British expats in Thailand feeling the misery as the UK pound drops to record low levels.

[bazza73]

2 hours ago, Gregster said:

Yes, good idea to talk with an FSO when back in Aus, but until then I'm keen to know if someone (who has worked in Aus for 45 years) is classed as an Aus resident for OAP purposes if they "live" at a relatives Aus address for only 2 weeks at a time in between 90 day holidays to Thailand ....for the previous 7 years ?!

I believe that someone would be; however, it's best to check it out carefully, rather than rely on my belief.

[Sumarianson]

That last post was all gobbledegook to me. All I know is ive lost a sh#t load of money but know that the pound will re emerge like the Phoenix from the ashes. The British economy is doing better than any European country bar Germany. However when the Germans realise that they will eventually be the paymasters for those countries that the Troika have devestated then the EU will be buried as it is already extremely sick.

Meantime if the cow May gets her act together and resigns, we may get someone in government that can take us positively through the Briex process. After which we should see a strong pound again. All these falls are just the Bankers who are upset that there is a spanner in the works now for their NWO putting pressure on the pound. Of course all investors follw the wolf in sheeps clothing to the slaughter house. . Smoke and mirrors lad, just smoke and mirrors.

[bomber]

1 hour ago, Sumarianson said:

That last post was all gobbledegook to me. All I know is ive lost a sh#t load of money but know that the pound will re emerge like the Phoenix from the ashes. The British economy is doing better than any European country bar Germany. However when the Germans realise that they will eventually be the paymasters for those countries that the Troika have devestated then the EU will be buried as it is already extremely sick.

Meantime if the cow May gets her act together and resigns, we may get someone in government that can take us positively through the Briex process. After which we should see a strong pound again. All these falls are just the Bankers who are upset that there is a spanner in the works now for their NWO putting pressure on the pound. Of course all investors follw the wolf in sheeps clothing to the slaughter house. . Smoke and mirrors lad, just smoke and mirrors.

cannot see many of your predictions coming off.tbh

[hashmodha]

If you're a Brit there's one hell of a difference between "funds" and "trusts". If you're holding through Hargreaves Lansdown you'll be humped on expenses and charges on "funds", and - unless you're really cute about how you organize things - they're generally expensive. Closed-end vehicles - investment trusts - are a lot better, as long as you understand a few basic things. 

Please can you elaborate on this point?
I have pensions in UK with Zurich. Life..I am 66
...so any suggestions..or what are others here at Thai visa doing now that there is an 25%exit tax.for QROPS Thanks

Please excuse spelling mistakes/misunderstanding
Best
HM

[hashmodha]

My observation's reading these posts are the I'm ok's I changed years ago and got lucky and those exposed by the ridiculous brexit vote and are not.
 
The unfortunate facts here is this is not a fluctuation its a long term can't see how sterling will come back calamity raising interest rates in the UK possibly the only way to support sterling right now is out of the question as this will crash the again over inflated housing market so where and when any good news comes out of the UK is anyone's guess.
 
One can only hope that the baht loses ground based on their exports must be struggling due to the baht's strength  the same way the UK'S exporter's are profiting from the pounds weakness  but again anyone's guess .
 
It's going to be a rocky ride unless your loaded and in the fortunate position of not giving a toss.  

They (Bloomberg)have saying for 5 years that baht is falsely overvalued...

Please excuse spelling mistakes/misunderstanding
Best
HM

[Craig krup]

4 hours ago, hashmodha said:

Please can you elaborate on this point?
I have pensions in UK with Zurich. Life..I am 66
...so any suggestions..or what are others here at Thai visa doing now that there is an 25%exit tax.for QROPS Thanks

Please excuse spelling mistakes/misunderstanding
Best
HM
 

 

Well........you need to be awfully carefully. Unit Trusts, OEICs, ETFs and the rest create and destroy "units" when people buy or sell. So the fund manager sells and buys units, but - at least some of the time - has to sell and buy the underlying shares in order to have the number of units they need. Investment trusts launch at one moment in time, take the money provided by all the investors in response to the initial advert (in the FT, or wherever) and from that point if you "want your money" you have to sell the investment trust shares in the market. That means (disadvantage) you're often selling at a discount to net asset value: more sellers than buyers means you're being humped. However, this also means that there isn't all the expense and aggravation of constantly having to meet the demands of those who panic, or speculators. This is especially important when it's something like a property collective investment. You can't easily sell half a building, so if there are loads of sellers it's a nightmare for a unit trust. A lot of them imposed exit penalties or time delays after Brexit because of this. 

