Ron

"This video is the best one I've found that explains the design and theory behind both the weight distribution and anti-sway control. "

Thanks, that video does explain that the only sway control feature incorporated into the design is the tilt of the head which causes a differential tension in the two tension bars when the truck and trailer are not alligned.  Since this added tension would be nearly all in a vertical force vector I'm skeptical that it would really do much to correct the sway in a dynamic situation.  And, I'm not sure why they think this feature is unique since all the hitches I'm familiar with  have this tilted-head  feature.  

They also sort of claim that if sway does does occur the fact that there is no friction feature in the tension bars allows the trailer to move back into alignment with the TV.  Actually this happens with the friction-tension-bar systems also because the tilted head of , e.g., the Equal-i-zer and others, forces the bar on the "inside" of the "turn" to have much higher friction, and the bar on the "outside" of the "turn" to have much less tension, than when the system is in the normally aligned position.

Anyway, I hope this system works out well for you.

19 hours ago, freestoneangler said:

Well, having just returned from our first long distance trip with the TT, here are my impressions about the Blue Ox Load Equalizer/Anti-sway system.  ..........  They sold us the 750 lb. tongue weight tension/stabilizer bars which are within the 7500 GW of the TT with max cargo load (which I'm pretty sure we were not). 

.......Would like to hear what kind of wind conditions your particular system can handle - or what you simply won't try to tow in regardless.

Thanks for reporting back on your experience with the Blue Ox. As I said in a prior post on this thread I still can't see any design feature of that hitch that would work to mitigate sway.  I tried to find a technical explanation of how/why it "eliminates sway", as they tout in the marketing literature, but I fail to see any explanation.  I've been using the Equal-izer system for over 10 years and have never felt unsafe driving it in any wind conditions.  I don't have specifics on winds and direction but about the only time I recall pulling off the road because of wind was a couple occasions when I saw commercial semi trucks doing the same.  

Regarding the 750# rating of the hitch; that just barely allows you to have 10% of the gross trailer weight on the hitch.  If you intend to full-time with this trailer you might find yourself loading it to nearly its full capacity.  In my experience you'll get better/safer handling with 12% to 15% of the weight on the hitch.

I wouldn't doubt that the Hensley hitch is probably the best you can get but it is far more expensive than the Equal-izer and for the size/weight of our trailer I've never felt the need for anything better than the Equal-izer.

4 hours ago, Twotoes said:

I was a investment advisor in 1989. Many clients called me that day and I told them "When do you buy a suit at Nordstrom? When they are on sale. Today is the time to buy    Stocks are on sale" 

How many of your clients took your advice - how many lost their "nerve" and sold near the bottom?

This Thursday will mark the 30th anniversary of the 1987 market crash, or “Meltdown Monday” as it’s come to be known. On October 19, 1987, the Dow plunged 508 points. In percentage terms, this was a loss of 22.61%. In today’s terms, that would be like a loss of more than 5,000 points!

Three decades later, the 1987 crash sill ranks as the biggest one-day percentage loss in history. It’s nearly double the second-biggest loss, which came in October 1929. With the modern “circuit breakers,” this record may never be broken. If the S&P 500 falls by 20% nowadays, the exchanges shut down for the day.

I often hear stock market “experts” predicting that another 1987 is about to come our way. I always think to myself, “oh, so you’re predicting another 1,000% return over the next 30 years.” Yes, that’s what the Wilshire 5000 did measuring from the market close on the day of the crash. And if we include dividends, then the index is up more than 2,000%. The fact is that the 1987 panic was a great time to buy.

I suspect the someday we may see less demand for oil but I'm personally convinced it's not going to happen anytime on the immediate investing horizon.  Demand is still steadily increasing but supply from cheaper sources in recent years (fracking, tar sands etc.) have had a dramatic effect on the economics of the oil industry.  But ever since oil was discovered these things have gone in cycles and every cycle brings out the prognosticators who make convincing arguments that "things will never be the same again.  When I was still in high school I remember reading about imminent "peak oil" being touted by many scientific "experts".  I remember when gasoline prices were so high just a few years ago how many experts said we'd never see gasoline below $3/gal again - I bought it this week for less than $2/gal.  Bottom line in my opinion is that NO ONE can predict how these things will evolve.  Just invest with the best knowledge available at the time and mostly ignore people who try to predict what will happen several years down the road.  It might be fun to speculate but it generally does not lead to profitable investing.  No matter which side of an argument one takes he can find "experts" who will confirm his own opinions.

