• Home
  • Disclaimer
  • News And Analysis
  • Message Board
  • Tools
  • Featured Offers
  • Registration
  • Forgot Password?
  • Contact Us
  • FAQs
  • About Us
  • Privacy
  • Premium Members
  • Testimonials

    I'm an active trader of the Qs and hot Nasdaq names. It's my job. I use LSR's information to help me prepare for the day. Mauck's T/A seems to be right on target. Salim and the other columnists have excellent ideas too. I use other well known services for idea flow and I may cancel them soon. This is one of the best market sites on the web. Great job, LSR.

    -John Hartman
    Institutional Trader
    Chicago,

    "I didn’t start making money in the stock market until I subscribed to LSR’s service."

    - Don
    Individual Trader
    New Jersey

    "After years of being bombarded with offers to join stock picking services, Long and Short Reports is the first and only service worth its weight in return on investment. LSR provides me with critical insight to market technicals, plus all the LSR stock selections I need to prosper, Bull or Bear."

    - Dennis Duff
    Short Term Investor
    Canada

    " I'm very happy with the service you're providing and I'm learning something new every day...I've traded on and off since 1987....my first experience with a crashing market...and have a pretty solid technical background in TA, so I'm familiar with most of the lingo you use...I really like your disciplined money management approach"

    - Andrew K
    Individual Trader and Investor
    Florida

    "I just wanted to thank you guys. I was looking at buying a hot OTCBB stock that had fallen some in price, but then I noticed Robert Church had written a negative report on the company in your Dead Fish section. It caused me to put the idea aside. The stock has now crashed. You were right and it saved me a bundle."

    - Ron Squire
    Portland, Oregon

    LSR'S Kerry J. Fulton,
    a former College Instructor, Certified Financial Planner, and Regional V.P. for a national brokerage firm, discusses planning concepts
    and ideas to be used in conjunction with your
    investment activities.


    Financial Advisors, Part 2 of 1
    March 01, 2002

    In this part of our article, we will discuss additional professional designations.

    Industry Professional Designations

    There are Certified Financial Planners (CFP), Certified Financial Analysts (CFA), Chartered Financial Consultant (ChFC), Certified Life Underwriters (CLU) and Certified Public Accountants (CPA). All of these certifications mean something. They all require training and testing processes for certification and also require qualified continuing education to keep the designation. Recipients of these desinations are subject to a type of board of ethics, which can take someone's certification away if they don't follow the ethical rules of the certifying body. These are all real designations that denote some level of training. 

    What do these mean and what can they do for you? As a brief description, a CFP is a designation granted by the college for financial planning. It requires a very complete knowledge in all aspects of financial planning and passing a comprehensive test. This is a general financial planning course and equips the individual to advise in all aspects of financial planning including investments, insurance, retirement, estate and tax planning. ChFC is an insurance industry designation granted by the American College, and insurance industry institution. A ChFC will have a well-rounded knowledge of financial planning from the insurance industry prospective. If you need business insurance and advice on various types of policies, a person with this designation would be able to help. A CLU is also an insurance designation from the American College for the insurance industry. This person will have a much better knowledge and training in insurance, generally in the life insurance side of the industry. Many ChFCs are also CLUs but that is not required.
    A CFA is a designation for the securities industry that indicates this person has more training in the area of portfolio management. This is more of an investment person that a financial planner. Most mutual fund managers, segregated account managers, and private money managers are CFAs.

    Insurance Industry

    The insurance industry, although regulated, is not as closely regulated as the securities industry. Obviously there are many more insurance agents than there are Securities licensed individuals. Unlike the securities industry, the license is with the person and not the company they represent. Once a person obtains an insurance license, they then "place it" with an insurance brokerage company and become appointed to sell their products. Some agents are exclusive, while others are independent and may sell insurance policies for many companies.

