Well, you're right and wrong in a way about whether I actually purchased the stock. I bought approx. 50% of the eventual position that I want to hold, Bought 500 @ $8.35 toward an eventual holding of 1,000 - 1,200 shares. I like to scale in to positions as opposed to a one shot buy-in.
FYI, the poster rhianni is actually a guy who is a very strident bear on AOD and has posted on this board for years. Whenever someone posts anything that resembles a positive investment slant toward this fund, he'll spring in to action to question it. Although he is not as vituperative in his comments as Alpine_rappr, he sees himself as kind of a self-appointed sentinel in warning off prospective investors in AOD.
I re-entered the stock at your urging, (just kidding, Mike), at $8.35 so we'll see how they do. The S&P 500 is the operative comparative benchmark for this long-only type fund -- so if they can outperform for a significant time period, they will have turned a BIG corner in fund performance.
Interesting that Warren Buffett said the other day that his will states that 90% of the money he would leave to his wife must be invested in a low cost (Vanguard) S&P 500 Index tracking fund. He said that he hates to give up the 1-2% AUM fees that funds typically charge regardless of how they perform. That 1-2% compounded adds up to a lot when compounded over time.
I think we agree on the approx. divs distribution to date of around $17. Your research on Y-Charts supports the comparative IPO price to be a split adjusted $40 per share. If you 1:2 split adjust the div payouts (effectively doubling them), then you have to 1:2 split adjust the IPO price to $40. Then you begin to approximate the -43% return on Y-Charts -- and you begin to understand why alpine_rappr, (et al), would like to strangle the Liebers.
Tell you what -- I never close the door on anything. Maybe this is worth another look because of the obvious change in the investment model. Perhaps they are quasi-closet indexing the S&P 500 which would not be a bad idea and somewhat accounts for the performance y-t-d. I think the play, if one is going to do so, is to make a scaled entry in to this and monitor the performance vs. the S&P 500. Then take a look at it at year end and see how they do.
Are you saying they distributed $17.66 on a pre-split basis? That can't be right. It would mean if
you held from fund start you would have a positive return by adding that amount to the pre-split
stock price. I think you meant ... 'riding the stock down from the IPO price of (post split) $40 to $6
per share range ....but ... they did manage to distribute $17.66 while doing that ...'
Market action since faux investment date of 3/9/2009;
S&P up 273% - AOD up 82%
2013 - S&P up 30% - AOD up 9%
2014 - AOD again lagging (surprise!) S&P 500 Index
Just the stupidity, (oops, I mean facts), of investing in AOD.
Nice little technical breakout. Cup and handle formation breakout Friday. Could hit some resistance at the 200 day MA, (9.81), but a further implied move to 10-10.20 looks imminent.
My, my ... I think I hit a little nerve with Mr. Thin Skin.
I leave you with this little factoid.
Friday's market action was a one day indicative sample of AOD at its relative under performance worst;
S&P up 1.33%
AOD NAV up .94% ... or just under 71% of the S&P % day gain.
All these bozo's would have to do is closet index the S&P and their performance would skyrocket.
Wonder if they (or you) will ever figure that out?
Well, you'll just have to excuse me if my 'uncalled for' and 'petulant' observation about somebody buying at an exact generational low in the S&P offended you. I guess I'll take your advice and in the future just swallow hook, line, and sinker that any and everything posted on message boards is the 'truth', lol.
And no, I didn't particularly, (as you stated) 'like their chances'. As I stated, I held into late last year on the premise that the price to NAV % discount would narrow -- it didn't, and still hasn't despite their R/S gimmick and MASSIVE (lol) div increase.
Oh, and my posting name is rlo, that's r l o ... not rio.
Just wondering -- is pathological astigmatism another one of your issues?
Exactly where did I not 'stick with the math'? There is nothing factually incorrect in any of the figures I stated. I just questioned why in nearly every posting on this board you continually reference, (or dare I say cherry pick ), an investment starting point in AOD that coincided with a generational low in the S&P 500. The point being -- why would you ever entrust your money to the bozo's that have destroyed so much of this funds value as opposed to just investing in an S&P 500 Index ETF? Can you claim with a straight face these guys will outperform the S&P 500 Index? They've sure done a great job of that since 3/9/2009, lol -- or, how about last year -- AOD +9% vs. S&P +30%.
Here is a great money generating/saving idea -- dump AOD and go with an S&P 500 Index ETF.
I am a former investor in AOD, (sold late last year at a split adjusted 8.18) and I'm having a difficult time relating to the 82% gain that you continually crow about in your posts. First of all, you pick an investment date of 3/9/2009 -- which just happens to be the EXACT DAY of a generational bear market bottom in the S&P 500. If you actually did buy on this date, (while nearly everyone else was hiding out in their investment bomb shelters), and bought AOD instead of a simple ETF that indexed the S&P, you left a HUGE amount of money on the table. The S&P closed on 3/9/2009 at 676 -- and closed on 12/31/2013 at 1848. That's a 273.3% increase in the S&P vs. the 82% increase that you seem to be enthralled with in AOD.
The only reason I held on to AOD through most of last year was the hope that the 15% price to NAV gap would at least narrow into a single digit % discount to NAV. It didn't, and still hasn't to this day. Fortunately, (and unlike many others), I got out with a small loss after factoring in monthly divs.
Too many other (better) investment options out there to be investing in AOD.