Posts by wiredotter16

I honestly thought I was dealing with some kind of demonic entity, but after asking six straight questions, he just hits me with a "whatever" 🙂

I honestly don't believe it. He nailed my gallbladder without me mentioning a single thing about it... I genuinely have no clue what he based that on.
Is she over 40, maybe 50? Is her mother still around? Is she involved in politics or constantly on TV? Honestly, it could have been absolutely anyone.

Now I’m going to come up with someone just to mess with him.🙄

I honestly thought I was just going to be talking about Ćira, but based on the questions being asked, I realized he was steering me somewhere else entirely. I was practically dying laughing while responding because he was clearly trying to lead me straight toward Mamić 😂

Kimberly Nguyen, my example was based on a real, existing offer from a bank, though I clearly failed to make that point clear to you..and since you want to talk about risk, tell me: which major US bank is going to hand you 50% of its capital just for depositing your own money, assuming the probability of a total collapse matches your pessimistic worldview?

And honestly, I wrote this specifically because there are so many beginners lurking on this forum..why wouldn't I share information that could actually be life-changing?

Look, if a fund returns 15% annually and you start with $50,000
the bank hands you an extra $25,000
bringing your total to $75,000
With compound interest over five years, you double your money to $150,000. If you decide to stop saving at that point, you pay back the initial $25,000 and walk away with $125,000.

I should also mention that during my last market correction, I saw a 23% dip in my portfolio in just a few days before things started trending back into the green..The ten worst market crashes in history didn't even see a drop greater than 50%. Even if a crash that massive actually happened and I lost everything, it would mean the end of civilization as we know it, at which point cash wouldn't be worth a damn anyway.

And let's not forget, your money is accessible whenever you need it. You aren't locked in by some rigid contract or a fixed-term CD.

Look, this isn't some hypothetical scenario; it’s my actual life experience, so I know exactly what I'm talking about. Even ironsurfer10 pointed out that credit officers are heavily pushing OMF... Since I don't work in the banking sector, I can't give you a granular, step-by-step breakdown of how they pull extra capital out of thin air, but I think everyone here already gets the gist of what's happening.

Just get the job done, hit your targets, and the money will follow.

Alright, Ronald Allen, I see you’ve decided to get defensive about your bank and how things operate over there. To be clear, I haven't mentioned your specific employer once in my story, nor do I have any idea where you actually work. My point was centered on a very specific scenario. You're trying to beat me on the grounds that your bank lacks certain standards, but even if they did, that misses the mark entirely. I was recounting an actual, existing situation, and I don't see why you feel the need to make this a personal vendetta against your workplace.

On another note, I am perfectly capable of distinguishing between a loan officer, a private wealth manager, and a teller.

When I used the term "clerk," I wasn't attempting to belittle anyone or diminish their role. My apologies for not using the specific terminology required for you to grasp the core of my argument.

The crux of the matter was this: all banking staff at a particular institution are pressured to hit certain targets. This includes a quota for enrolling a specific number of people into retirement savings plans. If they hit their overall performance metrics, they might see some negligible bump in their paycheck.

I trust that clears things up.
Best,

I want to introduce you to a specific type of Lombard loan; I noticed nobody here has mentioned this option yet, so it might pique your interest.

Let’s run a scenario. Suppose you don't have $60,000 sitting around in cash, so instead, you take out a home equity loan for that amount. You set aside $10,000 to cover old debts and miscellaneous stuff, then dump the remaining $50,000 into an investment fund. Based on that $50,000 stake, the bank grants you a Lombard loan of $25,000, which also gets funneled straight back into the fund. Essentially, the capital isn't "available" for spending. Some funds have been pulling 50% annual returns or even exceeding 100% over the last few years, but let's be realistic—let's assume you aren't that lucky and they return a modest 30%. Of course, that 30% is working on a total principal of $75,000.

With that $10,000 cushion you kept on the side, you cover your monthly mortgage payments, and for the bank providing the Lombard loan, you simply pay the interest. That $10,000 is enough to service both the mortgage installments and the interest for the next five years. You can run the math on the rest yourselves.