    The insurance industry is not as regulated with respect to what an agent may call themselves, except in the financial planning areas. Here you will see a lot of different titles and names for what they do. It is unusual to find someone that is good in the causality insurance areas, homeowners, auto, business, liability etc. to be very knowledgeable in the life insurance areas. They will know something about life insurance but typically not as much as one that is in the life insurance industry only. The medical insurance field is the same way. They typically learn their field and not the other insurance areas.  That doesn't mean they don't know anything about other areas of insurance but if you need help in any of these areas, go to the expert in the field. Someone who specializes in the type of insurance you need.

    Other Financial Services Industry Advisors

    Accountants and Attorneys are other people you may turn to for financial advice. I have talked with a lot of CPAs who are great at accounting but investments and financial planning are not typically within their fields of expertise. They can read and understand a financial statement for a company you are considering for an investment, but most aren't trained in financial planning.   One should probably not go to an accountant for financial planning advice.  Accountants are usually very good at giving tax advice.  After all, that's what accounts do, isn't it? They do numbers, balance sheets, taxes, bookkeeping, etc. That is not financial planning. It is part of it, and important part of it but it is not total financial planning.

    Attorneys may specialize in or emphasis estate planning, but there again very few have been trained in financial planning. The part they do in financial planning is also very important, but estate planning or business succession planning is only a couple of the pieces. They may be involved in your planning process but don't go to a lawyer for a financial plan unless they have been trained in that area. Also remember any lawyer can draft a will or trust, but estate planning is an optional course in most law schools. That means most lawyers didn't even take the basic course. If you have a complex problem, you don't want them to "practice" on you, do you?

    With this basic knowledge of licensing and titles, you will now be better prepared to understand how the various advisors work. In the next articles, I will explain which ones you should use and why and how they charge for their services.

    Kerry J. Fulton


    Financial Advisors, Part 1 of 1
    February 17, 2002

     

    This will be the first part of a multi part series concerning various types of financial planners and financial advisors. The first part will discuss various types of advisors. In the second part we will discuss how various advisors are paid for their services. The third part will discuss how to pick an advisor or various advisors to help you with your financial situation.

    Special agent sounds good, doesn't it? The FBI and the CIA have special agents. They are supposed to be the good guys,  so if one of my advisors is a "special agent",  it must be good, right? What about various certifications? What if one of my advisors is a "Certified" whatever? Isn't that a good thing? Doesn't that person know more than others in a particular field? A few weeks ago I heard a radio advertisement touting the services of a "Financial Coach". Even Tiger Woods has a personal coach, doesn't he? Shouldn't I have a professional "financial coach" to help me? What about an Account Executive? That sounds impressive, doesn't it? I could use a persona banker, to help with some of my investments, couldn't I?

    There are a lot of names for people who want to help you with your money. How do you know which one to use? Well, let's take a look at the financial services industry and find out what all of this means. We will discuss the securities industry, the insurance industry and other advisors.

    The Securities Industry:
    The securities industry has a lot of controls over what people can call themselves and what they can't call themselves. We will begin here. The National Association of Securities Dealers, NASD, is a self-regulating body of the securities industry. The NASD was created by the Federal Government to help control and monitor that industry. After all, someone needs to look out for the investors, don't they?

    If a person has a license with the NASD, they fall under certain guidelines and rules that they "have to follow". If they don't, they could lose their license and be fined. Someone who does not have a securities license,  is not subject to the NASD's  rules. A simple example of this is in the area of church bonds. If my church wanted an to expand,  and wanted to sell bonds for that expansion, members of the church could sell these bonds to each other, themselves, friends and relatives. They don't need to have a securities license to do this. Let's assume that the national organization for that church backs the bonds, which is often the case. Let's further assume that this church has never had a default on any of their bonds. Let's also assume that this is a good investment. Since these are not registered bonds, and are an unregistered security, and the transaction is exempt, meaning the sales person does not need to be registered with the NASD, anyone can sell these bonds, except someone with a securities license. If a professional in the industry who knew more than anyone in the church about investments sold one of these bonds, they could lose their NASD license and face a big fine.

