Stephen Foster Stephen Foster

Email Marketing Text

June 18, 2021

 

Subject: You Forgot Something 

Hi, James.

Thank you for spending time in our store recently.

Our records show that you did not take advantage of our annual two-for-one sale.

Not to worry, though. We’re still offering our “twofer,” as we like to call it.

Stop by anytime between now and June 30 to take advantage of the offer.

This is BOGO at its best!!

Read More
Stephen Foster Stephen Foster

Email Marketing

Subject: Home Furnishings

Dear Ms. Taylor:

We at Dream Furnishings Company have had the pleasure and privilege of helping turn people’s dreams into tangible realities for the past 10 years.

Our Store offers a wide range of home furnishings ranging from curtains to sofa covers to drapes to bed covers…All in all, if you have thought about it, we have got it!

You can visit our website www.dreamfurnishings.com and check out the wide spectrum of furniture we offer.  By ordering online, you can not only get to shop at your convenience but also be eligible for a special discount of 20% on all furnishings.

We also offer Live Chats with our experienced and talented interior decorators who can help you with any queries and doubts.

We look forward to hearing from you soon. The 20% discount can be used only within a period of the next 10 days.

Thanking You,

Sincerely,

John Roberts

Marketing Manager

**************************************************

Read More
Stephen Foster Stephen Foster

Swampscott Girls Play the Game

Swampscott Girls Play the Game at Another Level

When it comes to the local girls’ softball team, it’s best to have Lauren Fahey sum it up. Lauren, a seventh-grader, lives in Swampscott and has this to say about playing for the North Shore Breakers softball team.

"Being part of the Breakers means a lot to me. It means being friends with people who live beyond Swampscott. I think this team has made me a better softball player by having practiced with the 3 age groups at the same time, so I can play with different girls who are older, and I can learn from coaches who coach different ages."

Or this, from Gianna Irving, also a seventh-grader who lives in Swampscott: "I am very grateful to be a part of the Breakers team.  It has made me into a hard worker, a better player and a leader. The tournaments are very challenging, but we all come together as a team and work really hard to do our best at each game. I especially love cheering for my teammates and seeing each other's progress every week.”

Quite a lot of Swampscott residents play on each of the Breakers’ three teams: age 10 and under, 12 and under, and age 14 and under. These teams did not exist a few years ago.

Both Lauren and Gianna—and all of Swampscott, actually—have Heather Vieira Husain to thank for the opportunity to play the game. Heather founded the team, and she is actively engaged in managing and maintaining the integrity of the three teams. Heather is engaged with the team in several significant ways, and it’s because of her that there is even an opportunity for local girls to play fastpitch softball.

Heather has lived in Swampscott for four years, moving to the area from Connecticut with her husband. They love living in Swampscott and are grateful they decided on living here.

Heather says, “we really try to develop the players in a competitive sport, and at a level that did not exist before the Breakers were founded.” The Breakers play all year. When the team can’t play/practice outside, they work on their skills inside, at the Beverly Sports Complex, which is also one of the sponsors of the team.

Heather and her colleagues have also built a relationship with the Salem State Vikings softball team. Salem’s coaches and players visit the Breakers each winter to conduct one of the team’s practices; additionally, the Breakers frequently attend the Vikings’ games. It’s a meaningful partnership and has helped the Breakers grow and develop a better understanding of, and feel for, the game of fastpitch softball.

"Playing for the Breakers has been awesome. It has improved my softball skills by playing in tournaments throughout New England. I have also enjoyed making friends from the surrounding towns who play for the Breakers," says Maddie Lilley, a sixth-grader who lives in Swampscott.

These were Heather’s twin goals from the beginning: help the girls get better at a difficult sport and put them in a position to make friends and develop their social skills whenever they play.

Heather’s team (and she’s had ongoing help with the team from numerous local individuals and businesses) is a part of the USA Softball League. The USA League is a “feeder” group for the women who want to play the sport at the highest level, which includes the Olympics. According to its website, the “USA Softball provides people of all ages the opportunity to play the game they love at a variety of levels. USA Softball offers recreational, league, tournament and National Championship play for fast pitch, slow pitch and modified pitch and annually conducts over 100 National Championships.”

For the first time since 2008, women’s softball is again an Olympic sport. The United States team won the 2018 Women's Softball World Championship to qualify for the Olympics later this year in Tokyo.

Come June of 2020, 75 members of the Breaker family will attend an important event: the Stand Beside Her Tour, when the Olympic Bound Softball team plays an exhibition game in Massachusetts. As you might imagine the girls are anxiously awaiting an opportunity to see the US team before it heads off to Tokyo for the games, which begin in July.

Heather has been involved in girl’s fastpitch softball for years, and when she moved to Swampscott she noticed a deficiency in the options for local girls to play truly competitive softball. Heather set out to create a softball team that would play at the “travel team” level—which is to say, at a high, truly competitive level. The North Shore Breakers play throughout New England during the season.

It's because of Heather that there is even an opportunity for local girls to play fastpitch softball at a tournament level. And yet Heather easily adds that without the support of the local Swampscott community, she would never have been successful in getting the team off the ground.

If you’ve never seen a girls’ fastpitch softball game, then plan to do so this season. It’s an awesome experience. This is fastpitch, which means that excelling at it requires talent, of course, but also hard work and the discipline to train year-round. When Gianna says “the tournaments are very challenging” she is being honest and accurate.

If you have seen a girls’ fastpitch softball game, you’ll understand why it’s tough: because the players just simply work hard to be very good. And if you play on any of the three age-group teams, as many Swampscott residents do, then you should be congratulated. It means you’re good. And it means that you excel at a demanding sport. Playing fastpitch softball at any age is difficult because it’s such a tough sport—even more reason to congratulate all the players and particularly those who live in Swampscott.

With its numerous players on the team, Swampscott is a major contributor to the Breakers team. Most, certainly not all, players in the three “leagues” are residents of Swampscott.

Jocelyn Spickard, a seventh-grader from Swampscott, sums it up nicely: “They’re not just my teammates. They are all part of a softball family; a family that works hard, has fun, and doesn’t mind getting a little dirt on their uniforms.” Jocelyn may have just articulated what we all aspire to in life—working hard at something we love, making friends, and getting dirtied up now and then (because it’s good for the soul).

Now that the weather is improving, do yourself a favor and watch the girls play this spring and summer. You’ll be entertained and you’ll be impressed. Odds are you will watch and support them regularly.

More than anything, you’ll be proud of these exceptional girls.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read More
Stephen Foster Stephen Foster

Because it’s Better Here

Because It’s Better Here

Alexandra (Lexie) Byrne grew up in Riverside, Connecticut. Her husband, Patrick, is also a New Englander, having grown up in New Hampshire. Now, they don’t live in either state. They live in Swampscott, MA with a new addition to the family, Barbara Byrne, age 11 months. Lexie and her husband took a circuitous path to Swampscott residency.

And they couldn’t be happier.

Out of college, Lexie moved to live and work in New York City. She has worked mostly in the human relations field. Her life in New York was what you might expect: challenging, exciting, and at times difficult. Five years ago, she moved to Boston, MA for work. It was in Boston that she met Patrick, a sales professional in the solar energy business. Their regional backgrounds are similar, both having grown up in New England, and clearly their sensibilities are simpatico because they fell in love with each other, and conceived Barbara, in the city once they were married.

