|
|
 |
|
| Letters to the Editor |
Medical Melee
09/01/2005
|
Dear Editor:
I have been a huge fan of the focus of Worth
since its alignment with Robb Report. However, in “Bearish Portents” (June 2004,
page 128) the answers or purported insight to a question—posed by a member of a
family office in regard to a 10 percent loss in his family’s investment
portfolio over the next 24 months—seemed more like that of a rookie stock broker
advising Aunt Betty on her $5,000 retirement savings.
The reality is that a
portfolio with $55 million in five concentrated positions should already be
hedged (most likely the family is dealing with restricted stock or control
issues), whether through collars or exchange funds or even a private annuity
transaction.
The second larger issue at hand is in regard to perspective. A
100-year plan incorporates over 1,200 months. Issues regarding taxes and market
fluctuations are extremely myopic in the short term. Not that I would be opposed
to trying to hedge against a 10 percent short-term loss, but I am boggled by how
the conversation in regard to chasing short-term returns—real darn short term
over a four-generation investment pool—would even be broached. It seems as
though there is a lack of family in the focus of the strategy.
My immediate
response: Are your current family office investment advisors up to the
challenge?Brent E. Bentrim
Managing Principal, Carolopolis Family Wealth
Management
Charleston, S.C.
Worth welcomes your comments, critiques and suggestions. Please direct
your letters to letters@worth.com.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
