[Vettezuki]

Originally Posted by enkeivette

My step Dad's 69 Mustang Shelby Cobra GT 500 was certainly an investment that he let go for $15K 20 years ago. Car's worth more than $80K today.

And Ben our cars have actually gone up in value since I bought mine. I bought mine for $4900 with 78K miles on it and and no issues other than a broken motor mount. With the custom 82 bumper molded in.

Find me a 78 Vette for less than 5K with decent paint and around only 80K miles on it.

Not saying that I'll be able to turn a profit, but if I had left it stock I would have definitely made a profit just flipping it as it was.

Most people are pretty confused about what investment means. As proof I submit to you the current economic environment, a great deal of which had to do with people's notion of a house being an asset, another big mistake as practiced by most people.

Here it is in the most reduced form.
An asset puts money in your pocket
A liability takes money out of your pocket
Investment is the rational and intentional process of acquiring and building assets. (Obviously this includes control of associated liabilities, e.g., facilities, payroll, equipment, insurance, marketing, whatever, et. al.)

Further,
Every cost is an opportunity cost. That is, what is spent on A cannot be spent on B.
Don't forget to account for ALL of your input and operational costs.
Don't forget compounding effects of capital aggregation. (Playing for small returns and consuming them rather than *investing* them means you will always be at the level, as most people are.)

For these basic reasons people who are skilled and self-disciplined can start out with the same (or even nothing) and end up with far more by following this basic methodology. The details get complicated, but in principle, that's about it.

I'm not saying for a second don't buy toys. I'm saying don't lie to yourself and call them investments.

[enkeivette]

That's too much info for me Ben, I'm cramming today, if it's not prop I don't care. Here's what investment means to me. You buy something, it increases in value, and you make a profit.

You can't really deduct the cost of gas, oil and tires because you're making use of all of that. If I had rolled the Vette into my garage 7 years ago, put a battery charger on it, fired it up and sold it today. I would have made a profit. In fact, in 7 years it would have doubled in value.

X = $5K, 7 years later X = $10K, sell X, profit $5k. X was a profitable investment.

But yes, I realize most car toys are not investments. I'm just saying you can't make a definitive statement like that, it's not true.

[enkeivette]

Btw, never bought my car thinking it was an investment. Didn't cut apart my trans tunnel for the T56 thinking it was an investment. Nor did I replace the original seats with Toyota seats, cut the dash for my cd player, replace the rallye rims with ricer enkei rims, get rid of the 78 bumpers, and fill in the 25th anniversary emblem holes thinking it was an investment.

[enkeivette]

And I know full well that by spending $500 to upgrade my fuel system and $2500 to upgrade to a 12 bolt IRS I'll only increase the value of the car by maybe $1K.

[Vettezuki]

Originally Posted by enkeivette

That's too much info for me Ben, I'm cramming today, if it's not prop I don't care. Here's what investment means to me. You buy something, it increases in value, and you make a profit. . .

Better study hard, you're going to depend on earned income.

But yes, I realize most car toys are not investments. I'm just saying you can't make a definitive statement like that, it's not true.

I didn't make a definitive statement like that. I said there are those who REALLY know what they're doing and those who get plain lucky, say 0.001% of "toy" car owners. Moreover, that only the former approaches anything like investment, an intentional act of acquiring assets for the purpose of profit. That's my point and I'm sticking to it.

Again, I (obviously) have nothing against acquiring toys for fun. Nice things make life nicer. I'm just clear about what they are, that's all.

[enkeivette]

Originally Posted by Vettezuki

...investment, an intentional act of acquiring assets for the purpose of profit. That's my point and I'm sticking to it.

So, if you invested in Microsoft stock a few decades ago on a bet that you lost with Bill Gates (because you thought Windows was a stupid idea and purchasing his stock was a surefire way to throw your money away) and now you were rich because of that stock... that wouldn't have been an investment?

Similarly, if you bought a Shelby Cobra for your son years ago who never got into cars and bought a truck instead, and that Cobra sat in your garage collecting dust, only to be worth 6 digits today, that car wasn't an investment? An unknowing but profitable investment?