Here is the setup:
$75,000 in the fund
30% annual return
Compound interest calculation

After five years, the fund sits at $214,000. You pay the bank back its $25,000 credit, leaving you with roughly $190,000—all while having paid off your mortgage installments.

And look, you aren't forced to withdraw the money from the fund after those five years.
In that case, you could potentially qualify for a new Lombard loan worth 50% of the fund's value, bringing your total managed capital to about $300,000.
After another five years, you’d have upwards of a million dollars in the fund. You pay back the initial $25,000, then the subsequent $100,000, and ten years in, you're looking at a million-dollar balance plus whatever you've cleared on the mortgage.

And all of this started with nothing more than a mortgage on a house or an apartment.

I should clarify: this isn't for everyone. Most people either can't or won't wrap their heads around this strategy because they're too afraid, or for whatever other reason.

But I'm young and reckless enough to see that ten years isn't a lifetime. Even if the fund ends up yielding a measly $300,000 at the end of a decade—which is my pessimistic estimate—I won't make that kind of money in ten years unless I start smuggling cocaine from Colombia.

I'm eager to hear what you all think.
If you want to test the theory, try running these numbers with a 15% annual return. Even then, you'll be wealthy by our standards... and you'll be completely financially independent within ten years.

It looks like we’re just playing word games now. When I mentioned a bank official, I was specifically referring to a loan officer. This whole back-and-forth only happened because I was building on that question miST posted back on December 12th.

"Conditioning" feels like such a harsh, heavy-handed word... as if they’re just walking up and forcing it on you. In reality, they execute it much more subtly than that.

Could someone please tell me which 401(k) fund you’re currently enrolled in? I’d love to offer some recommendations, as I actually have some firsthand information on this. Our specific fund delivered an XY return this past year, and I genuinely suggest you give it some serious thought. Even a tiny 1% difference in annual returns might seem negligible now, but over a 30-year horizon, that spread translates into a massive difference in interest—we're talking about potentially doubling your retirement nest egg.
And what exactly is the client supposed to say? Let’s be real: most of them don't have the slightest clue which specific 401(k) fund they’re even enrolled in, let alone how the entire retirement system actually functions.

The first thing that popped into my head was how much of a rude welcome this new guy is getting in the 401(k) fund... it’s way more intense than what happened with $60... no hard feelings though.

Hey everyone, this is my first time jumping into this thread. The topic caught my eye, so I figured I’d weigh in. Regarding the claim that banks force you to switch to their specific fund when applying for a loan—that isn't entirely accurate. Bank employees operate under all sorts of quotas, like how many loans they need to close in a certain window or how many premium credit cards they have to issue. Part of their job description includes migrating people into their funds. Honestly, the data being presented by ironsurfer10 is a bit off. If you work directly for a fund, the gross pay for converting someone from one fund to another is pretty much a known figure, though some people pull in significantly more. When someone joins a fund for the first time, the gross amount is slightly lower, but those payout examples refer to people employed directly by the fund. As for bank staff, they only see an extra bump in their paycheck if they hit their team targets; usually, that bonus is capped at about 10% of their base salary. To circle back to this whole "requirement" thing—it would be more accurate to call it a "recommendation" from the teller. Of course, the employee isn't to blame if the client perceives it as a mandatory condition for getting the loan. Then again, most people are desperate enough for the credit that this "condition" doesn't even feel like a hurdle; they'll do whatever it takes just to get approved. It’s the same deal with people looking for loans through classified ads. The "requirement" to join a fund comes from the people working for the agency processing the loan. These folks don't actually live off loan commissions; they make their money through life insurance policies and by moving people into funds. Let's be real here: you are taking out a loan because you desperately need it, and I doubt it matters much to you which fund you end up in. Your only priority is getting that money. Since you likely can't get a traditional loan at a major bank like Chase or Bank of America due to a bad credit score or a bankruptcy filing, you're essentially paying a middleman for the service of getting the loan realized. That commission is actually up to five times smaller than what someone working directly for an investment firm would earn. Sorry if I went on a bit of a rant here. Cheers.