Both Lexie and Patrick were starting their lives together, and when Barbara came along, they began to feel the need for a change of scenery. In Boston, they lived in a small one-bedroom apartment, which is challenge enough for even two individuals. But add a newborn to the mix, and suddenly life is more complicated in the big city. It’s more expensive. Living quarters are, necessarily, small. A one-bedroom apartment is hardly room for one, let alone three.

So, they decided to bail on the big city. Make no mistake, they love Boston, and it was important to remain close. Deciding to leave was a difficult decision, but it was a necessary one.

On the one hand, living in Boston provided all the exposure necessary to sports, dining, concerts and other activities that feed the soul. On the other hand, they asked themselves, do we really want to raise our daughter in the big city, where the schools may not be so great and where the cost of living can be onerous, at most any income level. Weighing all these factors, Lexie and Patrick decided they needed to relocate to an area that was close to Boston, because of the commute, and where the schools were superior to what they’d likely be confronted with in the city.

These are often the challenges for couples who have children in a large urban area: how to discover a home near where work is and where little ones can thrive and develop at the pace that is appropriate to them.

And it’s not that Lexie and Patrick did not have multiple options. They did.

They considered any number of local cities and towns, each possessing pros and cons. Decisions had to be made. Where do we want to live so that we have access to a social life, where we are close to the city, and where our money will go farther than elsewhere. These are difficult decisions. They take time.

But it was truly love at first sight when they visited Swampscott. Why? Because it had everything that they wanted and needed.

Here’s what they thought about Swampscott on first sight: that it was an easy commute to Boston, that it allowed them to lower their living expenses, that it allowed them to purchase a house rather than live in an apartment, that it was close to the water, and that it had great schools.

Listening to Lexie, it’s like she could almost stand-in for a city ambassador. She loves living in Swampscott. She loves its charm. She loves that it allows her and Patrick to have access to a local social life. And she loves it because it makes her life perfect: a loving husband, an adorable daughter, and proximity to a large city, the milieu in which Lexie thrived in New York and while living in Boston.

Perhaps the most important reason for Lexie and Patrick to move to Swampscott was so that they could make friends with others who are in similar situations. Lexie is happy to say that she and Patrick have already made friends with others who have young children. She’s discovered local groups that will allow her daughter to socialize with peers, without having the obstacles that a large city presents (logistics, time, and convenience).

Lexie and Patrick have discovered numerous other families in Swampscott like theirs: mostly young professionals who also commute to Boston. All these families have definite reasons for moving to Swampscott, but those are fundamentally like Lexie’s and Patrick’s—quality of life and easy access to a large city.

And, of course, they have already staked out favorite places to shop and dine in Swampscott—notably, but not exclusively, Volo Craft Pizza, among others.

Just recently, Lexie and her husband have discovered a babysitter—finally a chance for some together time. They love that this is an option for them that would be difficult, if not impossible, to manage while living in Boston.

“We are lucky,” says Lexie, “to have a great neighbor who has lived in Swampscott for a long time and who’s willing to provide us with information on local attractions, you know, things to do and see that we might otherwise not be aware of.”

If Lexie seems rhapsodic when describing her life in Swampscott with her husband, it’s because she is. Think about it: you’ve been a denizen of large cities most of your adult life, not unhappily, but not really feeling complete. Then, your personal life changes, dramatically. You engage in a reconsideration of your life. It’s not quite what you want. It’s not quite what you need.

Lexie and Patrick are not sure whether they will expand their family. As Lexie says, “we are dealing with all the new parent issues now and have not had any time to think about whether we’ll have more children. We’ll see.”

When it comes time to change your life, especially when it involves others such as spouses and children, you want the best of all worlds.

For Lexie and Patrick, the best of all worlds is Swampscott.

 

Read More
Stephen Foster Stephen Foster

Edits

The trial has suggested that corruption in Mexico is as bad, if not worse, than many thought. 

“As bad …” needs another “as”; you can’t say “as bad … than many thought.” You could say “as bad as, if not worse than, many thought” — or, better and smoother, say “as bad as many thought, if not worse.” 

The filaments form visible spiral patterns within the rings, belying motions deep inside the planet that can be linked to its rotation speed.

“Belie” means to give a false idea of, or to show to be false. You should use something like “reveal.”

Courts can stop plaintiffs from shopping for judges in politically-charged politically charged cases, a new article argues.

No hyphen is called for in a compound modifier with an “-ly” adverb. Instead, say “politically charged cases."

Last year, the authority’s chairman, Joseph J. Lhota, said he would consider banning food, like as Washington’s Metro system does.

Avoid this use of “like” as a conjunction introducing a full clause. Make it “as Washington’s Metro system does.”

For the last two months, a team of three to five people have has laboriously swabbed away some of the varnish to allow the colors to come through.

Make it “has” to agree with the singular subject “team.”

 

Read More
Stephen Foster Stephen Foster

Dead But Not Gone

The influential in our culture often die unrecognized and unacknowledged. Or their once-prominent reputation wanes, depending on the latest scholarly or public consensus. To the cognoscenti, the true disciples, usually a minority of admirers and standard bearers, nothing could be further from the truth. They work diligently – sometimes successfully, sometimes not – to keep an artist’s memory alive and the flame of remembrance burning. Fortunately for James Luther Dickinson (who died in 2009), his influence was so vast and prevalent, his musical reach so profound, his relationships so extensive, that we’ll likely be listening to (and by doing so celebrating) him in one way or another for years to come – even though he is clearly not a household name and will never be.

His latest aptly named release, I’m Just Dead, I’m Not Gone, while not particularly ground breaking (nor is it meant to be), should go a long way toward reminding us of the musical power of the man. In this live stomp of a bar show, with Dickinson on vocals, we’re given a glimpse into the historical Dickinson, and that’s the record’s value – that and the fact that it simply represents a live set of rollicking blues, soul, and roots music, the kind of unfinished, less than perfect sound of a band, and of a man, out to have a good time (and successfully so) rocking the house down. Even though it was recorded in 2006, I’m Just Dead, I’m Not Gone was recently released by Memphis International Records.

James Luther “Jim” Dickinson was a Renaissance man in the music world. Pianist, producer, singer, session musician, front man for several groups – Dickinson left a legacy virtually unequaled by musicians who are not always front and center, and who don’t wish to be. Although he was born in Arkansas, he moved early to Memphis, and for the rest of his life would be associated with that town’s musical milieu. Among the highlights of his career: he played on recording sessions with some of the greatest talent in the business, including Aretha Franklin. He played piano on the Rolling Stones Wild Horses, on the Flamin’ Groovies album Teenage Head, and other sessions too numerous to mention – including what many believe to be the last great Sun Label release, Cadillac Man by the Jesters, on which he played piano and sang lead.

He also accompanied the following on various projects: Delany and Bonnie, Jerry Jeff Walker, Ronnie Hawkins, Brook Benton, Ronnie Milsap, Lulu, Duane Allman, Albert King, Maria Muldaur, and the list goes on. He also worked with Ry Cooder, and played on Bob Dylan's album Time Out of Mind. In 1998, he produced Mudhoney's Tomorrow’s Hits Today. His other production credits are extensive and include work with: Alex Chilton, Jason & the Scorchers, Green on Red, the Replacements, Primal Scream, and Rocket from the Crypt.

