On May 15, Tepper was nervous about stocks and said "don't be too friggin long". If you listened to Tepper then you lost out on a lot of stock market gains:
http://www.finalternatives.com/node/27056
I think Tepper feels he is trapped in momentum stocks and needs an exit strategy. He is trying to induce the public to stampede out of bonds into equities so he can unload some of his overpriced equity positions.

Dex, if the 10 year goes to 1% before 3% send my your address and I will send you a check for $500. In no way, shape or form do I see that occurring but would be thrilled and the $500 would be a small pittance to what I would make on such a move.

MJG noted: "A few days ago a distinguished MFOer didn’t understand the logic of an asset allocation plan with an equally weighted partition of its components."
I do recall did not agree, vesus didn't understand, too. No time to review the thread today.
Heck, even the lowly 50/50 mix of Vanguard Total Stock and Vanguard Total Bond funds are doing fine together; so far, this year. Tis an allocation model, too, eh???

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/915802/000091580214000043/grandeurpeakglobalreachhardc.htm
497 1 grandeurpeakglobalreachhardc.htm
FINANCIAL INVESTORS TRUST
Grandeur Peak Global Reach Fund
(the “Fund”)
SUPPLEMENT DATED SEPTEMBER 5, 2014 TO THE PROSPECTUS
DATED AUGUST 31, 2014
This Supplement updates certain information contained in the Prospectus for the Fund dated August 31, 2014. You should retain this Supplement and the Prospectus for future reference. Additional copies of the Prospectus may be obtained free of charge by visiting our web site at www.grandeurpeakglobal.com or calling us at 1.855.377.PEAK (7325).
Effective as of the close of business on September 30, 2014, the Fund will close to all purchases, except as described below (the “Hard Closure”). The Hard Closure of the Grandeur Peak Global Reach Fund means purchases will no longer be accepted into this Fund from either new or existing shareholders after September 30th, unless the purchase is part of one of the listed exceptions:
Institutional Shareholders:
•401k plans with an existing position
•Automatic rebalancing of an existing position (as long as purchase amounts are de minimis, as determined by Grandeur Peak)
Retail Shareholders (Direct Shareholders Only):
•Retirement Accounts
•Education Savings Accounts
•Minor Accounts (UTMA/UGMA)
•Pre-established Automatic Investment Plans
All Shareholders:
•Automatic reinvestment of the Fund distribution
These exceptions will be implemented wherever possible, but they may not be possible on all intermediary platforms.
As described in the Prospectus, the Fund’s investment adviser, Grandeur Peak Global Advisors, LLC, or the Fund each retains the right to make exceptions to any action taken to close a Fund or limit inflows into a Fund.
INVESTORS SHOULD RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT FOR FUTURE REFERENCE

" In reality that family was quite complex with possessed almost limitless power, especially in Europe. "
You can still follow the present day members of the family with RIT Capital Partners (which is an investment trust in London, which is sort of like a CEF here) in London, which is chaired by Jacob Rothschild and has investments in both other Rothschild entities as well as in the Rockefeller Co.
http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/05/30/rockefeller-and-rothschild-banking-dynasties-join-forces/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0

Hi Guys,
A few days ago a distinguished MFOer didn’t understand the logic of an asset allocation plan with an equally weighted partition of its components. The logic might be missing in action but that rather mundane asset allocation has been a part of investing since biblical times. Sometimes it is motivated by an investor without knowledge or preferences; at other times an equal allocation is championed by giants within the industry.
In the Talmud, within the discussion sections pertaining to Jewish customs and history, it is recommended that “Let every man divide his money into three parts, and invest a third in land, a third in business, and let him keep a third in reserve”. Conservative investing wisdom has a long history.
In the last few centuries, the Rothschild’s asset allocation plan was to invest their wealth in three equally weighted parts: securities, real estate, and art. It’s reported that the family did reasonably well.
Today, some portfolios might simply contain equal parts of a total bond index and a total equities index from Vanguard to minimize cost drag and to minimize investment research time commitment. That approach will likely never be a barn burner, but it will often deliver returns in the top quartile of annual rankings.
Another excellent example of an equal allocation policy within the mutual fund industry is the Permanent Portfolio. Initially, the Permanent Portfolio distributed holdings within 4 categories when originally assembled by Harry Browne in 1982. The current management has expanded that mandate to about 6 investment classes today.
Overweighting investment categories can be a hazardous business. Behavioral research finds that we all are mistake prone. Investor performance shortfalls are well documented by numerous academic and industry studies. We frequently fall victim to fast response behavioral pressures that are reflexive driven rather than to invest more slowly, more reflectively.
Daniel Kahneman spent a lifetime studying this human characteristic, and summarized his findings in his classic book "Thinking Fast and Slow”. The lessons documented in that book can guide investors to improve risk control and to avoid big mistakes.
However, that superior book is over 400 pages long, and, although it is a fast read, some investors will choose not to commit the required time for a complete reading. Fortunately, excellent article length substitutes do exist. Here is a Link to one written by Jim O'Shaughnessy of “What Works on Wall Street” fame:
http://jimoshaughnessy.tumblr.com/post/96471085029/behavioral-economics-why-we-know-what-isnt-so
The Link directs you to the first part of a four part series. After reading the first installment, simply click on the “Next Post” box at the bottom of the work to gain access to the next part of this 4-part behavioral piece. Please enjoy.
Earlier I mentioned the Rothschield family to illustrate an equal asset allocation philosophy. In reality that family was quite complex and possessed almost limitless power, especially in Europe. But Baron Nathan Rothschild produced a huge body of simple, quotable investment wisdom. Perhaps his most famous is “ Buy when blood is running in the streets”.
But my favorite Rothschield quote is “ It requires a great deal of boldness and a great deal of caution to make a large fortune, and, when you have it, you require ten times as much wit to keep it”. This quote captures the competing attributes necessary to be a successful investor: boldness, caution, and wit. That’s a challenging trifecta that few investors own.
Better recognizing our Behavioral shortcomings should enhance the odds for investment success.
Your comments are always welcomed.
Best Regards.