    In the securities industry, there are two main regulating bodies for financial advisors. We will ignore the SEC for this discussion, because that body is over all securities transactions but unless there is a major violation, they don't often get involved in the control over the area we are discussing. The NASD and states are the two entities we will discuss here. The NASD covers the industry nationally. States can further pass laws to protect their residents, which they do. They also inspect and supervise licensed securities companies and sales people.

    Once a person is sponsored by an NASD member firm, passes the necessary exams, and passes all the required background checks, they are licensed with the NASD for specific activities. There are a lot of different exams and licenses for all of the various securities products that are on the market today. They are all now called "registered representatives" because they are properly registered with the NASD to represent their firm is specific securities transactions.

    Now that I have a license, what do I call myself? That is left up to the control of the securities firm you are licensed with. Some allow their reps to call themselves account executive. Others call themselves financial representatives, or other titles. They all mean the same thing. What these titles mean, in effect,  is that they have a license.   In order to call yourself a financial "advisor" many states require that you pass a NASD series 65 exam as well as the others you need for your licenses. Once you pass that exam, you can call yourself an advisor. Other states don't have such a law but that seems to be changing.

    So what's really in a name? In many cases nothing. If a person is licensed with the NASD, one name doesn't mean anything more than another name or title. Some of the larger brokerage firms call their top reps Vice Presidents. In closer examination they are not elected Vice Presidents they are appointed Vice Presidents. They are, in essence, appointed by the firm to have a better title, with the hope that it will help them sell more. They are not on the board of directors, and they don't usually have any P & L responsibility.   They just are required to sell a lot of securities to keep the title.

    A person with a securities license may also be a stockbroker. If you really want to understand stockbrokers, read Jim Salim's book "The Great Wall Street Swindle". I did and I think its great! In fact, I recommend it to anyone who have interest in this article.

    Anyway, back to the topic at hand. My suggestion is to totally ignore the title of a financial advisor and look at what they can do for you. Certifications are a different story. Several years ago, I knew of a company that was selling diamonds as an investment. None of their representatives were registered with the NASD and didn't have to be. After 40 hours of in house training on how to sell diamonds as an investment, they became a "Certified Diamond Counselor". Sounds good, but what did it mean? NOTHING! 

    To Be Continued...  (In the next part, we will look at Industry Professional Designations, the Insurance Industry, and other financial services industry advisors)

    Kerry J. Fulton, RLP
    LSR Staff  Author
    LSR Staff Writer
    All around nice guy




    Divorce Requires Financial Planning
    January 14, 2002


    The statistics say that somewhere between 50% to ½ of all marriages end up in divorce. Unfortunately, divorce is not a joking matter. Too often people are highly emotional during this time and end up fighting over petty or stupid things and ignore some of the bigger things. Believe me, I speak with the voice of experience.

    A good friend of mine always told me never to emote and make important decisions at the same time. He was right on. During the initial part of my divorce proceedings, I was too emotional to make good decisions. Especially good financial decisions. Even financial planners make bad financial decisions when emotions get in the way. The more this process dragged on, the more I changed my outlook, attitude and strategy.

    I wanted to make sure the children would be well taken care of financially. Because of that, I paid a lot more than I should have paid. However, I did a lot of things right financially during the process. Once the initial divorce was completed, I thought the financial bickering was over. I was wrong. I was taken back to court every two or three years for increases in support. That is when I was able to keep emotions totally out of the decision process and good judgment took over.

    Prior to my divorce, I helped a lot of people with their financial decisions during their divorce processes. When it was me going through a divorce, I realized how much emotions could cloud one's judgment. Since that time, I have been able to better understand the emotions involved and I have been able to help a lot more people.

    One other thing that effects the process is the fact that most divorce lawyers don't know much about financial planning. Their goal seems to be to get the most they can for their client. Each lawyer wants the maximum for their clients, ignoring good financial planning concepts. Keep in mind that I am not a lawyer but I do have the ability to research, ask questions and find out what I need to know about a specific topic. We all have that ability, don't we?