I'm Just Dead, I'm Not Gone features Dickinson’s two sons, Luther (guitar) and Cody (drums), who are founding members of the roots and rock band North Mississippi Allstars. In a scant 42 minutes this set is an all out tribute to artists Dickinson knows and loves. Dickinson’s band is clearly having a good time; the playing is loose and easy because it is, after all, live bar music and the disc captures what must have been, for Dickinson, a joyous experience because it shows everywhere on I’m Just Dead, I’m Not Gone.

Of particular note is his cover of Buffy Sainte-Marie’s strung out, gut wrenching “Cod’ine” and “Ax Sweet Mama” by Sleepy John Estes. He opens the disc with a rambling and discursive shout poem – with references to George Bush, Novocain, whiskey, honey, pretty girls, and somebody else who makes all the money – that paves the way for the opening track, Sir Mack Rice’s “Money Talks”. Among the other artists covered are Bob Frank, Furry Lewis, and Terry Fell.

As this set so aptly proves, Dickinson is dead but is definitely not gone.

Read More
Stephen Foster Stephen Foster

Website Copy

Website Text: CultureCrank.Com

HOME:

You know why you’re here. You probably just stumbled on us, or perhaps you got an assist from Google.

But you are looking for a savvy, smart, and an engaging pop culture “place” to hang out.

You are interested in all things pop culture. What, exactly, does this mean? It means you are an information-hound when it comes to the following:

  • Art

  • Music

  • Films

  • TV

  • Books

  • Top Ten Lists

  •  Celebrity

  • “What to Read” Advice

Here at the Crank, we love all things pop culture.

Why Culture Crank?

We’re writing about all things having to do with popular culture. And we can be a bit cranky when it comes to the “stuff” (see above) of popular culture. Another way to describe the Crank is to say this: we will always be honest with you when it comes to the judgments we will render about books, film, etc.

We believe you want an honest assessment of what we are discovering daily. And that is how we will manage and maintain our site.

We’ll be honest. We’ll be comprehensive. We’ll be unflinching.

So, no matter what got you here, we want you to bookmark us and keep coming back.

We want to be the first site you visit in the morning, and the last one you peruse before you shut down in the evening.

Welcome to Culture Crank.

Read More
Stephen Foster Stephen Foster

What to Make of a Managed Account

Stephen Foster

What to Make of a Managed Account

If you’ve worked in the employee retirement world for anything over a week or so, you have heard the term “managed account.” For a long time, managed accounts have been the primary topic of discussion for employers who offer retirement plans, such as 401(k) arrangements; they have also become a darling of the retirement provider community, including such powerhouse mutual fund families as Vanguard and Fidelity. Despite their ubiquity, managed accounts remain a mystery to most employees: thus, it’s time for a new and simple definition.

Historically, employee participation in sponsored retirement plans, such as 401(k) and 403(b), hovers around 30 percent. By any reckoning, 30 percent is far lower than it should be. It reflects a disheartening trend: none of us is actively saving for retirement. Most observers argue that the rate of retirement plan participation should be twice what it is. Here’s the dilemma: how to double up on the 30 percent rate?

Historically, retirement income has fallen into one or all the following categories, the so-called three-legged stool: Social Security, employer-sponsored retirement plans, and personal savings. Rarely are these income sources sufficient on their own. Sadly, most people only have Social Security to rely on. Sadly, too, is the fact that the average Social Security monthly payout averages slightly less than $1,000 a month. This is one of the greatest threats to the safety and security of individuals who unknowingly believe that the government will come to their rescue upon retirement.

It’s a belief that may lead to catastrophe over the next 25-30 years.

Here’s where managed accounts enter the picture. A managed account looks like this: a retirement plan provider, such as Fidelity Investments, creates model portfolios that are tailored to each individual in a retirement plan. These portfolio (mutual fund) options use sophisticated algorithms to determine the best asset mix for Participant A or B or C. They almost always rely on age as the primary factor in portfolio selection. Thus, an individual age 60 may be placed in a portfolio that looks like this:

●     30%--Value Fund

●     30%--Balanced (between stocks and bonds) Fund

●     25%--Bond Fund

●     15%--High Dividend Fund

The individual’s account is “managed” in this way: each quarter, the plan provider will rebalance the allocations based on market performance. Let’s say that after three months of market exposure this individual’s allocation is more like 40, 30 and 15 and 15 percent. Fidelity, in this case, will buy or sell each fund to restore the original allocation. Approximately every five years, the plan provider will modify the algorithm to create a new allocation. The closer one gets to the so-called normal retirement age, 65, the less exposure these allocations will have to stocks, which can go up or down dramatically every day. The same applies, to a lesser degree, to bond funds.  The idea is to reduce portfolio volatility as the plan participant ages.

How, you may ask, does a managed account aid plan participation? If it looks on the surface like a managed account is all about portfolio creation, you are right.

But here is how a managed account increases retirement plan participation. The federal government has mandated that managed accounts are an acceptable default investment vehicle for employees. By default, the federal government is saying that the employer, without employee consent, may force a worker into any of these accounts. If an employee has not chosen to participate, the employer may choose accordingly for the participant. It’s true the employee can always “opt out,” but historically few ever do.

Why should an employer use managed accounts? The answer is simple. Employees who are covered by a retirement plan need to save for the future. They can do so on their own, which is the better outcome, or the employer can force them to participate and without permission place them in a managed account. If this has the whiff of big brother, so be it. Often, we need to be told what to do, at any age.

Read More
Stephen Foster Stephen Foster

Defining the Reverse Mortgage

Stephen Foster

Defining the Reverse Mortgage

A reverse mortgage is, quite simply, a real estate transaction that allows you to tap into the equity in your home. It is, as the name suggests, the reverse, or opposite, of a traditional mortgage. Rather than making payments to a mortgage lender to satisfy your home loan, your lender, in a reverse mortgage, makes payments to you, according to a strict set of rules. These payments may take various forms, and they are generally tax-free. The borrower need not pay back the loan; it will be settled when the home is sold or vacated.

Taking out a reverse mortgage constitutes a serious financial transaction and should not be undertaken without rigorous research and analysis.  

Having said that, a reverse mortgage may be an ideal way for you to receive income from your principal residence—and this is especially true if, for example, your retirement savings are not sufficient to support you when you cease working.

The three types of reverse mortgages are:

  • Home Equity Conversion Mortgage (HECM);

  • Single-Purpose Reverse Mortgage; and

  • Proprietary Reverse Mortgage.

The latter two options are not insignificant, but it’s the HECM that is easily the most popular of the three, even though obtaining one will likely end up being expensive upfront.

Here’s how HECM works.

HECM is federally insured and backed by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). If you have significant equity in your home—and the greater the equity the better—you apply to a financial institution for a reverse mortgage. In order to apply, you must be at least age 62. You will need to go through financial underwriting, just as you would if you were purchasing a traditional 30-year mortgage. If approved, you will need to pay upfront and ongoing property-related fees, and these may seem excessive to potential applicants.

That’s because they can be.

Following is a list of one-time fees that must be paid:

  • Mandatory HECM counseling. Each borrower must undergo a counseling session with a HUD-approved representative. The point of the consultation is that the federal government wants you to understand fully how a reverse mortgage works and why it might, or might not, be a good option for you. There is a fee for this consultation, and it ranges, typically, between $150 to $250 dollars.

