@MikePolicarNGP +1 for ebook along with the audiobook as mentioned by @andreacpa0
If I’m listening on a road trip (not reading along), then for notes I’ll just pause, screenshot the time in audible and dictate my thoughts into a note on my phone and put it into my database later (I use Notion)
@MikePolicarNGP@DividendGrowth@mdarmstrong Yes, if you have a solo Roth 401k, you can make 19.5k in Roth contributions and 38.5k in after tax and immediately convert the after tax to Roth and in effect get 58k into Roth. Fold in 6.5k in Roth catchup if possible and top it off with a backdoor Roth IRA and season to taste.
@DividendGrowth@MikePolicarNGP@mdarmstrong Many 401ks don’t allow for after tax because even if they are safe harbor, after tax contributions still are subject to annual non-discrimination testing. It’s mostly HCEs who do after-tax anyway so most likely wouldn’t pass the test and it’s a PITA to undo it all if you fail.
@hunter_harris@parkridgewealth@jasonzweigwsj@MichaelKitces I get the preference. Of course we’d all rather pay less if value doesn’t suffer, but I think it’s common sense that real value generally costs more in most domains.
Also, if the odds are in your favor but the cost of not winning is very large then you might choose differently.
@hunter_harris@parkridgewealth@jasonzweigwsj@MichaelKitces No but I would want/expect to pay my attorney a % of the outcome when representing me in a malpractice or negligence case. When an outcome is at stake, that alignment is expected and even necessary.
@AaronKlein I agree. They sent communication but it obviously wasn’t clear. Looks like they start to explain it toward the bottom. But this was sent in a thread where the sentiment was “how is this not illegal” when in fact it was “we have to do this because it’s the law”
Dear Media,
What’s happening with RobinHood?
A quick primer.
This is a “plumbing” issue. It is esoteric, even for those on Wall Street.
A very long thread on how the toilet is clogged.🚽🧻🪠
Read on
👇👇👇💎💎💎🚀🚀🚀👇👇👇
Dear Media,
What’s happening with RobinHood?
A quick primer.
This is a “plumbing” issue. It is esoteric, even for those on Wall Street.
A very long thread on how the toilet is clogged.🚽🧻🪠
Read on
👇👇👇💎💎💎🚀🚀🚀👇👇👇
@scottsalaske@jasonwenk Again, just intuitively, what % of those prospects would be caught off guard that 1% of 1M is 10k enough that it would change their mind?
The fee is only in question if the value is in question. When that happens, they don’t pay or keep paying, no matter how it’s quoted.
@scottsalaske@jasonwenk Just intuitively, what percentage of the clients who work with those advisors do you think had a hard time moving the decimal point over a couple places to approximate the fee. And how many of those advisors believed they were obfuscating the math enough to fool those clients?
@scottsalaske@jasonwenk I understand that your life’s work is to be in opposition to a certain fee structure, so I’m not expecting to change your mind. But I think the disconnect is simply that you believe that advisors don’t provide much value, while others do.
@scottsalaske@jasonwenk How would the attorney know in advance whether the jury would give a $5M or $10M settlement? The whole point of a contingency is aligning the compensation with the value (outcome). Same concept with AUM fees, except the outcomes happen over longer periods of time.
@scottsalaske@jasonwenk To use your comps, attorneys in an outcome based relationship many times work on contingency. The fee is absolutely different for the same services because it’s based on the outcome. You would expect to pay more to the same attorney for a $10M settlement than a $5M settlement.