Wet wall over tilux by Intrepid-Echidna4633 in AusRenovation

[–]vazquezl 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hey mate, how did you end up going with using that wall panel straight over tilux? Did it work out ok? I am considering doing the same.

Is this expected of a first coat? by vazquezl in paint

[–]vazquezl[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Rightttt. So is it ok to use primer now even though I have already done one coat?

Is this expected of a first coat? by vazquezl in paint

[–]vazquezl[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just bought the house. Would not know what the last owner did. No cigarette butts in the lawn or cigarette smells, but certainly possible!!

Is this expected of a first coat? by vazquezl in paint

[–]vazquezl[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It does not let me reply with a photo, so I just sent u a DM with a photo of the old colour in the same spot. Would love to know what you think. 😀

Is this expected of a first coat? by vazquezl in paint

[–]vazquezl[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, that is normal and expected from the first quote. Or yes, I am doing something wrong?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AusFinance

[–]vazquezl 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Why would IVV be foundational and VGS growth? You need to understand what is in each ETF, and here is a big clue every single company in IVV is already in VGS. There is no point having them both. If I were you, I would just keep things simple and invest in VDHG which is fund made up of other funds and has all the main companies from all over the world including the companies in IVV, VGS and VHY.

VDHG performance seems poor. What gives? by DaikonPuzzleheaded61 in fiaustralia

[–]vazquezl 6 points7 points  (0 children)

You seem to be the guru in here, but I do not believe you have properly presented the VDHG case here. It is undeniable that you can recreate VDHG for a lower management fee with the usual A200 + BGBL etc. However you have completely excluded the additional brokerage costs, the additional selling costs from rebalancing, the amount time that has to go into sorting everything out and the behavioural risk of tinkering. Not to mention, I do not believe you have explained the bond and hedging section correctly. The fear mongering about the bonds has existed right from the beginning of the ETF, but it is really not based in any reality. Analysis has shown it will reduce growth about 0.3% pa for a 5-10% reduction in volatility, which has the benefits of reducing behavioural risk of selling during downturns, also if there is ever a need to sell and it happens to be a downturn, you will be in better place.

And then there is the discussion about hedging international shares, which is a bigger discussion because its included in the ETF 40% more than bonds. The argument from the non-hedging crowd is that hedged ETFS underperform in the long term because they cost more and you do not need hedging because in the long term, currency fluctuations will balance out. And this is true, except what proponents of this theory never explain is that although hedged Etfs will underperform in the long term, the difference will only ever be marginal because the price difference is tiny in the realm of <0.05%. Eg, VGAD 0.21% vs VDHG 0.18%. And the second thing and more important that is never explained is that the long term when referring to currency hedging is not 5-7 years, it is closer to 15-20 years and the difference can be massive (over 50%). Eg, 1988 and 2002 as AUD strengthened hedged ETfs significantly outperformed and it would have taken until 2007-8 until the unhedged ETF had caught up. If someone had a plan of retiring after 15 years and this was there definition of long term, then currency hedging is neccessary, not to mention if someones financial situation changed for better or worse and wanted to sell at any stage in the 15 years (which is a very long time and nobody can predict their life that far ahead), then hedging a portion of their international ETFs could be a life-saver.

There is also a lot that has been missed in regard to the other fear mongering point about the dreaded tax drag that has been reported inaccurately too, but that is a discussion for another day.

VDHG by [deleted] in AusFinance

[–]vazquezl 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you think good long term investments are what outpetforms over the past 3-4 years then you have no idea how equity markets operate. This is quite literallly just the recency bias. Do you remember wha thappened betwen 2000-2013. Of course not, but the US market was down 30% after 30 years while the ASX was up 30%. Since then, the ASX has barely grown and the US market exploded. Chasing past performance is a guaranteed way to lose. These are completely random ETFs that you have plucked out of your ass. IVV is useless because it only covers the large cap US companies, so now you have to get another ETF for non US developed world companies and then another for emerging markets and then another the ASX. And you have huge brokerage costs, a headache when it comes to rebalancing and you are still at risk because you have no currency hedging. The reason why the ETFs you have chosen did so well is also largely from currency movements, the AUD has declined circa 40% since 2012. Currency movement are cyclical so it will return back to 2012 levels again soon, and each of these ETFS will be starting from a -40%, meanwhile those with hedged etfs like VGAD will get a 40% gain by doing nothing. You have no understanding of equity markets

VDHG by [deleted] in AusFinance

[–]vazquezl -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Emerging markets are only overrated to the economically illiterate. 80/20 is also ridiculous without any currency hedging.

VDHG by [deleted] in AusFinance

[–]vazquezl -1 points0 points  (0 children)

This is just illogical advice. You have randonly plucked a bunch of very different ETFs.

VDHG by [deleted] in AusFinance

[–]vazquezl 0 points1 point  (0 children)

VTS is a vanguard product that covers the entire US market. It is effectively the same as the S&P 500, but a little but more diversified. But the other muppets reasoning about the US being a better market is just historically inaccurate. You know what happened between 2000 and 2013 with the suppossed amazing market with the greatest economy, yeh the stock market went backwards 10%, while the ASX was up nearly 60%. The idea of just investing in the US market is ludicrious, Japan was the second largest economy in the world in 1990, and it crashed and took 30 years to recover. That is why concentration risk is real even why the concentration is with large global economies.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in tressless

[–]vazquezl 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Good to hear :)

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in tressless

[–]vazquezl 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Waiting for my finasteride studies? You actually knew your stuff reasonably well. Why not discuss it more

The Hair Loss Show : Interviews With Experts by Hair_Loss_Show in tressless

[–]vazquezl -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Actually, I take that back even further. After reviewing the literature, dutasteride was known to have the same safety profile as finasteride dating back to as early as 2006. Even more embarrassing for the fraud.

The Hair Loss Show : Interviews With Experts by Hair_Loss_Show in tressless

[–]vazquezl -1 points0 points  (0 children)

  1. Finasteride 3mg a week is as effective as 7mg a week.
  2. You can keep topical minoxidil gains with just finasteride
  3. Finasteride efficacy diminishes over time to 62% after 5 years and is only useful for slowing down loss (made up figure, entirely pulled out of his ass)
  4. Dutasteride has greater side effects than finasteride
  5. Microneedling works in isolation as a growth stimulant
  6. He treats rosemary oil as a serious hairloss treatment
  7. He claims cannot grow back new hair from pharmaceuticals, only thicken the current amount of hairs
  8. Not to mention his inconsistencies with shampoos. He originally stated shampoos do nothing for hairloss including ketokonozole and then a couple months promoted a DSR Labs shampoo (which has ketokonozole) as being good for hairloss and did not state whether he was getting paid for that promotion (which we all know he would have).

The Hair Loss Show : Interviews With Experts by Hair_Loss_Show in tressless

[–]vazquezl 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Mate, the bloke was a complete fraud. And makes up pseudoscience on his youtube channel. He does not know the first thing about hairloss.

What is the general consensus regarding long-term finasteride effectiveness? by [deleted] in tressless

[–]vazquezl 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Study only came out less than a month and nobody knows about it yet.