  • Appraisals. In order to establish a reverse mortgage, a home appraisal must be initiated. This is similar to an appraisal used for the purposes of purchasing a property. Your residence’s value will need to be assessed, and you’ll need to pay the appraiser. There is no set amount for the appraisal; it can vary from individual to individual or by geography. This will usually fall in the $400 to $600 range. The size of your house, too, is another factor in arriving at an appraisal figure. The larger the house, the higher the appraiser’s cost.

  • Third-party closing costs. These are like the closing costs you pay when you purchase a home.

  • Loan origination fees. These may be substantial but are capped at $6,000 dollars. You may be able to roll origination fees into your loan, but you’ll still feel their effects.

  • Mortgage insurance premium. This is due at closing and is 2 percent of the loan value.

Property taxes and insurance must be paid over the course of the loan.

 

Before starting down the road toward a reverse mortgage, begin by using an online reverse mortgage calculator. It will give you a good idea of the financial dynamics at play. It is a necessary precursor to reaching out to an HECM counselor.

Read More
Stephen Foster Stephen Foster

Eight Reasons You May Want to Ditch your Financial Advisor

Stephen Foster

Reasons Why You May Want to Dismiss Your Financial Advisor

Financial advisors are ubiquitous these days. They proliferate each year, seemingly, and of course they want your business. They may or may not be competent enough to help you manage your money, but that never prevents many of them from acquiring new clients anyway. Perhaps you are one of those clients, but how would you know, exactly?


There are more than eight reasons why you may want to take a hard look at financial advisors or financial planners or wealth managers. This goes for when you are seeking one out or may already have chosen one. Having done so, you may already be concerned about the way he or she may be handling your portfolio — poor performance being a primary reason. But there are others, too.

Following are eight of the biggest reasons you may wish to seek out a new advisor. Remember, you are not bound to an advisor for life; if you’re unhappy, for whatever reasons, then you should shift your portfolio to another professional advisor. After all, this is your hard-earned money.

1. Credentials: As with other professions, it’s easy to “buy” designations when it comes to financial advisors. Having a string of alphabets behind a name does not remotely mean your advisor is qualified. It may mean that he or she is playing fast and loose with financial training and continuing education. Here’s an example: CIC, which stands for Certified Insurance Counselor. It only takes 16 hours to obtain, and no matter how impressive it may look or sound, if you can obtain it in that short amount of time, flags should go off. And it really means nothing; it means that the planner paid a fee to take a less-than-rigorous exam. Once completed, the CIC is added to the advisor’s business card, and that supposedly makes him or her an “expert.” Not so. There are legitimate insurance designations that require extensive time and study, such as CLU, or Chartered Life Underwriter. That is not easily obtained. Having it means you’ve worked hard for a designation that truly means you are an expert. Other examples of high-quality designations include:

a. Certified Funds Specialist

b. Certified Estate and Funds Specialist

c. Certified Financial Planner

2. Fact-finding: When you first sit down with a financial planner it is important, crucial even, that you go through an extensive data-gathering session. In truth, this activity may extend beyond one session. A financial advisor cannot know how to manage your money without knowing everything about your finances. Almost no question is insignificant. If your advisor merely asks a few questions, as though they were written on the back of a napkin, then it’s likely you need to move on. As with a doctor, a financial planner cannot help you solve your problems without knowing everything about your current money situation. Remember this: for a truly great financial advisor, having as much information about you is imperative, and he or she cannot do a proper job without that information.

3. Always be closing: This is another way of saying that your advisor is always seeking to sell you something. This is akin to a stockbroker who is always calling with the latest “hot” stock tip. Once your plan is in place, if the work is performed properly, there should be no need for any short- or even mid-term purchases or portfolio “changes.” With a truly legitimate financial planner, you do set it and forget it — at least for a year, or unless something catastrophic occurs in the markets, such as what happened in the financial crash of 2008–2009. By default, a good financial plan is long-term in nature (it’s shorter in nature the older you are). Avoid the planner who calls always wanting to “move” or “adjust” your portfolio. It’s almost certain this planner receives a commission when changes are made. A commission goes into the advisor’s pocket and diminishes the value of your portfolio.

4. Fees: Speaking of commissions, how is your planner being paid for his or her services? The point of this article is not to say that a commission-paid planner is always a bad choice. That wouldn’t be true. But the best kind of planner or advisor is typically paid a straight fee or charges a percentage against the assets he or she is managing for you, typically around one percent, depending on asset size. Being compensated in these last two ways takes away the incentive to “churn” your money for commissions; remember, commissions put money in the advisor’s bank account, not in yours.

5. Investment conflicts: It has long been a practice for advisors to sell investment products aligned with their employers — in other words, the employer “manufactures” investment products, mutual funds for example. These proprietary investments pay the planner a greater fee than if your money were to be placed with an advisor where there are no product conflicts of interest. Your money should be placed in the product or investment vehicle that matches your needs, regardless of the company the advisor works for. If you’ve chosen a Merrill Lynch advisor and he or she always wants you to invest in a company product, consider finding a new financial planner (no intent to denigrate Merrill, a top-notch firm).

6. Written plan: As hard as it is to believe, there are quite a few financial advisors who will consult with you, but never put your plan in writing. And, also hard as it is to believe, there are clients who believe a written plan is not necessary. It is. It is critical. You simply must have a written roadmap for where you want to be in a year, five years, even ten years with your money. You can’t do that without a formal written plan that is reviewed at least yearly.

7. No fiduciary: If your advisor does not conduct business as a fiduciary, you are at his or her mercy, and you have no (or very little) recourse should your investments go bottom-up. First, a good planner is not going to put you in an investment that is even likely to go upside down. But being a fiduciary means that the individual is acting, at all times, in your best interest; he or she is managing your money with a prudent standard of care. Being a fiduciary means your advisor has legal and of course ethical obligations to you when it comes to managing your portfolio. If you did not ask upfront whether he or she is a fiduciary, do so immediately. If the answer is no, find an advisor who is. Being a fiduciary means, above all else, your manager must always have your best interests at heart.

8. Lack of contact: If your portfolio runs into turbulence, the first thing a solid, fully competent advisor will do is call you, perhaps even insist on a meeting. The excellent advisor is not afraid to convey bad news to you. He or she has done a proper job in setting the direction of your investments, but no one can control what is unknown. Bad news is bad news. Investments do not always work out, but a good and highly qualified advisor will always proactively call you with the bad news; they have a moral obligation to do so. If your advisor does not keep you properly informed, in good times and in bad, then you’ve made a mistake in selecting him or her. A poor advisor will routinely call with good news, but this is not what you want or need. You need to hear about what’s going wrong, and why, with your investments. It’s fair to say that routine discourse between advisor and client is a necessity — this should happen frequently and consistently.

So, back to the beginning. You’ll never find that there is a shortage of financial planners who are more than willing to take your money. Your challenge is to find and retain the advisor who is not defined by any of these eight reasons.

Read More
Stephen Foster Stephen Foster

Stephen Foster Editing Work

Stephen Foster

Editing Examples

The trial suggested that corruption in Mexico is as bad, if not worse than many thought.