Sort of what I expected too.  Moving it to them increases your AUM which, after EJ gets its cut will reduce your 3% annuity to, I'm guessing, 1.5% to 2%.  Maybe not so attractive from that standpoint - but that's what is happening to all of your investments managed by EJ.

It sounds like you are already paying Edward Jones for financial advice - have you asked your advisor the same question?  What's his/her advice?

Today the Dow 30, S&P500, and Nasdaq all hit new record highs.  Ten years ago today they did the same thing .... before they started a very major decline.  I remember that time quite well.  We had just sold our house and started our full time life.  Our investment portfolio was "underwater" for a number of years.  An interesting article brought back the memory today:

https://seekingalpha.com/article/4088809-10-years-gone

"Are you still in"?  If you are fearful we're in a "bubble" or have jumped out already it's always good to take a look from "60,000 feet" for a different perspective.  I ran across this interesting article today:

http://www.ciovaccocapital.com/wordpress/

Thanks for reporting back on your decision.  Please let us know later how you like it.

----ron

37 minutes ago, theeyres said:

I used the Equal-i-zer for years with previous trailers and was very happy with it. I would recommend it to anybody. However it got to where it was harder for me to deal with the heavy bars and started looking for an easier way when we got our current trailer and ended up going with the Andersen. It is a bit different but works amazing well and is very easy to hook and unhook: much easier than the traditional set-ups. The anti-sway part works flawlessly. At least check out their website and see what you think. http://www.andersenhitches.com/catalog/andersen-nosway-weight-distribution-hitch.aspx

I looked into the Anderson a year or two ago.  I can understand how it might be very effective controlling sway but the geometry of the chains in tension horizontally vs. having vertical tension as with most other weight distributing hitches convinced me that it would not be nearly as effective as the Equalizer for weight distribution.  Some internet research and conversations on other forums confirmed my suspicion.

On 4/13/2017 at 6:22 PM, barlow46 said:

A couple of mid-line priced WD hitches that are very popular are the Equalizer Hitch and the Blue OX hitch.  Both are in the $500 range.  A few nice ones available on craigslist at times for a good price.

The Equalizer is reported to be a little noisy but works very well on the road.

 The advantage to the Blue Ox seems to be the option to change the hitch bar stiffness based on your tongue weight should you change trailers down the road.  

I just went to the Blue Ox with the 1000lb bars for my 30' arctic fox, gross weight at 10,000 with hitch weight around 750-800.  

Both of these hitches allow you to back up without removing the anti-sway device on some other hitches.  You can do a google search on both hitches and their is a lot of info available.

Good luck with your decision.

I'm curious how satisfied you are with your Blue Ox hitch.  It just isn't intuitively obvious to me how its design really does much in the way of sway control.  Do you have any evidence that it prevents sway as good or better than the Equal-i-zer?  Also, have you been able to transfer a large percentage of the hitch weight with their spring bars?

I've been towing with an Equalizer for over 10 years and I'm pretty satisfied with it.  Through quite a bit of experimentation I've been able to "dial-in" all the adjustments and get rid of all the irritating noises.  Also, I've found the company really stands behind their product.  They are very responsive  when I have questions and they've replaced several parts that have failed free of charge regardless of the age of the unit.

I do not have any problems with sway using this unit.

RV, I'm sorry you took my post as being mocking of you. That's really not what I intended - it was intended only as a little levity.

I also wish you well. You've been doing great with this investment and your instincts with Musk and his endeavors have been spot-on. I don't think you've mocked me or anyone else on this site and I'll try to be much more careful in the future.

---ron

Yes it's always an interesting read for me too. The conversation has wandered a lot from the original topic over the years but it was interesting to read that original post. According to my calculations the items brought up in that original post have performed as follows:

Dow Jones Ind. avg: Up 57.5% (if you include dividends it's up about 70%)

Tesla: Up a whopping 918%

Gold: Down 26.2%

Silver: Down 61.2%

Maybe that's why we're not hearing from the original poster!