This it the current makeup of my bond portfolio, but I think it may be leaning a bit too heavily in the direction of low credit and high yield rather than higher quality bonds. I just want to cover all my bases regardless of rate hikes. Thoughts on consolidation of funds or the absence of higher quality credit bonds? The percentages are approximates. Thanks in advance.
PIMIX (PIMCO Income) - 15%
EVBAX - (Eaton Vance Bond - lw) -15%
DODIX - (Dodge and Cox Income) - 12%
BSBIX (Baird Short-term Bond) - 12%
MWTRX - (Met West Total Return) -10%
MITFX - (BMO Intermediate Tax Free) -8%
RSIVX - (Riverpark Strat Income) 5%
THOPX - (Thompson Bond) - 5%
FPNIX - (FPA New Income) 5%
PRFHX - (TRowe Price Tax Free HY) - 5%
BHYAX - (Blackrock High Yield) - 5%

@Pat Shuff: In case you missed this audio interview with James O'Shaughnessy.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/15417/masters-in-business-q-a-with-james-o-shaugnessy-audio-presentation/p1

O'Shaughnessy: "Fidelity had done a study as to which accounts had done the best at Fidelity. And what they found was..."
Ritholtz: "They were dead."
O'Shaughnessy: "...No, that's close though! They were the accounts of people who forgot they had an account at Fidelity."
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/forgetful-investors-performed-best-2014-9#ixzz3CS86Gn69
Well that frees up time for more important things.
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRHJohu0hS_mKyOVWSwhyZUY-ZPhCgq5Duj-Q88MRHAy5b86qh0kQ

FYI: Risk increases when portfolio managers fixate on a sector.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/these-diversified-stock-funds-spread-your-money-too-thin-2014-09-05/print

@kevindow, don't know when you please a trade at Fidelity on EVBIX. Maybe thing has changed a bit since you posted. It now required $250K for IRA account in addition to $49.95 transaction fee.

>> Most large-cap fund managers “will be forced to re-evaluate their portfolios or embrace the likelihood of drafting very disappointing year-end letters,” Mr. Kostin said.
What a fool thing to think. Not that what Snowball wrote isn't true, but I sure do not pay Ahlsten, Tillinghast, and the Yackts to outdo SP500 in a given year or even short period. More especially now.

Aren't Easy? How About Very Difficult ?
Goldman Sachs: Why Stock Pickers Have Suffered a Really Bad Year...
It isn’t a pretty picture,... Goldman says ... and may bode well ( ? )
Only 23% of large-cap mutual fund managers have outperformed the S&P 500 this year, rivaling the worst performance in the past decade, according to David Kostin, chief U.S. equity strategist at Goldman. By comparison, about 37% of fund managers have outperformed the benchmark since 2003. Only performances in 2006, 2010 and 2011 have been as bad or worse than the current year’s pace.
http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2014/09/04/goldman-sachs-why-the-bad-year-for-stock-pickers-will-fuel-rally-even-more/?mod=yahoo_hs
From David's September 2014 Commentary
"There are 500 domestic large core funds. I’d be amazed if anyone could make a compelling case for keeping 90% of them open. More correctly, those don’t matter to anyone but the advisor who needs them for business development purposes."
http://www.mutualfundobserver.com/2014/09/september-1-2014/

Keep on monitering , at the end of the year the S&P 500 will be up 25% in 2014.