“As bad …” needs another “as”; you can’t say “as bad … than many thought.” You could say “as bad as, if not worse than, many thought” — or, better and smoother, say “as bad as many thought, if not worse.

The filaments form visible spiral patterns within the rings, belying motions deep inside the planet that can be linked to its rotation speed.

“Belie” means to give a false idea of, or to show to be false. What is really meant here is “reveal.”

After nine-and-one-half years in orbit, 530,506 stars observed and 2,662 planets discovered around other stars, the little spacecraft will be left to drill forever around the sun.

Hyphens are not needed here: it’s simply “nine and one half years…”

Last year, the authority’s chairman, Joseph J. Lahota, said he would consider banning food, like Washington’s metro system does.

You should avoid using “like” as a conjunction that introduces a full clause. A better way to write it: “..consider banning food the way Washington’s Metro System does.

Read More
Stephen Foster Stephen Foster

Sample Ad Copy-Vivant

Stephen Foster

Sample Ad Copy: Vivant Rental Cars

Tired of the rental car roulette?

You know this, of course: you land at an airport, and the car you reserved is no longer available. 

Or the price has changed. Or the line to pick your vehicle, even with your special status, spirals around baggage claim.

Go ahead! Throw your hands up and say “ENOUGH.”

At Vivant Rental Cars we guarantee you’ll always get the car you requested, period. And our concierge service has agents stationed at multiple locations near baggage claim, so you can go to our counter or you can sign up and receive your keys while waiting for your luggage.

Guaranteed.

Now isn’t that what you’ve always wished for?

At Vivant, we wait for you so you don’t have to wait for us.

Read More
Stephen Foster Stephen Foster

Fine Quality Watches Announces Watch Time Partnership

Stephen Foster

Fine Quality Announces Watch Time Partnership

DURHAM, NC, October 09, 2010 /24-7PressRelease/ -- FineQualityWatches.Com (FineQualityWatches) initiates a 6-month buyer incentive event using WatchTime Magazine to promote Bulova, Citizen, Movado, and Sartego watches.

FineQualityWatches.Com today announced a buyer promotion program where each month a select number of watch purchasers from the site will receive annual subscriptions to WatchTime Magazine, the country's preeminent horological magazine--the periodical most respected by connoisseurs and always trusted by those who enjoy and value watches for their beauty and functionality.

Foster & Associates Holding Company, owner of FineQualityWatches.Com, will run the promotion for six months. It is part of a multi-faceted strategy to bring more buyers and watch connoisseurs to the site. Other planned marketing campaign strategies will include periodic watch and watchmaker quizzes and a monthly newsletter that will be site-driven but will allow for buyer-related content. These will be rolled out over the next 2-3 months.

For the WatchTime Magazine promotion, FineQualityWatches.Com will give annual subscriptions to the first 10 monthly website purchasers so long as the value of the purchase is at least $300.00.

The WatchTime Magazine annual subscription is valued at $40.00.

Stephen Foster, Foster & Associates' primary owner, says, "We are very excited about this promotion with WatchTime Magazine. We are using a product with a strong following in the watch community to bring more clients to FineQualityWatches. We believe our approach between now and the end of March 2011 will significantly increase the visibility of the site."

"This is a good move for us now," says Foster, "and we plan to do more in the coming months. At FineQualityWatches we believe we have the kind of site that appeals to all kinds of buyers. The WatchTime Magazine promotion will help us expand our brand significantly."

The promotion will remain in effect until the end of March 2011.

Read More
Stephen Foster Stephen Foster

Collaborative Hiring: How Do Group Interviews Work?

Stephen Foster

Collaboration is nothing new in corporate, or in non-profit, America. At a geometric rate, it is becoming a central, and required, protocol for how businesses operate. This is especially true when it comes to acquiring new talent. Collaborative hiring, as it is often called, has become the cornerstone not only for how a business operates but for how it thrives. (Group interviews and collaborative hiring are used interchangeably.)

If multiple individuals from diverse operational areas in the corporation are a part of the job candidate’s review and assessment, then the successful applicant will, by default, make a stronger team member than the one who merely passes through Human Resources (HR). Plus, those involved in the evaluation will feel a heightened sense of belonging in the corporate structure. Everyone wins.

How Do Group Interviews Work?

Group interviews work in a multiplicity of ways. eSkill, founded in 2003, provides clients a precise yet flexible tool for bringing various corporate stakeholders into the hiring decision. Its team scoring protocols allow for diverse internal constituents to evaluate and render hiring decisions that are, by definition, going to be advantageous for the organization using them—for the successful applicant, too.

Immediately, the new hire has advantages over the one selected using the HR-only approach. He or she has already been “introduced” to the organization and will ­­­thus be able to fit in more quickly than one not chosen in such a manner. Not all candidates will work out. More will, though. And that is because of the inherent advantages of collaborative hiring.

Seek Assistance Externally.

Group interviews should be outsourced, and eSkill is the thought and practice leader in this area. Most corporations simply don’t have the internal resources and expertise to conduct an unbiased group interview. Also, while corporations view collaboration as a necessity, their “thinking” in this regard largely has to do with high-level strategy, not talent acquisition. But the right talent is high-level strategy.

How to Conduct a Group Interview.

When it comes to establishing group interviews, eSkill has developed the perfect approach.

Appropriate internal evaluators are identified. Uniform and consistent criteria are developed so that each evaluator is operating from the same set of underlying corporate objectives and necessities. These reviewers will grade the candidates on relevant proficiencies, all while using a uniform set of grading criteria. Finally, a group appraisal takes place and an offer is made to the successful candidate. The odds of the selected applicant enhancing the organization after hire are significant. Why? First, the hiring decision is less biased because more internal individuals are involved in the process. Plus, group hiring involves data-driven decisions; virtually all subjectivity is removed from the hiring protocol, and this clearly benefits both the business entity and the new hire.

If group interviews are performed correctly, they are objective and inclusive and without bias. 

Group interviews should also increase the confidence of the selected job candidate; he or she knows that a group of individuals from various departments participated in the hire. Plus, for the forward-thinking candidate, the collaborative hiring exercise will allow him or her to evaluate the organization. What may make a good hiring fit from the employer’s perspective may not be the case as far as the applicant is concerned.

The eSkill approach encompasses all the steps necessary for the successful group interview. The overall key: getting complete buy-in from the individuals who will evaluate the applicant. These individuals need to be immersed in the corporate culture. In other words, they too must feel they are an intrinsic part of the organization’s cultural milieu—collaborative hiring is thus a two-way street.

This is a good thing. It means both parties to the group interview will feel empowered.

As Cath Everett says, writing in HR Magazine online: “The fact that co-workers are involved in the hiring process also means they have a vested interest in ensuring the new hire is successful. Unconscious biases are reduced as the views of the many rather than the interpretation of an individual are taken into consideration.”

Given the abundant advantages of group interviews, are there any negatives? Not really. Making hiring decisions using a collaborative approach may lengthen the hiring activity. But in the end, most experts agree, long-term efficiencies are realized when the “perfect” job applicant is selected for the “right” position.

Technology fuels Human Resource functions (others, too) at a lightning pace. It gives HR personnel ever-expanding tools to perform their tasks.

Why not enhance HR’s ability to hire the perfect candidate? Collaborative hiring will accomplish this. eSkill has built and tested the methodology behind group interviews, with proven results. Reach out to eSkill and take advantage of the company’s powerful group interviewing approaches.