    I ended up giving my lawyer and opposing council a lot of training about financial planning as this process evolved. I had several phone calls on the speakerphone with my lawyer and hers explaining tax consequences and financial planning concepts. Her lawyer wouldn't just take what I told him as fact, so I had to convince him that he should at least research what I was telling him. After several discussions or arguments, he did his job and checked these things out.

    As I have stated in other articles, advisors are hired to advise you. What you ultimately do with that advice is up to you. I directed much of the negotiations and process with the advice of my lawyer. He was good at the law, especially in these matters. I knew financial planning and people. Together we did fine. He told me that in Missouri, it is extremely difficult to appeal a domestic relations ruling and win. In fact, we appealed one ruling on 5 points and won on three of them.

    If you have a retirement plan, and the divorce decree states that one spouse will receive a portion of that retirement plan, you have two choices on how to pay it out. If it is not properly stipulated in the decree, you may have to withdraw the money and pay it to your ex-spouse. Doing that could cause you to have to pay a penalty and taxes on the portion you withdraw. It could also cause your ex spouse to pay taxes on all the earnings on that money.

    I was divorced in 1987. At that time Qualified Domestic Relations Orders, QDRO, were not as common as they are now. I did a lot of research and discovered that a QDRO had to be written is a specific way in the decree to make it work. I found a corporate lawyer in Atlanta who had worked with several of these and called him with specific questions. I discovered how to make this work for me.

    A QDRO works especially well with a defined contribution retirement plan. With a QDRO, a portion of the retirement account can be re-registered to an ex-spouse and maintain the tax shelter until it is withdrawn. It can also avoid early withdrawal penalties and current taxes for both parties. It makes a lot of sense to do this. It is just good financial planning.

    One of my clients told me that his wife wanted him to sell 50% of the stock and give her the money. He didn't have a problem with that. After all it was ½ hers and he didn't object. I suggested that he give her ½ of the stock and let her sell it. The stock had a large capital gain and he would have had to pay the taxes because the transfer would have occurred when he was filing his taxes as a single person.  I don't know if her lawyer understood the difference but he easily agreed with that idea, saving my client a lot of money in taxes.

    A female client was divorcing a businessman. She wanted and deserved to have ½ of the business assets. She wanted to own ½ of the business with him. It turned into a bitter divorce proceeding. Running a business with a partner is difficult enough without trying to do it with an equal 50-50 partnership with someone you've divorced. We worked out a deal where she would receive equal value in other property and assets in exchange for him keeping the business. She knew nothing about the business and shouldn't have been an owner in it. This may well have kept the business from failing and her ½ of the business  from becoming worthless. The lawyers agreed once they realized the value of this arrangement. Prior to that, they were trying to work out how the business would be split.

    I have seen men give up way too much just to get a divorce over. Once that is done, the ex-wife frequently takes him back to court for increases in child support. States have guidelines on how assets will be split and what the child support will be. I would personally rather see the divorcing couple go along with the guidelines and use good financial planning do decide how specifically to split up things.  After that, if the non-custodial parent wants to do more for the children, they can provide a lot of the extras. Initially, I couldn't do that because I gave up too much to make sure the children would be well taken care of financially. It would have been much better for my relationship with my children, if I would have gone by the state guidelines and had enough money to provide more extras for the children.

    Little things can make a big difference. Home ownership can cause other problems too. If the decree says one spouse can live in the house until they sell it then the money is split, you could have a problem. That spouse can live in the house forever, if it is totally up to them. I had a friend who bought a used Cadillac from an ad in the paper. The ad said like new, one year old, loaded - $100. My friend called on the ad to see what was going on. The seller told him that the divorce decree stated he must sell the car and give his ex wife the proceeds. He didn't want to give her anything more than he had to. The ex didn't want the car; she just wanted the money. What a mistake for her! What a great deal for my friend!

