Quote:
Posted By JohnH38 on 11/09/2012 5:19 PM
Bruce, Bruce, Bruce,
What a devious mindset you display. Ask the Forum mgr, he'll confirm I'm no Hollier.
You & Melissa, what a pair!
JohnH38
JohnH,
I did say it could be coincidence, and you gotta agree, it
is a curious one. Out of 50 or so similar funds you just happened to pick one that has a fund manager with the same first name and a last name that begins with the same letter of the alphabet. By the way, it is not my desire to engage in personal attacks, nor am I suggesting that your investment recommendation should not be considered. What I am saying is that there are other issues relative to HOAs that need to be considered which, in your enthusiasm, I donāt think you have thought about.
Seriously, though, I do find your suggestion interesting. As a result of your suggestion Iāve been looking at some of these funds and might give them serious consideration for my own portfolio. However, I am not convinced they are right for an HOA. Before I get into that, I want to touch on a couple of statements you made because I think they need some clarification,
Your recent statement, "As for risky, even CD's are ... the FDIC doesn't even have 5 % of the funds needed, and our government backing the FDIC is kaput" appears to conflict with an earlier statement, "Treasury notes and bonds are fully backed by the US government, ergo mutual funds holding them are insured better than CD's are and ever will." I donāt see how both statements can be true. If the "kaput" government cannot back its FDIC commitment to insure bank deposits, then I donāt see how that same "kaput" government can honor its commitment to "fully back" treasury notes and bonds. Furthermore, your claim that mutual funds holding Treasury notes and bonds are insured better that CDs is simply untrue. You are not suggesting direct investment in Treasury notes and bonds; rather, you are suggesting purchasing shares in mutual funds that hold such instruments. As you know, the price of those shares depends, just as with any mutual fund, on the Net Asset Value (NAV) which is not backed or guaranteed by the U.S. government. In fact, a look at the charts of such mutual funds over the last 10 years will show that the NAV of many of them have varied considerably, especially during the period of 2008-2009 (more on that later). So, while Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities (TIPS) may be backed by the U.S. government and be relatively safe, it does not necessarily follow that the NAV of mutual funds heavily invested in TIPS is equally safe.
In fact, the SEC, in its publication, "Mutual Funds ā A Guide For Investors," offers this:
"Bond funds generally have higher risks than money market funds, largely because they typically pursue strategies aimed at producing higher yields. Unlike money market funds, the SECās rules do not restrict bond funds to high-quality or short-term investments. Because there are many different types of bonds, bond funds can vary dramatically in their risks and rewards. Some of the risks associated with bond funds include:" - - "ā¦the risk that the market value of the bonds will go down when interest rates go up. Because of this, you can lose money in any bond fund,
including those that invest only in insured bonds or U.S. Treasury Bonds. Funds that invest in longer-term bonds tend to have higher interest rate risk."
By way of example, letās take a look at the chart for the fund whose link you provided, the Vanguard Inflation Protected Securities Fund (VIPSX). During 2008, the fundās NAV dropped by about 15% between March and November. I compared this to the charts of a couple of other similar funds and, when normalized, their curves were nearly identical.
I will agree, over time, the ups and downs may average out, and with the reinvestment of dividends, the HOA may come out ahead. However, when the HOA needs to cash out some of its reserves to meet a future capital expense, it needs to do it then, and the only way to do that is to sell shares at whatever price (NAV) those share happen to be at that time. Furthermore, there is no way to predict or guarantee what that NAV will be at any specific point in the future.
Your statement, "Over long periods of time, like eternity for HOA'sā¦." does not apply. An HOA sets aside money as reserves to meet unanticipated future expenses, cover the deductibles on insurance policies, and primarily, to repair or replace its capital assets when they reach the end of their useful lifetimes. These assets could include computers, recreational and exercise equipment, vehicles (primarily larger HOAs), pools, tennis courts and other recreational areas, clubhouses, clubhouse and poolside furniture, and so on. The HOA may need to take cash from its reserves at 3-year intervals for some assets, 5-year intervals for others, 10-year intervals, and so on. Such short-term needs are hardly anywhere near an eternity. When the HOAs reserves are insufficient to finance its needs, its only other alternatives are a special assessment or to obtain a loan. Neither is likely to make homeowners happy.
But, we could argue the foregoing all day. As a board member, I need to consider other issues that do not pertain to me as an individual, but that I need to be aware of for an HOA. Two that come to mind are state laws and mortgage underwriting requirements. In Oregon, for example, HOAs are limited to direct investment in issues of the federal Government and/or FDIC bank accounts or CDs. HOAs are not permitted to invest in municipalities, mutual funds or indirect investments (investments to which the investor does not directly hold title, such as mutual funds, limited partnerships and Real Estate Investment Trusts). Non-FDIC insured money market accounts are not to be used for homeowner association reserve investments by law. So, while your investment idea may be permitted in some states, it may not be permitted in others.
Mortgage underwriters such as Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and HUD, have very strict requirements regarding underwriting mortgages for prospective purchasers of homes in condo and home owners associations. Local lenders tend to follow these guidelines. Some are more restrictive, and some are less restrictive. There are restrictions on the percentage of homes that may be owned by one individual (or other entity), limitations on the number of non-owner occupied units, limitations on the number of delinquencies, adequacy of insurance, and so forth. Many of the requirements are centered on the financial health of the associations, including reserves. Some lenders may not be willing to provide mortgages if reserves are not in FDIC insured accounts. Although you might believe mutual funds holding TIPS to be a relatively "safe" investment, that does not mean that lenders will perceive them as such, and itās the lendersā perception that counts. If it is difficult to obtain mortgages, then it will be difficult to sell homes in the community, and home market values could suffer. Iām not saying that lenders
will refuse to offer mortgages if reserves are not in an FDIC insured account. What I am saying is that these are points that need to be considered and investigated before making any investment decision.
Here are some additional points to ponder:
According to the law firm of Epsten Grinnell & Howell, "Losses from investments in riskier or speculative securities could be personally charged to the individual Board members who authorized those investments." And "Thus, safety of deposit and preservation of principle is the first and highest priority." "It is this firmās opinion that all investments should be in federally-insured Certificates of Deposit or Treasury Bills backed by the United States Government." (and, the NAV of mutual funds is
not backed by the U.S. Government.) Finally, the firm goes on to prioritize the investment objectives of an associationās reserve account: 1) Preservation of principal, 2) Liquidity, and 3) Return.
From HOA Leader "Practical Guide to Homeowner Association Management": "Some HOA boards place their funds in riskier investments, but that carries its own dangers. Without explicit disclosure and formal consent from association members, you could face anger and lawsuits if your reserves drop. Even if you get members' consent, you'll still likely face claims that the risks weren't adequately explained. All in all, risky investments are the surest way to invite trouble."
From Reality Times: "Because of fiduciary concerns, the Board should usually only invest in guaranteed and insured investments unless the membership votes to be more aggressive. In either case, there should be a clear and written investment policy for the Board to follow."
As I said earlier, your suggestion has caused me to study TIPS mutuals more closely, and I will likely discuss such investments with my financial adviser for possible inclusion in my personal portfolio. However, I am not ready to accept such investments as a wise choice for HOA reserves. So far, you appear to have considered this strictly from an investment viewpoint. I believe there are many other issues that need to be considered and investigated further before any investment decision is made.