As author Brian Tracy said, “The smartest business decision you can make is to hire qualified people. Bringing the right people on board saves you thousands, and your business will run smoothly and efficiently.”

Read More
Stephen Foster Stephen Foster

I’ll Play the Blues for You

Stephen Foster

Cream made it popular, but bluesman Albert King originally recorded — though did not write — "Born Under a Bad Sign," and it is rightfully the song he's most often associated with. The blues classic was written by Booker T. Jones and William Bell, both of whom were essentially house musicians for Memphis-based soul label Stax Records. Although the Stax stable of artists consisted mostly of soul musicians (notably Otis Redding), the label also took on funk (Isaac Hayes, the Memphis Horns) and the blues, King predominantly. Stax released the career-making Born Under a Bad Sign, on the same-titled album, in 1967. It was King’s first record with the label — but, despite its influence and the power of the single, not his best.

Start to finish, King’s finest album on Stax (and arguably finest, period) is 1972’s I’ll Play the Blues for You. It was released as King was still basking in the success he’d built from Born Under a Bad Sign, and it solidified his standing as one of the most unique of blues talents — one of the three “Kings of the Blues," along with B.B King and Freddie King. 

Now, Concord Music Group is re-releasing I’ll Play the Blues for You as part of its Stax Remasters series. Enhanced by Joe Tarantino’s 24-bit remastering and the addition of four unreleased bonus tracks, the reissue underscores the album’s popularity and importance over the four-plus decades since its release.

Albert King (1923-1992) was not a powerful blues singer, even though he’d lived the life. But he was a singular electric blues guitarist. King was left-handed, but he played his now-famous (among blues lovers, that is) Gibson Flying V right-handed guitar flipped upside down, which made for an inimitable sound: He pulls down on strings instead of pulling up on them. Add to his guitar work the soul-funk infusion underlying the Stax backing sound and the result is, really, a different kind of blues, certainly for its day. Even now — especially now—the Albert King “Stax sound” is distinctive among blues musicians. It’s blues with a soul feeling.

I’ll Play the Blues for You represents a chance to rediscover, or hear for the first time, a distinctive bluesman. Thanks to Concord, King gets to shine anew on the remastered I’ll Play the Blues for You. His voice throughout is warm and casual, even chatty, and his guitar a stinging whip of high, bended notes that speak of all things blues — bad luck and trouble. In addition to the LP’s eight original tracks, I’ll Play the Blues for You includes four previously unreleased titles — two of which are alternate takes of songs in the main sequence, including the title track without the spoken interlude. The other two are fine, undiscovered additions to King’s body of work: "I Need a Love," and the funk-heavy "Albert’s Stomp."

King’s discography encompasses some 25 albums, and nearly all of them contain moments of fiery brilliance, owing to the unique way in which he played his iconic guitar. But it is King’s years with Stax that both define and differentiate him; the Stax sound made King something different for a bluesman, someone who transcended the typical blues sound and yet remained firmly grounded in its electric traditions.

I’ll Play the Blues for You represents the best of King’s Stax years and is a vital re-release, even for casual fans.

Read More
Stephen Foster Stephen Foster

Estate Planning and the Portability Provision

Stephen Foster

Estate Planning and the DSUE, or the Portability Allowance

Estate planning, done properly, is necessarily complex. And, the greater the wealth at play the greater the need for complexity. This is not an activity left to a novice. Genuine and thorough estate planning must be performed by trained and experienced professionals. A lifetime of wealth accumulation should not be treated lightly when it comes to its disposition—that is, taxation—at death. A well-executed and formal estate plan can save millions for an individual’s family and loved ones. “Well-executed” means details are not overlooked. “Well-executed” means that all financial eventualities be considered and accounted for. Finally, it means the planner is immersed in estate planning practices and knows important details that must be considered, whether employed in the final plan or not.

Estate Planning and DSUE

One important part of any estate planning work, when married individuals are reviewing their estate options, is something called the DSUE, or “deceased spouse’s unused exclusion.” DSUE is also referred to as the portability provision or allowance. Using one term or another does not change the meaning of the provision at all. In the broadest possible terms, when it comes to estate planning, portability simply means “porting over” from a deceased spouse to a surviving spouse any unused estate tax exemption. This provision was enacted nearly ten years ago in legislation known as The Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010. In 2013 legislation, portability was extended indefinitely.

Before Portability

Before portability became law, married couples needed to set up a by-pass or credit shelter trust. These would be a repository for the deceased’s unused estate tax exemption. This preserved the assets from taxes—thereby eliminating double taxation—on the subsequent death of the surviving spouse. If the deceased spouse had any available estate tax exclusion left, it was effectively lost. Portability addressed that problem.

The Estate Tax Exemption

Simply put, the estate tax exemption allows an individual to preserve certain assets from taxation at time of death. Over long periods of time, this exemption has changed significantly. For tax year 2019, the IRS announced the exemption will equal, per individual, $11.4 million. This amount, indexed annually to the inflation rate, is scheduled to be phased out of existence in 2025. What new dollar level will exist in 2025 would be anybody’s guess. Once an individual, not married, exhausts his or her exemption, the remainder is taxed at 40 percent.

Under these exemption rules, a married couple would collectively have an exemption of $22.8 million in 2019.

Here is a list of estate tax exemptions and the estate tax rate for the last eight years:

Year Over Year Estate Tax Exemption Estate Tax Rate

  • 2012 $5,120,000 35.0%

  • 2013 $5,250,000 40.0%

  • 2014 $5,340,000 40.0%

  • 2015 $5,430,000 40.0%

  • 2016 $5,450,000 40.0%

  • 2017 $5,490,000 40.0%

  • 2018 $11,180,000 40.0%

  • 2019 $11,400,000 40.0%

Here’s an example, without using DSUE. It’s the year 2018, and John, not married, passes away. John has an estate at death valued at $16.5 million. Earlier he set up an estate plan—and established a like provision in his will—within which he desired to have his assets at death be split evenly between his two brothers, Bill and Josh. Of the $16.5 million, $11,180,000 is excluded from taxes. John’s taxable estate is thus $5,320,000 ($16.5 million minus $11.18 million). What remains is taxed at 40 percent, meaning the two brothers share equally in the remaining 60 percent ($5,320,000 times .6 equals $3,192,000).

Here’s how the assets look after John’s death. Bill and Josh both will inherit $5,590,00 with no tax penalty ($11,180,000 times .5). Plus, each will receive 50 percent of what is left after the 40 percent estate tax rate on $5,320,000, or $1,596,000 each. The total to each brother equals $7,186,000 ($5,590,000 plus $1,596,000).

This hypothetical calculation does not bring the portability provision into play at all.

Here’s the significant point from the example above: taxes at death have a consequential impact on what your heirs get to keep at the point of inheritance. Also, note this: certain states, but only a few, have chosen not to follow federal statutes and may have rules far more restrictive. A well-done and comprehensive estate plan will look at all applicable rules, federal and state, and take these into account. Otherwise, the likelihood for unnecessary tax exposure increases while inheritance dollars may take a significant and unnecessary hit. A qualified and conscientious wealth management strategist will help you avoid any miscues.

So, how does DSUE truly work?

