So, that investment tipsheet writing job didn’t last long

Three test pieces and I’m out already.

“unfortunately I still consider the writing style relatively inaccessible for the average reader.”

Should people who find my writing style complex be allowed to handle their own money?

Onwards to the next writing idea then.

Example here.

26 thoughts on “So, that investment tipsheet writing job didn’t last long”

  1. Bloke in North Dorset

    Headline is very clunky (subs?) and the opening two paras didn’t grab my attention. After that it was a bit of a labour to get to the end, but a good point made, eventually.

  2. “unfortunately I still consider the writing style relatively inaccessible for the average reader.”

    “Inaccessible” is not the same thing as “complex”, though, and BiND persevered longer than I did.

  3. “Should people who find my writing style complex be allowed to handle their own money?”

    Obviously there should be a government agency that does that instead.

  4. Ah, Fool.co.uk. I think I see where you went wrong.

    Most of the articles I glance at on there would probably be accessible to your average Sun reader, but wouldn’t help them manage their finances in the slightest.

  5. Motley Fool isn’t Investor’s Chronicle. Think Daily Mail & write accordingly. There’s an art to that though.

  6. Just addressing the substance of the piece, might Aston survive independently as a coachbuilder and/or tuning company?

    I am thinking of Touring’s (re-)vamp of the Alfa 8C.

    My take on Aston is it’s been trying to compete with Ferrari et al. But it’s thing was always sublime beauty, elegance and a bit of dash or swagger. Well, it retains some of those things, but it’s gone down the road of thrash-it-all HP and, as you say, the big companies with their very expensive R&D budgets will always be on top.

    As to the style, well. There is an archness to your prose style. Many of us like it, others may not.

    I’ve always admired the ability to ape another style, not just for a few paragraphs or for a chapter, but for an entire book. Think, for example, of Boyd and Bond – among others.

    Ultimately, for most, you write the way the write. And unless the subs get hold of you at the age of 16, that isn’t going to change.

  7. @Tim W

    Helps if you know what you’re writing about.

    AML design & build car bodies; develop/specify suspension etc – other than that the rest is bought in

    eg Brembo brakes, Mercedes-AMG engines

    Finally, stock is above ML’s target of 400p

    .
    @Mr Lud

    My take on Aston is it’s been trying to compete with Ferrari et al. But it’s thing was always sublime beauty, elegance and a bit of dash or swagger

    Compete with Ferrari, Lambo, McLaren? – No. GT market like Jaguar, Maserati, Merc AMG & Brabus etc, BMW M series & Alpina etc, Porsche…

    AML has not gone down the road of thrash-it-all HP

  8. I thought was was readable enough. No vocab difficulty. Was the target market monosyllabic teenagers? I could see the issue there, like.

    But one major red flag it didn’t mention: The ecolunacy that is opposed to all cars, which we are already seeing resulting in factory run downs and closures.
    Also the max CO2 emission, that means for every Aston Martin you buy, you must also buy and scrap 3 Nissan Micra shopping trolleys (or equivalent).
    In that environment, investing in any car company, luxury or not, is a gamble that common sense will beat Gaia Worship. On past history, that’s not a good bet.

    NB I see the Brexit 50p coins with their slogan “Peace and Prosperity to all Nations” are to be scrapped. Contributions invited for the next Brexit coin attempt: how about Kenny’s “Round the EU Presidents up into a field, and Bomb the Bastards!”

  9. It’s fine, by my lights. I think Ed. mistakes inaccessible for unique. Or maybe you were paid per word and they thought you fluffed it out a bit. It was a sound point you made. A standard hack journo would have reviewed their product range, possibly also the plans of the MD and balance sheet, and then invited either optimism or skepticism, based on track record and/or received wisdom. Aside from style You touched a more fundamental point, which others usually don’t.

  10. A tipsheet reader does not want a lecture in micro economics, even if it might support a value-based view on a certain stock. Ask BIS… Especially since value investing is waiting for the good times to return.