 

However, you don't want to incur a load of costs moving from one to the other (units to shares). Buying shares isn't cost free. You probably do, though, want to make sure you aren't getting beefed on costs. The Alliance Trust is about the cheapest for folk with large investments. Hargreaves can be quite pricey if you're holding funds. Alliance Trust Savings offers the lowest priced versions of the funds, and the annual charges are fixed: very cheap if you've a reasonable amount. 

 

 

[Briggsy]

£1 up 40 satang or so today to 43.69 Baht (median rate). I am not sure if this is related to positive UK manufacturing output data or not.

[stevenl]

On 06/09/2017 at 10:11 PM, Sumarianson said:

That last post was all gobbledegook to me. All I know is ive lost a sh#t load of money but know that the pound will re emerge like the Phoenix from the ashes. The British economy is doing better than any European country bar Germany. However when the Germans realise that they will eventually be the paymasters for those countries that the Troika have devestated then the EU will be buried as it is already extremely sick.

Meantime if the cow May gets her act together and resigns, we may get someone in government that can take us positively through the Briex process. After which we should see a strong pound again. All these falls are just the Bankers who are upset that there is a spanner in the works now for their NWO putting pressure on the pound. Of course all investors follw the wolf in sheeps clothing to the slaughter house. . Smoke and mirrors lad, just smoke and mirrors.

Since ww2 the pound had decreased in value, many of those years without EU. Why would it be different now?

[scubascuba3]

 
Well........you need to be awfully carefully. Unit Trusts, OEICs, ETFs and the rest create and destroy "units" when people buy or sell. So the fund manager sells and buys units, but - at least some of the time - has to sell and buy the underlying shares in order to have the number of units they need. Investment trusts launch at one moment in time, take the money provided by all the investors in response to the initial advert (in the FT, or wherever) and from that point if you "want your money" you have to sell the investment trust shares in the market. That means (disadvantage) you're often selling at a discount to net asset value: more sellers than buyers means you're being humped. However, this also means that there isn't all the expense and aggravation of constantly having to meet the demands of those who panic, or speculators. This is especially important when it's something like a property collective investment. You can't easily sell half a building, so if there are loads of sellers it's a nightmare for a unit trust. A lot of them imposed exit penalties or time delays after Brexit because of this. 
 
However, you don't want to incur a load of costs moving from one to the other (units to shares). Buying shares isn't cost free. You probably do, though, want to make sure you aren't getting beefed on costs. The Alliance Trust is about the cheapest for folk with large investments. Hargreaves can be quite pricey if you're holding funds. Alliance Trust Savings offers the lowest priced versions of the funds, and the annual charges are fixed: very cheap if you've a reasonable amount. 
 
 

Perfectly fine investing in unit trusts and OEICs, both valued at net asset value usually daily, very liquid. Whether they create or liquidate units on a daily basis isn't a big deal its the norm. Two main things i look for excluding the obvious performance are 1) the star fund manager moving somewhere else, 2) the Fund is getting too big

[Craig krup]

52 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

2 hours ago, Craig krup said:

 

Perfectly fine investing in unit trusts and OEICs, both valued at net asset value usually daily, very liquid. Whether they create or liquidate units on a daily basis isn't a big deal its the norm. Two main things i look for excluding the obvious performance are 1) the star fund manager moving somewhere else, 2) the Fund is getting too big

 

Well, they find it quite expensive sometimes to run the fund. Fidelity actually tells you for the some of the funds (or the ATS platform certainly tells you) that if you sell and buy too often they might tell you to sod off. Twelve o'clock pricing for lots of the funds, and a single price (so no way to punish the frequent traders) tends to up the costs for the long term investor. Property unit trusts are insane: for property it has to be a closed end fund to avoid problems with redemptions. Sometimes the managers sell what's most liquid to deal with redemptions, and that slightly unbalances the asset mix. With platforms like Hargreaves the total expense of holding funds can be eye-watering. 

 

Funds are fair enough, but I think you need to know which sectors and funds are appropriate, and you need to keep an eye on the total cost of ownership: real total expense ratio, plus any humping you're getting from the platform. 