Estate Planning: Porting Over Excess Exemption Dollars

In brief, here’s what DSUE, or portability, means. It allows an executor, or a specifically designated individual, to elect to file a decedent’s estate tax return in such a way that it “ports” to the surviving spouse/family members any unused estate tax exemption. Rules exist for the filing of this estate tax return. A knowledgeable estate planning professional will make certain these filing requirements are met. Generally, the estate tax exemption DSUE form must be filed within nine months of the spouse’s death.

Let’s take John again, but under different circumstances. In this example, he’s married to Anne. This time, John has an estate valued at $15 million. Anne’s estate is valued at $13 million. John and Anne have two children, Mary and Adam. Several years earlier the couple put together an estate/financial plan that deliberately incorporated portability. John dies in 2018 and Anne, his executrix, files an estate tax return that formally establishes portability (a specific tax form issued by the Internal Revenue Service). Without being overly simplistic, this allows Anne to retain the amount of the estate tax exclusion that John did not use.

It works like this.

In 2018, John dies. His estate tax exclusion for that year would have been $11,180,000. He used none of it in the form of gifts; he died with his full exemption intact. Anne, by virtue of the planning the two had undertaken, becomes the recipient of all her deceased husband’s exemption. She now has her tax exemption, which in 2019 is $11,400,000, plus John’s exemption from 2018 ($11,180,000) when Anne filed the portability tax forms. Her total estate exemption is therefore $22,580,000 (which includes John’s exemption of $11,180,000 the year he died). Both John and Anne, in 2019, are now deceased. John’s estate is still valued at $15 million and Anne’s at $13 million. Total estate assets are $28 million.

Children Mary and Adam are designated as 50/50 recipients of their parent’s estates. Their total estate tax exemption will be John’s 2018 exempt amount of $11,180,000 plus Anne’s 2019 exemption amount of $11,400,000. The total is $22,580,000. This amount goes to the children free of estate tax. The difference between the full value of the estate, $28 million, and their collective exemption of $22,580,000 is $5,420,000. This is taxed at 40 percent, leaving the children with 60 percent.

Mary and Adam both will share equally in the following: $22,580,000 plus $3,252,000. Each, accordingly, receives $12,916,000, net. Wealth at this level, and certainly higher, cannot be preserved inter-generationally without the necessary and sophisticated estate planning that takes available rules and allowances into account.

Generally, in the case where there are multiple spouses, the individual filing for portability must use the estate valuation numbers of the most recent spouse to die.

Estate Planning: Summary

There are no margins when it comes to estate planning. The expert planner will be fully knowledgeable of, and conversant in, all relevant principals at play for individuals undergoing the process. Mistakes can cost millions. Planner ingenuity can save millions. Do not take this exercise lightly. Seek out expert planners. Ask for references. Proactively ask about the portability provision: it can save you millions.

Read More
Stephen Foster Stephen Foster

Looking for Income

Stephen Foster

It’s no secret that interest rates have been at all-time lows since their historic highs of the late 1970s. At the height of the interest rate increases of forty years ago, in the late 1970s and early 1980s, the Fed Funds rate exceeded 20 percent. The Fed Funds rate is the interest rate at which banks can borrow short-term money, usually overnight, from each other to keep the debt markets liquid. It sets the tone for interest rates in general across all interest-sensitive investments.

Bond Market Investments

During the economic collapse of 2008 and early 2009, the Fed Funds rate was zero, meaning that the cost of money was, effectively, free. Why? Because the Fed either raises or lowers rates to help stabilize the economy and induce growth; it raises or lower rates either to slow or increase economic growth. It’s a safety valve for the economy and it is used judiciously because of its power. It’s safe to say that the various Fed Chairmen and Chair Janet Yellen have been cautious and conservative over the years, as they should be, always attempting to calibrate the effect of rates on the equity and debt markets—and, by extension, the economy at large.

Altering the Fed Funds rate is a powerful economic tool: its impact on the economy is substantial and consequential.

Bond Market Investments

Which brings us to bond market investments and whether they make sense right now. The answer, wouldn’t you know it, is that it depends. It depends on what you are trying to accomplish with your investing plan. Bond interest rates differ according to the maturity of the bond in question: short-term bond maturities will typically have lower interest rates than longer-term debt investments. But the differences are not always as dramatic as you’d expect. With longer-term debt investments, you tend to be rewarded for the length of time you are willing to tie up your money.

You’d think, if you didn’t know otherwise, that the difference between 5-year Treasuries and 30-year Treasuries would be extensive. That is not necessarily the case.

For those considering bond market investments, think about this. The rate on 5-year Treasuries today is 2.26 percent. The interest rate on a 30-year Treasury bond, as of this writing, is 2.86 percent. Pause to consider. Usually, the longer the maturity of a bond the higher the rate, and usually by a considerable amount. When this is the case the bond yield curve is said to be normal.

In an inverted curve yield market, shorter-term bond rates are higher than long term bond instruments. This, of course, is counterintuitive. If you’re willing to take on a longer maturity bond, you should be rewarded by doing so: which is to say your interest rate should be higher than what it is on a short-term bond investment. Today, we are in a flat yield curve environment. This defines the illustration above: there is very little difference between yields on short- and long-term bond or debt investments. (Stock ownership is referred to as equity investing.)

So, let’s get back to the “it depends” part of this piece on bond market investments. Does it make sense to invest in bonds, given the flat yield curve we are experiencing?

If you are looking to add yield, or interest rate payments, to your portfolio it likely does make sense to put some—repeat, some—of your money in a bond investment or in an investment tied to the bond market, like a bank CD. You should know, however, that with rates as low as they are at banks these days, you’ll need to keep an eye out on inflation, which is not a major issue today. If a 5-year bank CD pays, as it does, about 3 percent, you may barely be keeping up with inflation. The current rate of inflation is slightly over 1 percent. So, given all this, your money in a short-term bond investment will beat inflation, which is a good thing.

But here’s a second view to consider. Let’s say you are investing for income, which means you are looking for interest income. If you do so through a mutual fund government securities portfolio your interest rate will likely be higher than the numbers above. Those rates fall in the 6 percent range. Not bad, given the historically low-interest rates we are experiencing now.

But remember this: bond market investments will not only pay you interest but may cause you to lose principal. Why? Because as the interest rates on bonds increase, their underlying price falls. (Exclude CDs, where your money is guaranteed, but locked up for varying periods of time.) This means that, contrary to what many investors think, you can lose money in a bond investment! If yields go up, the underlying price falls; if yields go down, the underlying price rises. Which means you can make money, too.

Here’s an example. You put your money in a government securities mutual fund with a yield, which can change daily, of 4.5 percent. Your original investment is $10,000. If rates on government securities (treasury bonds) go up, your $10,000 investment will drop. The higher the rate increase the steeper the drop. With bonds, principal and interest move in inverse relation to each other. Of course, as noted, you can avoid this by putting your money in a CD, where the principal is guaranteed not to decline—but then your money is locked up and you lose liquidity, if that’s important to you.

Stories abound about individuals who invested in the bond market for income, only to find that interest rates slipped up and the actual value of their investment dropped. Sure, the investor is receiving the higher interest rate payments, but if or when he or she decides to sell in a market such as this, they will not recover their principal investment, which has shocked more than a few investors.

The best way to view this is as follows.

