I believe in the company, I think it is one of the best in the world and always will be (MER). I am very young and plan to retire with the company. By accumulating as much stock now, and then diversifying as I get older, I can take advantage of huge long term single stock returns.
Sure it could have down years of 10% (but average cost basis, I almost want that to happen) if you look at charts on the long term by decades, single stocks seem the way to go if you have a time horizon of 40+ years.
2007-02-05 07:16:14 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Business & Finance ➔ Investing
This question looks like an advertisement for MER ...
And the graph of MER stock looks very good indeed. That;s because we are still in a bull market. long term. For how long? we are yet to see.
But once the market start going down as in 2000, 2001, maybe not that fast downhill as then, one of the first companies to suffer are the brokerage firms since the bear market will scare off all investors.
2007-02-05 13:41:23 · answer #1 · answered by Leo P 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I used to be employed by them...they will do anything to protect the stock price of the company even if it means huge layoffs. They are very proactive in that regard. They are solid, been around for many years, and are enormous in size.
But, they were also involved in ENRON....and had the exposure and liability been greater you very well could have also seen the end of ML along with Arthur Anderson and Enron. Do not do this....Put no more than 20% of your account in there...that includes all employer contributions...which means your own deferrals likely won't go there. I'd avoid using Merrill Funds for those as well...high expense ratios and poor performance.
And yes...the time horizon for them is good...but tell me this. If you're planning on retiring at 50 and you have 100% in ML during year 40 and there is a 3 year run at -10%...do you still think you're retiring at 50? Answer please??? NO!
2007-02-05 19:55:57 · answer #2 · answered by digdowndeepnseattle 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ask any employee at ENRON what happened when they did that!! The employees put their stock in the company. If the company goes down, you lose everything. I'd recommend putting a set amount your company, but make sure you diversify the stocks into other areas.
But I think you are wise in thinking about investing. My finance professor told me that the people who invest for their retirement at an earlier age end up accruing more interest in the long run and actually saving a nice nest egg for retirement.
2007-02-05 15:27:17 · answer #3 · answered by Searcher 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, no, no, and no-no again. WHY TAKE THE CHANCE?
You're in it "long term"...so diversify for about 5 or 7 years..then compare your " single stock" returns to a portfolio of U.S.and global equities / REIT's and energy. If MER is ahead, go ahead make your move ...
One bookkeeper fooling around, one trader pulling some moves, one downturn in the mkts, some bad publicity here or there and you're sitting on nothing.
I'd venture to say there aren't two people in the whole company who would recommend ( or participate) in what you suggest.
2007-02-05 18:21:11 · answer #4 · answered by jebediabartlett 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Surprised hey would let anyone invest only in company stock. Every employer I have been at has a max cap for the stock.
To answer the question, nope. Diversify the $.
2007-02-05 15:49:17 · answer #5 · answered by my opinion 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely not. Specious logic at best. People thought Enron was the best company in the world & put thier retirement funds there. You already have your job/income tied up there. Just no excuse for even considering this.
2007-02-05 15:43:40 · answer #6 · answered by vegas_iwish 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sure. Go ahead. Might turn out to be another Enron down the road, then we can read how you lost your life savings. I for one will not shed a tear.
2007-02-05 15:24:03 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hell no. Diversify!
2007-02-05 15:19:48 · answer #8 · answered by hebercitydude 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