David, thanks for all you do, and have done! Your past research projects have been a boon. It's an eternal and sad state of affairs that government dictates we cannot be exposed to risk by credible, life-long market pros like yourself, and unsurprisingly gets more onerous with each passing week. Any chance of an "accredited subscription" as a work-around?
Your individual suggestions are among the best ever. Your willingness to be specific and timely puts you in a class by yourself. Not looking at the big picture just some good ideas.
""As you veteran readers might also recall, a change in SEC rules with regards to written recommendations necessitated that I halt said tracking. But due to increasingly restrictive SEC guidance to people who, like me, are affiliated with a registered investment advisor (RIA), I now need to discontinue making individual security recommendations. However, I will be able to suggest portfolio adjustments on asset classes and sectors, at least for the time being.""
Ah the nanny state strikes again. I hate this country a little more each and every day that stuff like this happens
Well that stinks about the SEC. I LOVE this Monday edition. How do these paid newsletter scammers get away with their crap? How about you charge us a few $$$ as a paid newsletter service? Thanks, David!
I first heard you on a podcast last year and have loved your work ever since. Last year I invested in four very different paid financial newsletters, and I have continually been struck by how your content is among the best out of everything I'm paying for!
With that in mind, please charge me $50/mo for your stock picks :) I hope this can be a win-win for the community you've developed and yourself. Thanks for considering
The good news is I can ride out some of your previous picks for a while. Though I suspect your screening processes, like those you discuss here, will be even more valuable than specific picks in the long run.
Not sure how one navigates the plethora of rules the SEC is instituting. As usual, your 30,000 foot view is well focused on the future. Would the SEC prefer it if you recommended only SPY or R2K or COMPQ or EDV or TLT? The Silly Erratic Clowns are trying to keep "investors" (read: gamblers) from harming themselves, which is a fool's errand. Thanks for your ongoing efforts to do what investment gurus do; provide useful advice. Onward!! Aloha.
Compared to other briliant substacks, you are delusional to think of this as more than a marketing tool. QA requires a feedback circuit outside of management's control and the vibe here is that you have nobody who is willing to be honest with you. I'll scan free stuff only. Gold has no overhead resistance; that's rare.
Hey David, I've been following your newsletter for over a year, back when it was part of the Evergreen Gavekal newsletter. Thanks for all the time and effort you've put into the content! I've really loved the macro commentary, but I don't really trade specific stocks/bonds too much so the specific recommendations in stocks or bonds have not been the the reason I follow you (which it sounds like you can't do as much any more due to the SEC). As an individual investor, $400/year is a bit high for me to pull the trigger on paying since I'm following for the macro commentary. Other macro investing subscriptions I've subscribed to (Investech, Grant Williams Podcast) offer entry level tiers for individual investors more in the $120-$175/year range. I would very happily pay to subscribe to your newsletter for something in a similar range, the $400/year price point, while I love the content, I just wanted to share the data point that I personally would probably not subscribe at that price point.
You may want to consider offering multiple tiers of subscription to get more price discrimination. There are a few ways you could consider structuring it:
1) Individual vs Institutional investors (where institutional maybe get more access to you for questions, etc)
2) Just macro commentary vs Macro commentary + specific stock/bond recommendations (if you find some way to do it with the SEC regulations).
3) Timeliness - An entry level tier gets things on a week delay or gets a bi-weekly compilations/digests of your Haymaker + Highlight Reels while a higher tier gets the more timely 2x per week newsletter.
I very much appreciate your analysis and I join the chorus of those suggesting a paid subscription if that does away with the obstacles put in the way of investment writing that makes sense. If so, issuing two versions of this letter should be possible with a few, very simple edits. Thank you for your work!
Is the SEC being funded by the ETF industry? The US $ is a single currency. Will that be too much risk to mention? Thank you for taking the time to put your experienced opinions out there.
Maybe we could pay for the subscription and then it would just be you doing your job?
David, thanks for all you do, and have done! Your past research projects have been a boon. It's an eternal and sad state of affairs that government dictates we cannot be exposed to risk by credible, life-long market pros like yourself, and unsurprisingly gets more onerous with each passing week. Any chance of an "accredited subscription" as a work-around?