Edited September 8, 2017 by Craig krup

[scubascuba3]

 

Well, they find it quite expensive sometimes to run the fund. Fidelity actually tells you for the some of the funds (or the ATS platform certainly tells you) that if you sell and buy too often they might tell you to sod off. Twelve o'clock pricing for lots of the funds, and a single price (so no way to punish the frequent traders) tends to up the costs for the long term investor. Property unit trusts are insane: for property it has to be a closed end fund to avoid problems with redemptions. Sometimes the managers sell what's most liquid to deal with redemptions, and that slightly unbalances the asset mix. With platforms like Hargreaves the total expense of holding funds can be eye-watering. 

 

Funds are fair enough, but I think you need to know which sectors and funds are appropriate, and you need to keep an eye on the total cost of ownership: real total expense ratio, plus any humping you're getting from the platform. 

Total expense ratios are easy to find, key features usually show them. My interactive investor app shows it just by clicking on the fund. Property funds are unusual in that they can and do suspend liquidations, but people should read about the fund before they invest, no big deal.

And there are still dual priced unit trusts so certainly not all single priced

[Briggsy]

8 hours ago, Craig krup said:

 

Well, they find it quite expensive sometimes to run the fund. Fidelity actually tells you for the some of the funds (or the ATS platform certainly tells you) that if you sell and buy too often they might tell you to sod off. Twelve o'clock pricing for lots of the funds, and a single price (so no way to punish the frequent traders) tends to up the costs for the long term investor. Property unit trusts are insane: for property it has to be a closed end fund to avoid problems with redemptions. Sometimes the managers sell what's most liquid to deal with redemptions, and that slightly unbalances the asset mix. With platforms like Hargreaves the total expense of holding funds can be eye-watering. 

 

Funds are fair enough, but I think you need to know which sectors and funds are appropriate, and you need to keep an eye on the total cost of ownership: real total expense ratio, plus any humping you're getting from the platform. 

Understand the dilution adjustment.

[Craig krup]

19 hours ago, scubascuba3 said:

Total expense ratios are easy to find, key features usually show them.

I thought that. I used to look at Ample and Fitzrovia. But people don't understand the jiggery-pokery that goes on. Last week on (IIRC) the BBC's Moneybox they were talking about the new EU directives that require the companies to either absorb their research costs or publish the details of them separately. The whole nonsense about "versions" of funds is also far from clear. Take Fidelity Enhanced Income - which I used to invest in. It had an alphabet soup of "versions", A, Y, W etc, but these weren't versions, they were just letters to indicated what a rogering you were going to get. I owned the Y version (low costs compared to some) and the dear old Alliance Trust secured the W version (cheapest), and moved me into it without my asking. How many people would know about this? Then you've got the charges for the platform on which you hold the units. 

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/investing/funds/10841234/Funds-that-cost-four-times-the-advertised-rate.html

 

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/aug/23/investors-pay-too-much-charges-fees

 

 

[travelingman1959]

I just checked, I'll reach state pension age at 68, in the year 2059.. I could be alive still if I look after myself, eat heathy and world war 3 doesn't start ..

When people say save up as much as possible .the problem many have is what do you live on then.most wages only pay to get buy week after week man .thats the top and bottom of it

Sent from my LG-H815 using Tapatalk

[travelingman1959]

Well I must say, I didn't realise  that anyone contracted out would end up getting a total of State plus additional pension that added up to less than the £159.55 per week full State pension, my mistake.
 
This of course isn't fair.

How much should it be please

Sent from my LG-H815 using Tapatalk

[scubascuba3]

How much should it be please

Sent from my LG-H815 using Tapatalk

You can log on to HMRC and it will tell you what you are due. I'm 47 and it still tells you what you are due.

[cyberfarang]

2 hours ago, travelingman1959 said:

When people say save up as much as possible .the problem many have is what do you live on then.most wages only pay to get buy week after week man .thats the top and bottom of it

Sent from my LG-H815 using Tapatalk
 

Compare the cost of living these days to that of 1987, 30 years ago. According to an online historic inflation calculator £1 in 1987 is the equivalent of £2.69 today. That means UK inflation has increased by 1.69%. If for example Thailand inflation increases at the same rate, then the cost of living in 2047 will be almost 3 times the amount it is today. If it requires 43000 baht per month to survive in Thailand today, in 30 years it will require 129000 baht per month for the same standard of living. That would mean saving 46440000 baht in 30 years, or 1,548,000 baht per year, or £35950 per year for the next 30 years. That means without being in some some sort of pension scheme, saving for old age out of earnings is going to be out of the question.

Edited September 9, 2017 by cyberfarang

[partington]

10 hours ago, travelingman1959 said:

How much should it be please

Sent from my LG-H815 using Tapatalk
 

At least equal to, and preferably more than if you didn't opt out, that is £159.55 and up!