Lesson: Listen to RV - put all you money in TSLA - stop worrying about "the market"!

---ron

Actually, I don't use Stockman for financial investment advice. I do read him for his knowledge and perspective on how the macro-economy works especially concerning the FED and its influence on the financial sector or industry and stock market.

 

On the other hand, I am surprised with the comments that seem to be examples of that debating term, ad hominem arguments.

 

From Wikipedia: An ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"^[1]), short for argumentum ad hominem, is an attack on an argument made by attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, rather than attacking the argument directly. When used inappropriately, it is a logical fallacy in which a claim or argument is dismissed on the basis of some irrelevant fact or supposition about the author or the person being criticized.^[2] Ad hominem reasoning is not always fallacious, for example, when it relates to the credibility of statements of fact or when used in certain kinds of moral and practical reasoning."

 

My personal goal at this forum would be to hear someone's reasons for disagreeing with an article I have posted rather than attacking the author. Like I think I did in my comments on http://realmoney.the...g-so-buy-stocks

I don't think what I posted was irrelevant. At any give time you can find any number of "experts" with totally divergent interpretations of how various financial issues will affect stock prices. There are always those who see only gloom and doom. Once in awhile they're right and they never let you forget it. You might look at my post as an attack on Stockman that is irrelevant but if you "do read him for his knowledge and perspective on how the macro-economy works especially concerning the FED and its influence on the financial sector or industry and stock market." then he is probably influencing you own decisions and assumptions. My point is that I'd rather be influenced by someone with a better track record than Stockman. After all, Stockman probably used his "knowledge and perspective" to guide his own decisions when running all the failed funds with which he was associated.

I try to read both sides of the argument that: "stocks are in a bubble" versus "stocks are fairly priced and going higher." But I must admit that I have been more taken with the "bubble" side of the argument. So I post what I think are some good, easily read articles on that side.

 

So here is one that I like.

 

http://davidstockmanscontracorner.com/when-wall-street-gets-defanged-look-out-below/

IMO David Stockman is not a very credible source of financial guidance. After working in Government for several years he tried finance and investing. His results in those fields were not exactly stellar. Here's an excerpt from Wikipedia:

After leaving government, Stockman joined the Wall St. investment bank Salomon Brothers and later became a partner of the New York–based private equity company, the Blackstone Group.^[13] His record was mixed at Blackstone, with some very good investments, such as American Axle, but also several large failures, including Haynes International and Republic Technologies.^[14] During 1999, after Blackstone CEO Stephen A. Schwarzman curtailed Stockman's role in managing the investments he had developed,^[15] Stockman resigned from Blackstone to start his own private equity fund company, Heartland Industrial Partners, L.P., based in Greenwich, Connecticut.^[16]

On the strength of his investment record at Blackstone, Stockman and his partners raised $1.3 billion of equity from institutional and other investors. With Stockman's guidance, Heartland used a contrarian investment strategy, buying controlling interests in companies operating in sectors of the U.S. economy that were attracting the least amount of new equity: auto parts and textiles. With the help of about $9 billion in Wall Street debt financing, Heartland completed more than 20 transactions in less than 2 years to create four portfolio companies: Springs Industries, Metaldyne, Collins & Aikman, and TriMas. Several major investments performed very poorly, however. Collins & Aikman filed for bankruptcy during 2005 and when Heartland sold Metaldyne to Asahi Tec Corp. during 2006, Heartland lost most of the $340 million of equity it had invested in the business.^[17]

During August 2003, Stockman became CEO of Collins & Aikman Corporation, a Detroit-based manufacturer of automotive interior components. He was ousted from that job days before Collins & Aikman filed for bankruptcy under Chapter 11 on May 17, 2005.

On March 26, 2007, federal prosecutors in Manhattan indicted Stockman in "a scheme ... to defraud [Collins & Aikman]'s investors, banks and creditors by manipulating C&A's reported revenues and earnings." At the same time, the Securities and Exchange Commission brought civil charges against Stockman related to actions he performed while CEO of Collins & Aikman.^[18] Stockman suffered a personal financial loss, estimated at $13 million, along with losses suffered by as many as 15,000 Collins & Aikman employees worldwide.