    Here is a common scenario during a divorce. One party must sell something and give the proceeds to the ex spouse. Why lawyers allow that during the negotiations, I will never understand. You can almost guess what will happen, especially if things are bitter at that time.

    Bonuses can cause additional problems. If you have to give up part of a future bonus, try to negotiate a situation where it is a % of the bonus not a flat amount over the next several years. During these current economic times, you don't know what could happen to a bonus. Later that bonus may become part of regular pay and the bonus reduced.  When that happens, the dollars paid as a % of the bonus are also reduced.

    Financial planning is important in a divorce for both parties. You have to look at these decisions as business decisions not emotional decisions. You should always look at what could happen after that decision is made. What could possibly go wrong or change to affect that wisdom of your agreements? Do you want the law to require a working relationship in the future or do you want that to be a mutual decision. How can you avoid unnecessary taxes now and in the future? Can you control the outcome or change your investments or are they stuck some place and require an ex spouse to do something that will have a positive outcome for you?

    It may be difficult, but when going through a divorce you will need to work with a financial planner.  That planner can then consult with you and your lawyer in order to effectuate the most positive outcome possible. Together, your lawyer and financial planner can work to achieve the best possible outcome. One without the other, generally can't do as well as they could working as a team for you.

    Kerry J. Fulton
    LSR Staff Writer




    Business Succession Planning
    December 26, 2001

    Most small business owners spend most of their waking hours working with and planning for their businesses.  The business is their "baby". They work the business and pour all their blood sweat and tears into building that business. In return, the business provides for the needs of the owner and his/her family. When the business becomes successful, dreams of growing the business to even greater successes begin and many times these dreams come true.

    But one important thing that many business owners never think about is, what would happen to the business if they became disabled or wanted to retire?  Most small business people have life insurance in the event of premature death. Many have insurance to cover fires or temporary business interruptions. But what will happen to the business when it is time to sell or retire?

    Proper financial planning dictates that you should never have all your eggs in one basket. You should not plan solely on your business to always take care of you. You should invest some of your profits in outside investments. Many small business people don't do that. Not doing so is a big mistake. Don't fall into the trap of thinking that things are good and always will be good. Invest for various contingencies.

    On top of this, while you are planning the growth of your business, plan on what will happen to it when you are ready to take life a little easier. Spend some of your planning time thinking about whom could possible buy your business and how they will pay for it. Remember, when you are no longer there to help with the day-to-day activities of the business and when someone else begins to manage your company, things can and often-times will change. Many of your customers buy from you because of you. If you are not there, will those customers continue to do business with your company?


    Less than 1/3 of all small businesses survive two generations of ownership. If you don't have children who want to run your business, then you need to consider who might purchase your business when it is time for you to step down.   How will your business be valued? It probably won't sell for the amount of money you think it should. You may have to negotiate a price.  Check with your banker. Ask if your business could be financed to a new owner. If so, ask how much the bank would finance it for. The answers might surprise you.

    Think about some of your competitors. What would you pay for their businesses? What would they pay for yours? Would they be willing to buy you out when the time comes?

    Would you have to stay for a period of time following the sale of your business to assist in the transition? After that, if the new owners aren't as successful as you, or if they fail, how will that effect the payments on which you would have relied?

    You should always plan your exit strategy long before the time comes to sell out or transfer ownership. Perhaps you can hire, train and sell the business to a key employee. If that is the case,  he or she may be able to obtain the financing necessary to pay for the business outright.  If not, will the earnings from the business be enough for that new owner to pay you the purchase price of the business if the success it achieves isn't as great as when you ran the business?

    If you have enough outside investments for retirement, the money from the sale of the business will be extra income instead of essential income. That is the best position in which to be when the time comes to retire.

    All businesses are different.  But all business owners should make this exit planning a major part of their financial planning. Remember, it is easier to plan for potential problems before those problems occur than it is after the problems exist.

    Kerry J. Fulton
    Staff Writer