[Vettezuki]

Originally Posted by enkeivette

So, if you invested in Microsoft stock a few decades ago on a bet that you lost with Bill Gates (because you thought Windows was a stupid idea and purchasing his stock was a surefire way to throw your money away) and now you were rich because of that stock... that wouldn't have been an investment?

Similarly, if you bought a Shelby Cobra for your son years ago who never got into cars and bought a truck instead, and that Cobra sat in your garage collecting dust, only to be worth 6 digits today, that car wasn't an investment? An unknowing but profitable investment?

Absolutely NOT! Is stumbling on a gold mine an investment? Is winning the lottery an investment? Now you're catching on.

Investing is the rational and intentional act of creating value vis a vis asset development. You'll notice that I don't consider stock trading to be investing. It's trading, another vehicle for making money, but not investing per se. Now an entity that buys stock to gain control of a firm IS investing. A person who buys shares in order to generate dividends (the original concept for stock ownership in a firm), IS investing. For most people, including myself, stock trading is the better term.

Investing is the Raison d'être for an entrepreneur (who knew we spoke French) and a real capitalist. Both of which we desperately need more of.

Maybe think of it this way. You are investing heavily right now. You are investing your time, effort and credit/captial on an asset. What's the asset? Your skill as an Attorney. The asset once mature will begin to put money in your pocket. The idea is that it will be of far greater value than the cost to develop the asset. Likewise, if after passing the bar you decide you don't want to be an Attorney, your skill as an anttorney will not be an asset, but a liability. All the time effort and credit/capital is gone and moreover could have been spent somewhere else. (Every cost is an opportunity cost.)

From this you can easily infer that there is a substantive difference between good (productive) and bad (non-productive) debt. Debt which goes towards the development of an asset is good debt. Debt which just goes to a liability, like a loan for a toy, is bad debt. *Ideally* you shouldn't use credit (debt) to buy a toy. But at least be clear that your buying a liability, not investing.

Expanding the concept further, if you start a firm which brings partners on board, supported by staff, etc., you're developing another asset "the firm." The act of creating the firm to generate value is investing.

Further still, these are different levels of investing. One is you depending on a single asset, you. You will only make earned income doing this. Earned income is the worst way to make money (unless you're a supserstar, mega-CEO, etc.). You're income depends fully on you and it is by far the most heavily taxed. In the latter case, the firm is the asset generating income FOR you, including passive income. That is it creates value separate from or in addition to your efforts. Good. The first level of real financial independence is to get passive income at least equal to your average fixed living expenses. From that point on you're operating at a different level. There are many worlds and levels beyond this step. At some point the actual laws begin to change for you. That's right, you can invest in all manor of things as an accredited investor that you may not touch as non-accredited investor. But now we're getting actually legal, not just conceptual.

[enkeivette]

I see your point. But I think you're wrong.

An investment is a noun, referring to the thing. A thing cannot have intent. A investment thing is something that sits and accrues interest, hopefully.

I think you're thinking of investing.

A verb, which would have your element of intent. An action you take with the intent of gaining profit, interest. Investing.

And no, stumbling on a gold mine is not an investment. But if you found that gold mine and sat on it, dumbly, for 10 years while it increased in value, it is an investment. IMHO.

[Vettezuki]

Originally Posted by enkeivette

I see your point. But I think you're wrong. .

And I'm pretty confident that you're wrong. A found object that serendipitously appreciates in value cannot belong to the lexicological category of investment. I could not find any etymological reason or practical examples to support you claim. On the contrary the etymology supports my claim that an intentional action is required.

[enkeivette]

Aw Ben! C'mon don't give up you're so close!

Just copy and paste, this was the next logical step:

Yes, an investment is a thing and cannot itself have intent. But some things, like investments, are of the type that they are because of how we define them or intend to define them. Like a relationship, a relationship is only a thing if you intend for it to be so. So, if you do not intend for an investment to be so, it is not, it is just some other thing. Like a car, or a gold mine.