Stockman said in a statement posted on his law firm's website that the company's end was the consequence of an industry decline, not fraud.^[19] On January 9, 2009, the U.S. Attorney's Office announced that it did not intend to prosecute Stockman for this case.^[20]

Also, be very wary of the so-called professionals. Many of them are simply lining their pockets with your money by giving you advice that's easily obtainable for free by doing a little of your own research. At least on this forum I know that no one is enriching themselves at my expense!

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/the-average-investor--being-systematically-taken-advantage-of--says-new-book-130247891.html

I treat information I receive on this or any forum as just one more data point and weigh it against information from other sources. Then do further research to test its validity. I weigh all the evidence and then make my own decisions.

---ron

The market has dropped some this week,,, could it be a good time to put some money in here pretty soon??

IMHO no one knows the answer to your question. You'd have to get the answer from someone who has a long record of being able to successfully "time the market". I've been looking for someone like that for over 40 years and haven't found one yet.

An alternative question that I, and many other investors, find more useful is "where are the bargains?" in the market today. Finding the answer to that question takes more work than simply looking at the overall market averages but it can also be far more rewarding. IF, IF, you start with the premise that you are unable to time the market then I believe the next best approach is to stay fully invested but diligently rotate your investments away from companies that seem overvalued to companies that seem undervalued. This takes a little research, lots of patience, and lots of discipline.

There are always segments of the market that are temporally out of favor for one reason or another. Within those out-of-favor segments it's possible to find excellent companies, with excellent management, selling for a bargain price. Buy them when they are "on sale" - then sit back and relax. But, diversify widely because on any single investment decision there's always the possibility that your assessment could be totally wrong.

It is also true that the overall market goes through cycles of being more expensive or less expensive based on various valuation methods. But determining how much higher an "overvalued" market will go, or knowing how much lower and "undervalued" market might go is, IMO, not possible so the next best approach is to be fully invested in companies that are already "cheap", and therefore will probably fall the least in a market downturn. Those are usually the ones that will recover and the fastest and have the largest increases when the overall market turns more positive.

I could offer many examples of what I consider relative bargains today. This article expounds on one of them that pretty much meets my criterion so it serves to illustrate the point. I like the "Seeking Alpha" website because most of the authors are real investors with a lot of experience. The comments that follow most articles are also very valuable because they usually offer additional insights, from a broad range of perspectives, from other serious investors. The back-and-forth of the comments help you weigh the evidence and form your own opinion about the author's thesis.

I'm not an investment advisor and I'm not recommending any investment approach or any particular stock. All of the above is just my opinion. Everyone should do their own due diligence and find an approach that works for them.

Regarding RMDs; there is a tax law that may not be widely known. Current tax law allows the direct contribution of withdrawals from IRAs to qualified charities, up to a maximum of $100K/yr. These direct contributions may be applied against your RMD and are not taxed. For those blessed with more assets and/or income than they need and are of a mind to donate part of their assets to their favorite charities this can be a very effective way to do so. One can also use this as a portfolio rebalancing tool by donating assets that have realized the highest appreciation and have become overweight in your portfolio.

http://www.irs.gov/Retirement-Plans/Charitable-Donations-from-IRAs-for-2012-and-2013

Dan, I will share with you the one thing I have learned about investing that keeps me out of trouble. "Don't be greedy".

 

Every time I break that rule I regret it. I rarely regret the opposite - selling a position before I think I've squeezed the last dime out of it.

These clichés about the bulls, bears, and hogs and the transition from "seeking a fair profit" to being "greedy" all sound so sensible. But, please explain exactly how you define when you've crossed that threshold. I've never found an implementable strategy or rule for making this important decision. Unless you can define how this decision is reached the "advice" is pretty much useless.

---Ron

The story about the shepherd who cried wolf when he knew there was no wolf, is a story about liars. I may be wrong about what I think is going on in our economy, but I hope no one actually believes I am lying - I don't really think any one does think that.