    Besides your analysis is very ceteris paribus, assuming that nothing can change in the short run. That’s the thinking that vitiates everything that Chris Dillow writes. He frequently asserts that most companies don’t have long lifespans and backs it up with a quote from “The Simpsons”. But he is obviously thick.

    What this analysis omits is the flexibility of capitalism. After all Lagonda and Aston Martin were once separate companies.

    These companies have brands and if you have a marketable brand, you can do loads of stuff. Whitbread no longer brews beer. Tate and Lisle no longer refines sugar. Thicky lefties such as Dillow don’t know this.

    Bugatti design spectacle frames as well as the Veyron (but they might even have no involvement in that these days, I don’t know). The “Pierre Cardin” name appears on shoes but did Pierre have anything to do with them?

    So Aston Martin could be taken over for its brand, such as the great gear boxes that Stirling Moss extolled, which would allow a trader to make a nifty profit. Did you address that in your lecture? I don’t know because I only lasted about 3 paras

    They could move into something completely different like the companies mentioned above.

    Above all, the reader of a tip sheet wants to know what the market thinks. Plenty of pundits will tell you of the impossibility of such and such company doing great numbers. Very few analysts looking at a company mainly known for babyfood, Glaxo, told us about Zantac

  11. I enjoyed the article well enough, and knowing little about the subject in hand I’d say Tim’s analysis makes a reasoned point. I think this is more of a mismatch with the target audience….

  12. Sadly not, Mr in G. I had a GT as, I seem to recall did you. Lovely bit of kit.

    Jaguar XE now. It suffices, but I struggle to love it.

    Given that only 500 8cs were made, I count myself uncommonly lucky to have seen two of them.

    I might slice off a finger for a 2013 Disco Volante. A distaff finger, but a finger nevertheless.

  13. Diogenes said:
    “Tate and Lisle no longer refines sugar”

    Is the spelling a punning reference to their research into corn syrup based nylon for stockings? A joint venture with DuPont.

  14. Know your audience. People who read tipsters are looking for a win over a few months rather than a business cycle or more

  15. I love this blog but the prose on the Fool site is pretty inaccessible. A simple Flesch Kincaid test confirms the same.

  16. So, I looked up Flesch Kincaid on that fount of all human knowledge, and discovered;

    “The least readable scientists are economists (Flesch score = 41.70)”

    Tee hee.

    (Also, three magic numbers in the formula. Irritating.)

  17. I’d forgotten about The Motley Fool!

    I think you are being a bit rude about Morgans too, which casts doubts on the accuracy and wisdom of the rest of the article.

    The traditional Morgans might well be ash framed and metal bodied in the old fashioned manner but the aero series were aluminium and had numerous patented features IIRC.

    And they aren’t independent either, having sold out to an Italian investment company recently.

  18. @Tim the Coder October 29, 2019 at 8:30 pm

    But one major red flag it didn’t mention: The ecolunacy that is opposed to all cars, which we are already seeing resulting in factory run downs and closures.
    Also the max CO2 emission, that means for every Aston Martin you buy, you must also buy and scrap 3 Nissan Micra shopping trolleys (or equivalent).

    +1

    The EU eco-lunacy, that Tim supports (Carbon Tax – is that a tax on Pencils?) has resulted in Fiat, Nissan, PSA, Renault etc discontinuing their smallest & lightest most economical cars as it’s cheaper to make a larger heavier car a bit more economical.

    Why? Engine & gearbox heavy, small car body can’t become lighter & meet EU Safety etc profitably
    .

    @Diogenes October 29, 2019 at 9:51 pm

    So Aston Martin could be taken over for its brand. They could move into something completely different like the companies mentioned above.

    +1 They have

  19. @Battery Chicken October 30, 2019 at 5:54 pm

    +1 on Morgan

    .
    @Tim W

    If you don’t know, don’t pontificate – unless you aim to replace Barry Gardiner

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *