RE: A few thoughts:"spec money only"
I will look ignorant for saying this (so be it), but I've never understood that concept.
Risk and Reward are consistently inversely related. Everyone knows this.
So what's the difference between putting it all in high risk investments vs low risk ?
Nothing... except the former gives you the opportunity for a big homerun. You'll never hit one playing it safe, and allocating only 5% or less to spec plays isn't enough because the basket will be too small.
In the meantime, the perceived "low risk" plays can implode also, just like the income trusts did.
If I take 500k, put it all in high risk plays, even if 60% of it goes to zero (which is impossible using proper money management) I just need a triple from the remaining 40% to make a decent return. And it isn't unusual for stocks like SA to triple quickly. It went from .30 to 2.48 on 2 holes. That's considerably more than a triple...
Before you call me a nutjob, FWIW, Paul Van Eeden has often said he puts all his equity into exploration companies. He's made some bad calls, true, but his track record is still very impressive. I don't think there's anything wrong with his strategy. HIs reputation speaks for itself.
Besides, even if a person loses it all.... a) it's only money and b) you show me an extremely successful businessman or entrepreneur, and I will pretty much guarantee he didn't achieve that level of success playing it safe all the time...
I guess what I'm trying to say is that everyone's situation is different... you can't throw a blanket over everyone and say they should all follow a pre-determined approach to investing. Factors such as age, personality, background, income, family... etc etc... all have to be considered.
Obviously, it's easier and more logical for someone like me, without family or people relying on me, to be as risk tolerant as I am. I certainly wouldn't advise a married person of 45, with 4 kids and 2 mortgages, to try this route. The end result could easily be quite unpleasant.
grain of salt
cheers