Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
@LewisBraham - thanks for the links to Walden. WSBFX doesn't work for me - I prefer to keep bonds and stocks separate, both for control over asset allocation and for ease of tapping less volatile assets. But I might consider something like WAMFX.
I do think engagement can be effective, so long as it's not all done behind closed doors with no public comments. So it's good to see your other link - an announcement by Walden regarding Vanguard.
And now a pissy rep too. I trust I can do even more.
@msf, it is you who has pointed out the issues with singling out WFC. I never stop at headlines. Yes, it was and is the failure to offer modifications. If in fact their failures in this regard were and are not worse than others', or indeed not as bad, your pointing it out is a good thing, and the articles are unfair.
Back when I had all of my LCV (indeed all LC) moneys in PRBLX, I did not track their holdings, bank or other, just trusted their judgment. Their WFC decisions and nonresponsiveness to shareholder queries caused me to leave them altogether. (WFC was acquired during 2016, so far as I can detect.) They had BAC at some point, I thought, in the 2000s, since I both owned it individually (wish I'd kept) and was interested in who else. I too do not see ownership, going back to 2009. Not interested enough to go back to 1993 to see if my memory is any good. At one point BAC generally was on the radar of SRI types: future in-laws were friends with old management, and a neighbor was a decisionmaker for the Calvert funds. But I could be misremembering.
I am going to go watch all of the new "until we lost it" / "earning it back" stagecoach ads at once, and start believing. I mean, trust is purchasable today, right? That's today's motto. If second time is farce, what's the third time?
Comments
I do think engagement can be effective, so long as it's not all done behind closed doors with no public comments. So it's good to see your other link - an announcement by Walden regarding Vanguard.
@msf, it is you who has pointed out the issues with singling out WFC. I never stop at headlines. Yes, it was and is the failure to offer modifications. If in fact their failures in this regard were and are not worse than others', or indeed not as bad, your pointing it out is a good thing, and the articles are unfair.
Back when I had all of my LCV (indeed all LC) moneys in PRBLX, I did not track their holdings, bank or other, just trusted their judgment. Their WFC decisions and nonresponsiveness to shareholder queries caused me to leave them altogether. (WFC was acquired during 2016, so far as I can detect.) They had BAC at some point, I thought, in the 2000s, since I both owned it individually (wish I'd kept) and was interested in who else. I too do not see ownership, going back to 2009. Not interested enough to go back to 1993 to see if my memory is any good. At one point BAC generally was on the radar of SRI types: future in-laws were friends with old management, and a neighbor was a decisionmaker for the Calvert funds. But I could be misremembering.
I am going to go watch all of the new "until we lost it" / "earning it back" stagecoach ads at once, and start believing. I mean, trust is purchasable today, right? That's today's motto. If second time is farce, what's the third time?
Taibbi is always one to turn to:
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/taibbi-an-ode-to-the-feeble-corporate-apology-629452/
Here’s a picture of a cowboy. We opened 30 accounts in his name. Just kidding.
I know msf will find comparables. And Taibbi does address why the other guys are not running such ads.
I feel better already. Back to the burning world.
nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/08/sheila-bair-on-what-hasnt-changed-since-the-great-recession.html