Forum Gets Mentioned (Globe & Mail) | General financial discussion | Discussion forum

Loonie said
Does anyone else find it strange that Carrick, with all his knowledge, has his money parked at 2.35, 2.3, 2.0, 1.25, and 1.05? He's now considering 2.8 at Motive.
I'm not sure how much I trust someone who is so willing to leave money on the table.  

Reading many of his articles in the Globe & Mail & some of his other financial articles,I personally think he is in the back pocket of the big five.He probably gets paid a tidy stipend for mentioning certain FI's.Hubert has never gotten any of his ink that I have ever seen,& their rates & service are head & shoulders over any FI he has recommended.

Rob Carrick has mentioned both this site and the smaller financial institutions discussed here.

He mentioned Hubert and Oaken as recently as last month in The brief, shining moment of rising rates for savers and conservative investors is over.

As for the HISA accounts he has, he may not have significant amounts of money in them. He may still have a mortgage and understands that using extra cash for prepayments to a 3.75% mortgage is a smarter idea than rate chasing HISA's and GIC's.

hotmony said
Carrick is knowledgable but there is a narrative that has to be put forward for political and economic reasons. For example, what would happen if the nation was constantly guided into putting their money into small CUs or the media started tellin everyone the economy is a bit of a ponzi scheme. If everyone was perfectly honest it be the socialist utopia but its not realistic.

I'd like to see the government regulate bloomberg n reuters terminals more open up their networks to everyone they trade on undisclosed not widely disseminated info.  

Interesting comment. There is some logic to regulating, potentially, Bloomberg and Reuters in terms of the market dominance they hold as far as financial data aggregation. However, they are just data aggregators - I would much rather see the bank and broker-dealer-owned TMX Group, Inc., being forced to make real-time financial data available to an open source financial data clearinghouse/aggregation tool. It doesn't seem right, to me, that they get to be the exclusive nominee holder of all beneficially held securities in their Canadian Depository for Securities Ltd. subsidiary, hold the dominant position in market listings, control a majority of the financial trading data, and get to control access to said data. 🙁

Cheers,
Doug

There is still one other 5 year GIC @ 3% from ICICI off the HighInterestSavings chart. Thanks to due diligence from members .

Here, here. What troubles me about the Globe and Mail is their tendency to charge the same amount for a digital subscription as a print subscription despite their, apparently (since they're privately owned by the Thomson estate's heirs), being in better financial shape relative to their Torstar and Postmedia competitors and their discounting the idea of the need to radically alter their cost structure (i.e., by laying off employees one day, and rehiring them the next day, minus the overly generous DB pension plans). Alas, I digress.

Nevertheless, I do tend to discount the Globe versus, say, the Financial Post because of that paywall.

Another non-notable Rob Carrick column, to which I'd just add, most of the regular forum readers and participants are far more knowledgeable than Rob Carrick. Thus, his columns seek mainly to validate our own postulations.

For example, from my academic library access via ProQuest, Carrick writes, "The best five-year GIC rates offer only a modest premium over the best one-year rates, which themselves offer little or no premium over high-rate savings accounts. Might a savings account be the better choice than GICs right now? The backdrop here is the flat yield curve, a term that means short- and long-term interest rates are pretty much at the same level. Usually, long-term rates are higher. This explains why you traditionally get a solid rate bonus for locking up your GIC money for five years versus shorter terms. Today, competitive five-year GIC yields are in the 2-per-cent to 2.65-per-cent range. One-year GICs vary, but the best rates come in between 2 per cent and 2.45 per cent. You could conceivably lock your money down for five years and get just 0.2 or 0.25 of a percentage point in extra yield over what you’d get for a one-year term." I, and others, were well ahead of Carrick in this observation.

Carrick continues, "Motive Financial’s Savvy Savings Account offered 2.8 per cent as of late October, while other players were in the 2.3-per-cent range at best." Yep, this forum knew that already.

Carrick goes on, "There’s a lot to like about the idea of forsaking one-year GICs and replacing them with highrate savings accounts. You get almost as much yield, along with complete freedom to withdraw money as you require. GICs, of course, are locked in and cannot be redeemed with a penalty of some sort unless they’re of the cashable variety (and thus have lower yields). But a savings account leaves you open to the risk that rate declines in the coming months will trickle down to the return you’re getting on your money. With a one-year GIC, the rate is the rate for one full year." Nothing new here.

In short, there's nothing of particular interest here, folks. 😉

Cheers,
Doug

I also get the NY Times. I usually have to let the promo lapse--they usually won't quite match it. And a day letter, I get a promo on Facebook--$1 per week--but it's always way more than $1.

"The low-drama rate outlook serves borrowers well by allowing them time to hammer down debts“

Lmao. I think the hammers they are using might be made of feathers.

https://business.financialpost.com/personal-finance/debt/rising-insolvency-readings-raise-red-flags-in-canada-sort-of