Dow+150.25up+1.52%
10,058.64
Nasdaq+24.82up+1.17%
2,150.87
S&P+13.78up+1.30%
1,070.52

MSN Money video

Video on MSN Money
This video requires the installation of the free Adobe Flash Player. Click here to download.
More video on MSN Money . . .
Liz Pulliam Weston

The Basics

Experts confess their money goofs

Four successful personal-finance gurus share costly mistakes they've made -- boneheaded decisions they'd do over if they had the chance.

By Liz Pulliam Weston
MSN Money

Financially smart people make dumb money mistakes, too.

Every once in a while, I like to ask financial experts to share their doozies. I think it helps readers who are intimidated by money to realize that everyone screws up -- even people who are, or eventually become, savvy about personal finance.

So I asked four money gurus where they'd want a "do over," a chance to go back in time and change one financial decision or action.

I wasn't looking for minor screw-ups or character-building mishaps that they later learned to cherish. I didn't want "success in the guise of failure" claptrap. I wanted goofs that cost them serious dough that they would happily undo if given a chance.

And they came through.

'I didn't follow my instincts'

Before writing a string of best-selling money books, including his latest, "Fight for Your Money: How to Stop Getting Ripped Off and Save a Fortune," David Bach worked with his father and sister as a partner in The Bach Group, a unit of Morgan Stanley.

One day about a decade ago, Bach noticed that several of Morgan Stanley's top executives were selling shares as the brokerage company's stock price neared $100. Bach ran into his father's office and asked whether it might be a good time for the Bachs to sell some of their shares as well. No, his father said, the big executives were probably just diversifying.

The insider sales continued, so Bach ran into his sister's office. Shouldn't we sell, he asked her, if they're selling? Nah, she said. Surely the stock had room to rise.

Except it didn't. Morgan Stanley never regained that peak and is now worth about one-quarter of that top value.

Greed is the investor's Achilles' heel. That's why those who invest in individual stocks need to have rules about when to take profits.

Bach kicks himself because he has found insider trades -- purchases and sales of stocks by top executives -- to be a pretty reliable indicator of future stock moves. Bach wishes now that he'd cashed out at least a quarter of the shares he held.

"I followed insider trades, but I didn't act," he said. "I didn't follow my instincts."

Going shopping with 401(k) money

"Today" show financial editor Jean Chatzky is another prolific financial author. Her most recent book, "The Difference: How Anyone Can Prosper in Even the Toughest Times," explores how the wealthy and financially comfortable differ from the paycheck-to-paycheck and further-in-debt crowds.

But Chatzky admitted she wasn't always so wise about things financial.

Video on MSN Money

New job © Creatas/PictureQuest
Lost your job?
MSN Money columnist Liz Pulliam Weston talks about where you might find work during this recession.

"I completely botched my first attempt at a 401(k) because I didn't understand what it was," she confessed. "I was in my first job, an assistant editor at Working Woman magazine, contributing regularly, and my employer was matching, and yet when I switched jobs I didn't roll into an IRA. Nor did I look at moving the money to a plan at my new employer."

Instead, Chatzky made the mistake about half of all young job-changers make: She cashed out her 401(k). In those days, you could do it by default. Employers routinely closed out retirement accounts for workers who left their jobs, sending them a check with their 401(k) proceeds, whether or not the employees had asked for the money. Today, such automatic distributions are typically limited to accounts worth less than $1,000.

"I waited. Got a check in the mail. And went shopping," Chatzky recalled. "I was thrilled -– until years later when I revisited what I should have done and calculated what my relatively small balance would have grown to in an S&P 500 index fund."

This will give you some idea of what Chatzky spent when she went shopping: $1,000 can grow to about $2,600 in 10 years, $6,700 in 20 years and $17,500 in 30 years, assuming 8% average annual returns (and there hasn't been a 30-year period in the modern stock market where equities have had less than 8.5% average annual returns over 30 years, including the Depression years, according to Ibbotson Associates).

Chatzky's little lost nest egg "wouldn't have paid for four years of college," said the mother of two teenagers. "But it might, eventually, have paid for one."

Continued: Do as I say, not . . .