Edited September 10, 2017 by partington

[thaibeachlovers]

On ‎9‎/‎4‎/‎2017 at 3:13 AM, Elkski said:

It's pretty arrogant to assert that you were smart enough to predict  or plan for this baht exchange rate. 

It most likely means you were fortunate to have started with twice what common financial assumptions would have predicted.  

I don't claim to be either clairvoyant or smart, but after a lifetime of mostly being shafted by exchange rate fluctuations, I ASSUME the rate change will ALWAYS be against me and plan accordingly.

 

[travelingman1959]

Compare the cost of living these days to that of 1987, 30 years ago. According to an online historic inflation calculator £1 in 1987 is the equivalent of £2.69 today. That means UK inflation has increased by 1.69%. If for example Thailand inflation increases at the same rate, then the cost of living in 2047 will be almost 3 times the amount it is today. If it requires 43000 baht per month to survive in Thailand today, in 30 years it will require 129000 baht per month for the same standard of living. That would mean saving 46440000 baht in 30 years, or 1,548,000 baht per year, or £35950 per year for the next 30 years. That means without being in some some sort of pension scheme, saving for old age out of earnings is going to be out of the question.

Well said .you cant keep up with the price of stuff these days .look at petrol for instance..around the durham area in england petrol is at 1.20p a ltr again its going through the roof .wages and pensions still still .

Sent from my LG-V500 using Tapatalk

[Jim Turner Mad Punx]

Yes it's hard and not much you can do about it...next

[bomber]

On 9/10/2017 at 3:48 PM, travelingman1959 said:

Well said .you cant keep up with the price of stuff these days .look at petrol for instance..around the durham area in england petrol is at 1.20p a ltr again its going through the roof .wages and pensions still still .

Sent from my LG-V500 using Tapatalk
 

and it was £1.38 six years ago.

[onthesoi]

.

Edited September 11, 2017 by onthesoi

[onthesoi]

1 minute ago, onthesoi said:

 

 

.

[bert bloggs]

9 hours ago, bomber said:

and it was £1.38 six years ago.

Yes but a barrel of oil has halved in price ,so why not petrol? tax maybe

[elliss]

On 9/3/2017 at 5:18 PM, SheungWan said:

Yes. Need more police officers who can peel oranges.

 

 John Peel ? . 

                   Used to be,  beer Singh or Chang , 

                 now  i drink  Archa , from a can . 555

                           

Edited September 12, 2017 by elliss

[whiteman]

11 hours ago, elliss said:

 

 John Peel ? . 

                   Used to be,  beer Singh or Chang , 

                 now  i drink  Archa , from a can . 555

                           

How the mighty have fallen :)

Edited September 13, 2017 by whiteman

[bermondburi]

There's nothing I can type here. What would satisfy you. Suppose I drew to your attention the obvious fact that just because 48% of the turnout voted "Remain" doesn't mean that 48% thought leaving "ridiculous". An awful lot of people thought it was the lesser of two evils, and narrowly so. A lot of folk were terrified by Project Fear, ran by the Treasury and Bank of England. As to 15 months, we were making a decision for many decades into the future. In the grand scheme of things the UK has suffered remarkably little from the vote, as anyone not fretting about GBP-THB admits, including the staff of project fear. As to EU migrants running the health service, 1) they certainly don't, 2) if they're needed they could be given visas or work permits, 3) we've got huge numbers of African and SE Asian English speaking staff who are desperate to work here, and so on, and so on, and so on. 
 
I can't have an online Philadelphia Convention with someone who has the event horizon of a fighter pilot at fifty feet. This is about hundreds of generations as yet unborn, not today's exchange rate.   

In the grand scheme of things the UK has suffered remarkably little because nothing has actually happened yet.

[TKDfella]

1 hour ago, bermondburi said:

In the grand scheme of things the UK has suffered remarkably little because nothing has actually happened yet.

I read that the first law hurdle has been passed. This caused the £ to increase by 1 Baht according to the exchange rate.

[jeab1980]

17 minutes ago, TKDfella said:

I read that the first law hurdle has been passed. This caused the £ to increase by 1 Baht according to the exchange rate.

Slowly but surley it will return i expect it to level out at between 48 and 50 eventually. 

No before the "how do you know this" posters start i dont i only expect it to time and time being the word will tell.

Edited September 13, 2017 by jeab1980