Be prepared to reallocate assets as quickly as possible. You do not want to lose principal when you are investing for income, but you can do just that if you’re not aware of all the elements at work.

Also, we all know that the one thing you can’t predict is the direction of the economy.

Bond Market Investments

You need to invest both for income and growth. But don’t think for a moment your principal is protected if you invest in bonds, whether directly or through a mutual fund.

In the end, this all goes back to investing 101: know where your money is, know the consequences of that money should the economy begin to worsen, and know that you can and should make changes in consultation with your advisor.

Read More
Stephen Foster Stephen Foster

Gidman’s Elect-O Shine: Your First Self-Shining Shoe

Stephen Foster

This will be huge, bigger than huge! Better than incredible!

You will soon be the owner of the just-patented Elect-O-Shine.

And what, you may ask, is an Elect-O-Shine?

Just this: the Elect-O-Shine is the last pair of shoes you'll ever shine. The EOS, as we call it, takes advantage of new nanocular technology advancements.

Here's what we mean:

  • EOS uses nanocular technology to imbed slow-releasing color pellets directly into shoe leather.

  • The no-shine shoe works for as long as you own them.

  • That means no more shining your shoes, ever!

  • EOS will save you thousands on shoe polish alone.

  • The EOS Deluxe model even allows you to change shoe color easily!

  • The Elect-O-Shine shoes are guaranteed for life, your life!

What are you waiting for?

Pick up a pair of Gidman's EOS shoes today.

Walk a mile in our shoes.

Where fine quality shoes are sold.

Read More
Stephen Foster Stephen Foster

The Big Scam: Timeshares

Stephen Foster

You’ve had it, and we get it. At first, it seemed perfect, right? And the pitch was just so enticing. Do you want to essentially own a resort property, often at the beach or in the mountains? Of course you do. Who doesn’t? So, you go all in and sign on the dotted line, or lines as the case may be. Then, with great pride, you announce to the world that you are a resort property owner. Your property is a timeshare. Secretly, you know your friends are envious.

Unfortunately, there are only so many times during the year when you may use it, but so what? You still are an owner. But this is a timeshare: others just like you also own the property. It’s only nominally “yours.” 
More than likely you’ve all been scammed--far too many details in the contract to keep account of. More than likely you’ll live to regret your decision to own the timeshare (AKA, time scare). Your anger and frustration may have you howling at the moon every night.

Why? Because your timeshare is very likely to be a massive money pit.

Buying a timeshare is like purchasing a house. You must sign a mortgage, with all that that implies. And, sure, you may have read about certain “extraneous” charges, but you never gave them much thought. Now, you are furious over those charges. Why? Because they will inevitably increase and increase and increase again.

Fees. You will be assessed fees, and these assessments are likely to occur frequently, and they almost always increase in cost, too. Over and over and over. 
What recourse do you have to stop them? None. These fees are ostensibly for: property upgrades, repairs, and general maintenance. The semantics of fee assessments may vary, but they almost always serve one purpose: increasing the corporate owner’s net worth. Fees are sort of like taxes. They proliferate and you, the owner, clearly didn’t vote for them. And just as with taxes, you must pay, period. You begin to have second thoughts, but still.

Now along comes another timeshare hand in your pocket.

Special Assessments. Speaking of semantics, when is a special assessment not a fee? Well, it’s not a fee because fees usually apply to specified parts of the property itself. A special assessment may be for a less tangible undertaking, such as locally-mandated “ordinances” or property management upkeep, which you thought were what fees were for. Not so. And when you are “specially assessed,” you must pay. Period. To borrow a cliché, you are now drowning in a money pit. And the pit is deep. It’s quicksand. And whatever you may have budgeted for your timeshare, you will almost always come up short. The special assessment cycle is like the minute hand on an electric clock; it never stops.

How could you have let this happen to you?

1. Timeshare salespeople are super aggressive. They know how to rope you in, and unless you’re in the minority, you’ll almost always relent: especially after you’ve been wined and dined at a super top-end restaurant where you undoubtedly were served steak and lobster, or any dish meant to sweep you off your feet.

2. You “know” in advance that your timeshare will be open for you on particular dates, and this is appealing because you can always plan around it. But those dates are not always going to hold up. The owners may, in fact, be conducting maintenance just when you plan to jump on a plane. Or you may have another engagement that you can’t miss—a son’s or daughter’s wedding, say. So you’ll have to miss your resort this year. And good luck getting another owner to switch times with you.

3. It seems as though everyone is buying timeshares, see number one above, and so you want to be where the action is.

Of course, as it turns out, timeshares almost always make bad investments. They are the vacation equivalent of quicksand. Best to have your steak and lobster and then slip out the back door.

Your bank account will thank you.

Read More
Stephen Foster Stephen Foster

Throw Away the Key: For-Profit Prisons and the Ethics of Incarceration

Stephen Foster

Sadly, crime and punishment are both inevitable and necessary when two or more people inhabit the same geography: homo homini lupus, man is a wolf to man. But it’s how a society punishes its criminals that defines it. How a collective of individuals goes about the grim task of depriving its members of their freedoms—at times, their lives—says as much about our law-abiding as it does our lawless.

For civilized society, prisons are necessary. But prisons need not be inhumane. They need not mimic the very behaviors they are purportedly punishing. Two methods of operating prisons in the United States exist: government-run and maintained, and as for-profit enterprises. Being incarcerated under the latter model is inherently unethical; it reduces our humanity to a “make-a-buck” model of punishment. A corporate, or for-profit, prison may indeed receive a stipend from the government to help with operations. But make no mistake: it’s the corporate element that defines not only how it treats its residents but also its employees.

When it comes to a prison’s population, these two methods of incarceration differ by desired outcomes, and the calculus is remarkably simple. Investopedia says, “A public prison is naturally non-profit. The end goal is to house prisoners in an attempt to rehab them or remove them from the streets. A private prison, on the other hand, is run by a corporation. That corporation’s end goal is to profit from anything they deal in.” (The Business Model of Private Prisons. Sean Bryant, June 2019.)

Corporate prisons benefit the most when they are at full capacity, so rehabilitation and release are secondary, if that. A government-run prison wants—needs—to have its residents pay for their crimes in the ways that society dictates and then release those men and women back into society all for the better. Like it or not, detainees have rights, and more than a few studies have concluded that for-profit prisons will inhibit or quash those rights to increase the proverbial bottom line.

When it comes to a prison’s employees, according to Cody Mason, “Privately managed prisons attempt to control costs by regularly providing lower levels of staff benefits, salary, and salary advancement than publicly-run facilities (equal to about $5,327 less in annual salary for new recruits and $14,901 less in maximum annual salaries).” (Too Good to be True: Private Pensions in America. The Sentencing Project. January 2012, p.10.).

The desire for increased earnings quarter-over-quarter should not dictate how prisons are run. Detainees suffer. Employees suffer. The only winners here are the very institutions that should not have winning financially as their goal.

Failing to attempt rehabilitation of prisoners is unethical; it undermines this country’s need to integrate rather than segregate, and surely our moral underpinning is weakened when we sanction the treatment of prisoners in ways that enhance a balance sheet. And asking a prison employee to work for poverty wages—in jobs that require extreme dedication and high-level training—is, too, lacking an ethical foundation.

For-profit prisons not only diminish but defile us. They are a disgrace we should choose not to live with.

Read More