The following is in response to Robert Huebscher’s article, The Winning Endgame, which appeared last week:
Dear Editor,
First, let me say I enjoy reading many of the articles I receive from Advisor Perspectives. I truly look forward to receiving the emails and use the information gleamed therein to properly inform my clients. Thanks for doing such a good job.
Next, let me say I found a breakdown in your posting of stories. The article “A Winning Endgame” by Robert Huebscher was not properly reviewed by your staff. I read the very first paragraph and found I could not read any more. In this article, Mr. Huebscher is either very sloppy or he is deliberately lying; either way you should not have posted it on your site. You have done a disservice to me and all your readers. I believe an apology is in order.
In the second sentence Mr. Huebscher says the president now has the debt burden as one of his goals. This is a barefaced lie and Mr. Huebscher either knew it or should have found it out. There are many ways you can verify this for yourself. There are videos of Mr. Obama during his campaign for the office of president that shows his promise to have national debt reduction as a part of his presidency. In a quick internet search I found the following. If you listen, Mr. Obama says his administration will cut the deficit in half by 2013. What his administration has done to get this substantial reduction is add an additional five trillion dollars to the debt.
How did you miss this?
Sincerely yours,
Don Simonsen
Royal Alliance
San Dimas, CA
Robert Huebscher responds:
My claim that one of President Obama’s goals is debt reduction was based on his support of $2 trillion in spending cuts as part of the debt-ceiling resolution.
The following is in response to Scott Smith’s guest contribution, Hitting a Moving Target: Matching Portfolio Risk to Client Expectations, which appeared last week:
Dear Editor,
I enjoyed the article from Scott Smith; however, it failed to define “risk.” It appears to be variance or market volatility, but that is not risk.
Scott hit the nail on the head when he stated “in most cases an investor has a goal in mind,” but he fails to fully grasp that MPT, relying heavily on CAPM, assumes a singular goal for all investors. Clarifying these questions is not difficult if the correct risk measurements are used.
Although FINRA will never allow its brokers to adopt a more suitable calculation of risk (because it would cross the realm into advice), RIA firms and their advisors should consider why they hang onto a mean/variance approach despite all the evidence it does not work for the intended purpose – building portfolios to achieve goals.
Yours truly,
Brent Bentrim
Carolopolis Fiduciary Counsel
Charleston, SC