 

So, here is another negative view of our economy that may be wrong, but I don't think they are crying wolf either, John Mauldin's "Outside the Box." The section of the article toward the end titled "Can the Fed Create Demand" is going to be "over the top" for some who have not had an econ course or for whom it has been a long time since having one, so don't fret about it. My advice is to just skip it and read the last section titled "Treasury Bonds."

 

Cheers John

 

edit: I forgot, you have to freely subscribe to Mauldin's site. Then you are looking for the article in the section:

Outside the Box

Hoisington Quarterly Review and Outlook

I don't think the folks that make a habit of "crying wolf" are necessarily liers. They may actually believe they see a wolf. Perhaps you and Mauldin both fall into that camp. Before anyone invests his hard earned money following the advice of "perma bears" like Mauldin it might be beneficial to read this:

http://investingcaffeine.com/2010/04/14/john-mauldin-the-man-who-cries-wolf/

There are a lot of ways to make money in the stock/bond markets but you will have a hard time finding many "market timers" that are successful over a long period of time.

Not advice - Just my opinion.

---ron

I'm still 100% in cash in all my accounts and have been since the end of March. I lost out on about 5% of potential market gain by not being invested (I sold some in Jan and Feb at lower prices than my biggest sale in March and collected interest that was lower than the dividends afterwards).

 

Last Friday, I bought SPY puts at $140 for Dec 22 and $135 on Jan 19. The last time I bet that the market was going to go down (spring of 1999) was a few months before the dot com bubble burst. But I shorted 4 internet stocks and lost a LOT of money. At least this time, I've limited my exposure by using puts instead shorts.

 

Dan

It might be time to close the Puts on SPY since Ben just took a seat on the other side of the table - he has VERY deep pockets.

---ron

Some interesting opinions on Tesla for those interested in this company. I just stumbled on the article - don't personally have a dog in this fight.

http://seekingalpha.com/article/633361-tesla-s-gift-box-inefficiency-wrapped-in-hype?source=email_the_daily_dispatch&ifp=0

---ron

I’d like to offer a different viewpoint.

.........

The point I’m trying to make here is timing the market is tough. Timing individual stocks is even tougher. Learn to make money in the market just as it is and you won’t have to time it.

 

Just my two cents

IMO your post offers very sage advice Jim - and worth a lot more than two cents!

---Ron

 

[/i][/b]You see USAA is open only to military and retired military and their children.

 

True that USAA membership is only open to military as stated but their USAA mutual funds are open to anyone.

 

Sorry my post confused you. Actually I should not have replied to your post because I have to admit I did not read the entire post nor all of the related recent posts. Some of them are so long that I don't find the time so I skim them for something that might interest me. The impression I had formed based on this skimming over the past few days was that you were very excited about the upcoming FB IPO and want to make sure you didn't let this one get away from you.

 

That is what prompted my comment about FB - I hadn't read about the 180 you took regarding FB.

 

Then I read part of one of your posts expounding on buying low and selling high which led to someone else asking you if you planned to now sell your investments since they were "high". You replied something to the effect that you "hoped they would keep going higher". My interpretation of your statements sounded like you were contradicting yourself and this prompted my comment about hope not being a strategy.

 

But, I repeat, I should never have commented on your post without first reading the entire post and all of the other related posts behind it. My mistake. Please accept my apology.

 

It is my opinion that the USAA funds are among the better ones with generally low fees and above average performance. I personally don't invest much of my portfolio in mutual funds except for one international fund (HAINX).

 

In another post below I interpret one of your statements to say that your investments are highly diversified using two mutual funds (USAIX and URTNX). If that's the case it would not meet my definition of diversification. USAIX is a bond fund holding mostly AA Corp. bonds with an average 5 yr. maturity. URTNX is a fund that holds other USAA funds and its largest holding is the institutional version of USAIX! In fact about 20% of URTNX is just more USAIX. Over 57% of URTNX is invested in various USAA bond funds. So basically you have a diversified bond portfolio with a smattering of common stocks. I'm sure I'm not telling you anything you didn't already know - it's just that it doesn't meet the commonly accepted definition of diversification.

 

Cheers,

Ron