Bargain Hunter said:
Nonrecourse for most people in most circumstances buying an established is less risky than starting your own business. Whether its buying shares in Woolworth's or buying the best local coffee shop in your neighborhood that's always packed and has a great reputation, or putting some equity into a family member of friend's business when they are looking to expand, the risk is far less than starting your own business from scratch, particularly if you lack the necessary experience and capital. The sharemarket is not by default riskier than property, it all depends on circumstances. What's riskier buying shares in Woolworths (WOW) or buying a negatively geared (90% borrowed) in a small mining town? I think you get the point I'm trying to make.
The view expressed is common among people who are average and average is bloody awful. I am not suggesting you are average and I am not having a go at you. People try to avoid risk. In reality from the moment you are born you face risk. People don't like change but change is what occurs day in day out.
We all face risks in everything you do. Most people like to hand responsibility off to someone else. That is why the majority work for a boss and are a wage slave. That is why over 80% of the population end up on the pension. They choose to let someone else manage their risks and they end up with less.
When you hand your money over to buy shares the company that takes your money and uses it to its advantage to earn a return. It rewards its top executives from the returns that your cash investment provided. The risk/reward that you get as a share holder who has taken the risk is laughable compared to the executive who gets rewarded regardless of what happens to your capital.
The vast majority of people who invest in the share market make no money. The last 12 years in the share markets have been a disaster. If you bough an investment property 12 years ago you have taken a risk. If you bought in a mining town 12 years ago I would argue the rental income would have been huge the capital gain would have been massive and around 2011 it would have come back closer to the mean.
The share market does not allow you to control your investment. If you are unhappy with the management you cannot take over the management of the company. We have an investment property in a small coastal holiday town that was the only property we did not manage ourselves. We sacked the agents because the return on the property in the high season was only $3000 for the month of January less 20% for them managing it and cleaning it. The last two years we have managed it and cleaned it and the return for the month of January is $12,000 each year. The property is fully let which it never was, is cleaner and has no issues with damage that we had when it was "managed".
Life is about choices. If you choose to let someone else manage your risk your return will be reflected in that choice.
Kind Regards
non recourse