Your individual suggestions are among the best ever. Your willingness to be specific and timely puts you in a class by yourself. Not looking at the big picture just some good ideas.
""As you veteran readers might also recall, a change in SEC rules with regards to written recommendations necessitated that I halt said tracking. But due to increasingly restrictive SEC guidance to people who, like me, are affiliated with a registered investment advisor (RIA), I now need to discontinue making individual security recommendations. However, I will be able to suggest portfolio adjustments on asset classes and sectors, at least for the time being.""
Ah the nanny state strikes again. I hate this country a little more each and every day that stuff like this happens
Well that stinks about the SEC. I LOVE this Monday edition. How do these paid newsletter scammers get away with their crap? How about you charge us a few $$$ as a paid newsletter service? Thanks, David!
Can it be free to EvergreenGavekal clients?
David -
I first heard you on a podcast last year and have loved your work ever since. Last year I invested in four very different paid financial newsletters, and I have continually been struck by how your content is among the best out of everything I'm paying for!
With that in mind, please charge me $50/mo for your stock picks :) I hope this can be a win-win for the community you've developed and yourself. Thanks for considering
The good news is I can ride out some of your previous picks for a while. Though I suspect your screening processes, like those you discuss here, will be even more valuable than specific picks in the long run.
Not sure how one navigates the plethora of rules the SEC is instituting. As usual, your 30,000 foot view is well focused on the future. Would the SEC prefer it if you recommended only SPY or R2K or COMPQ or EDV or TLT? The Silly Erratic Clowns are trying to keep "investors" (read: gamblers) from harming themselves, which is a fool's errand. Thanks for your ongoing efforts to do what investment gurus do; provide useful advice. Onward!! Aloha.
Compared to other briliant substacks, you are delusional to think of this as more than a marketing tool. QA requires a feedback circuit outside of management's control and the vibe here is that you have nobody who is willing to be honest with you. I'll scan free stuff only. Gold has no overhead resistance; that's rare.
Hey David, I've been following your newsletter for over a year, back when it was part of the Evergreen Gavekal newsletter. Thanks for all the time and effort you've put into the content! I've really loved the macro commentary, but I don't really trade specific stocks/bonds too much so the specific recommendations in stocks or bonds have not been the the reason I follow you (which it sounds like you can't do as much any more due to the SEC). As an individual investor, $400/year is a bit high for me to pull the trigger on paying since I'm following for the macro commentary. Other macro investing subscriptions I've subscribed to (Investech, Grant Williams Podcast) offer entry level tiers for individual investors more in the $120-$175/year range. I would very happily pay to subscribe to your newsletter for something in a similar range, the $400/year price point, while I love the content, I just wanted to share the data point that I personally would probably not subscribe at that price point.
You may want to consider offering multiple tiers of subscription to get more price discrimination. There are a few ways you could consider structuring it:
1) Individual vs Institutional investors (where institutional maybe get more access to you for questions, etc)
2) Just macro commentary vs Macro commentary + specific stock/bond recommendations (if you find some way to do it with the SEC regulations).
3) Timeliness - An entry level tier gets things on a week delay or gets a bi-weekly compilations/digests of your Haymaker + Highlight Reels while a higher tier gets the more timely 2x per week newsletter.
Hi David
I too, would like to see a subscription service that would get back to individual equity as well as income recommendations.
Thanks for all the info you provide.
Mike G
I very much appreciate your analysis and I join the chorus of those suggesting a paid subscription if that does away with the obstacles put in the way of investment writing that makes sense. If so, issuing two versions of this letter should be possible with a few, very simple edits. Thank you for your work!
Is the SEC being funded by the ETF industry? The US $ is a single currency. Will that be too much risk to mention? Thank you for taking the time to put your experienced opinions out there.
Alan DeBoom
How come you cannot recommend specific stocks or etf's - yet every Tom, Dick, and Jane on CNBC does that very thing all day long? thank you
Great column and truly appreciaitve of the breakout scan, it is indeed a telling and useful contribution. Thank you!