Maurice: Yes, you correct ! 12b-1 fees have been the subject of nemorous attempts in Congress to eliminate them.
Regards,
Ted
Here is a Scott Burns article from 5/98 quoting Roy Weitz on fund fees.
http://www.uexpress.com/scott-burns/1998/5/17/its-not-the-fund-stupid-its

Just a few things we monitor daily. Just a day.....in the life.
VWO 46.05 -0.43%
ITOT 91.41 -0.22%
EMB 115.01 -0.02%
IBB 270.92 -1.65%
TIP 114.22 -0.38%
LQD 118.98 -0.71%
IEF 103.83 -0.36%
IWM 116.01 -0.39%
IYR 74.12 -0.19%
HYG 93.37 -0.33%

FYI: It’s been a long time since the S&P 500 has experienced a double digit loss. The last one ended in October of 2011, so we’re coming up on three years of relative calm in the markets.
Markets always seem easier with the benefit of hindsight, but there’s always an economic, market or geopolitical headline at the time that adds to the uncertainty. There have actually been a couple of double digit losses since the market bottomed out in early 2009:
Regards,
Ted
http://awealthofcommonsense.com/even-bull-markets-arent-easy/

Years ago, the Vanguard International Index Fund started out as a fund-of-funds, holding shares of the European Index and Pacific Index Funds.
At some point, it, too, converted to a structure in which the fund held foreign shares directly.
Does anyone recall whether or not investors in Vanguard's International Index fund incurred capital gains distributions? If not, how did Vanguard do it? Clever timing (i.e., conversions incurred at a time when there was a loss), or something else? Thanks.

First, a clarification on funds. The fund you're referring to was (and is) Vanguard Developed Markets Fund. As you wrote, it used to hold two index funds. In late 2008/early 2009 it switched to investing directly in stocks. Earlier this year, Vanguard merged it into its Tax-Managed International fund, and called the resulting fund Developed Markets Index Fund.
AFAIK, there isn't/wasn't a fund called Vanguard International Index Fund. There was (and is) however, a Vanguard Total International Index Fund. That fund used to be comprised of three index funds - European Index (VEURX), Pacific Index(VPACX), and Emerging Markets Index(VEIEX) funds. (Tickers are correct - Vanguard invested in Investor class shares, not Admiral class shares.)
About half a year or so before Developed Markets was allowed to invest in individual stocks, Vanguard started the same transition for its Total International Index Fund. Vanguard announced the completion of that transition Feb 27, 2009.
Here's a Bogleheads thread on the Total Int'l Index fund transition. In it, the second poster quotes from the Vanguard announcement:

The change ... is not expected to result in capital gains distributions to shareholders.

So that's part of the answer to your question.
As to how, your guess may be correct. Note that these conversions took place late 2008 early to mid 2009, when most funds were sitting on large losses due to the market collapse. Clever timing indeed.

Hi bee,
I am not familiar with Isralesen, so appreciate if you can share some reference point of credibility.

Ted provided this link to other referenced articles.
financial-planning.com/thought_leaders/israelsen.html
If youe're asking me, "Is he a quack?"
Well, he does have a PHD after his name (so he may like to Piles it Higher and Deeper).

Then there is the 8.3% in cash. Is this for planned withdrawals? If not, perhaps a ultra-short bond fund would be a more prudent option. Perhaps it would be better just to invest in a mix of 5-6 'dynamic allocation funds' like FPACX, TIBIX, MALOX, PRWCX, OAKBX, etc. In the end, there is no perfect allocation. The ideal allocation is one that an investor can live with when times are bad. I am not sure about this one.

I personally have no problem substituting "cash" with short term bonds or similar vehicles.
In another article by Israelsen as weighting in the other eleven pieces of the pie ebb and flow the cash position is available to help rebalance those positions.
There also is an age based adjustment to cash with his allocation strategies. From 50-60 years of age his startegy raises cash (from 8.3% to 20% cash), 60-70 (40% cash), and 70+ (60% cash). I start to worry about "growing" a portfolio when holding this much cash. Cash can buoy a portfolio during market down drafts, but act too much like an anchor when markets rise.
Finally, judging by the performance of the the three cash/equity allocations compared to the two "non-cash indexes" he used as benchmarks (Vanguard's Balanced Index and Vanguard's S&P 500 Index), cash does seems to have a dampening effect of portfolio DD% as shown here (check out the yellow highlighted results for 2008):