 1 | 2 | next >

Rate this Article

Click on one of the stars below to rate this article from 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest). LowRate it 1Rate it 2Rate it 3Rate it 4Rate it 5High
Join the discussion!
Sort by:
1 - 10 of 41
Thursday, April 09, 2009 11:20:40 AM
"there hasn't been a 30-year period in the modern stock market where equities have had less than 8.5% average annual returns over 30 years, including the Depression years,"

This doesn't seem right. A back of the envelope calculation says 8.5% return over 30 years is an increase of over 1000%.  There are many 30 year periods where the market does not go up that much (e.g. 1955-1985)
Thursday, April 09, 2009 12:10:18 PM

buy and hold

market goes up every 30 year period

what a bafoon

Thursday, April 09, 2009 12:19:41 PM
Forebearing student loans and allowing them to go to collections to avoid adjusting our lifestyle budget cost us big time as we learned painfully at the end about captialized interest. Now we owe $50K instead of $30K,  and every month our nearly $500 payment knocks less than $50 off the prinicipal.
Thursday, April 09, 2009 3:48:43 PM
Sundog8 wrote:
"there hasn't been a 30-year period in the modern stock market where equities have had less than 8.5% average annual returns over 30 years, including the Depression years,"

This doesn't seem right. A back of the envelope calculation says 8.5% return over 30 years is an increase of over 1000%.  There are many 30 year periods where the market does not go up that much (e.g. 1955-1985)
_______________________________________
It can be confusing.  I think it has to do with the fact that the average is misleading.
Example: Say I have 4 years where I get a 10% increase each year, and then have one year with a 10% decrease. 
My $100 is worth $146.41 after 4 years of 10% increases.
When I lose 10% in year 5, I now have $131.76.
In year 6, it goes back to a 10% increase.  That makes it $144.94.

I didn't get back to my high of $146.41, since my 10% drop in year 5 was more than my 10% increase in year 6. 
When you factor in bear markets that wipe out 40% or higher, you need a much larger increase to get back to even.
That is why I find the average misleading.  It only works if you never have a year where your return was less than zero.        

Thursday, April 09, 2009 4:07:14 PM

This thread is showing up on the Your Money Board again. Hitting the link brings you to the article.

laterbloomer - MSN Money Board Moderator

Thursday, April 09, 2009 5:06:15 PM

First and foremost.

 

By definition a mistake is an unintentional act.

 

In each instance these so called financial gurus made conscious decisions/choices that preceded their behavior.  Hence they did not make mistakes. 

 

They may have made dumb, silly, foolish, unwise choices and/or decisions, but it is an error in thinking to allow them the out by allowing them to claim that they made a mistake.

 

There's little wonder that so many youngsters these days use poor grammar - the adults around demonstrate that their use of language is not governed by proper usage.

 

Liz you have this venue for people to share and express their different views - it would be a gift if we made an effort to use proper word usage and communicate our ideas with English as it was intended to be applied.

 

As for the so-called gurus - well their errors ought to be illuminated to demonstrate that NO ONE KNOWS - we only make guesses based on a hunch.

 

Thank you for allowing me a momentary soapbox.

 

Dr. Molloy

Thursday, April 09, 2009 5:44:11 PM

Hmm.... NASDAQ composite, 1955 - 1985

Composite went from 22.23 to 247.35, a 1112% gain. (eleven bagger!)

 

This only works out to 8.4% when I annualize it, but still....

 

http://www.finfacts.com/Private/curency/nasdaqcompositeperformance.htm

Thursday, April 09, 2009 5:53:16 PM
I keep my money in a shoe,  safe at homeOpen-mouthed. don't  make money, but don't lose it either.
Thursday, April 09, 2009 6:32:49 PM

Well it goes to the good ol addage that if its too good to be true it probably is.  I invested $250,000 with an investing firm for 15 years and only made about 15 percent before they took their fees for managing my account.  I figure I could do just as good or worse on my own and I get to keep my own money.

 

Dahno

 

http://www.myfreelifetips.com

Thursday, April 09, 2009 7:02:25 PM

legit261

   you lose to inflation!!!

1 - 10 of 41
To add a comment, pleasesign in