Maps: Google rolls out new "Google Maps" for iPhone and Android. I already love it. It's amazing, but I prefer "Google Maps" to Apple's "Safari Maps" even on all my Apple devices. Makes no sense.
Coronavirus stats, through February 22, 2022, posted. I expect the February 23, 2020, data to be posted later this evening. Four stats to follow:
- daily deaths growth factor: continues "downward" trend (good)
- total deaths, change in total, day-over-day, down again (good); at 4%;
- daily deaths, change in daily, day-over-day, down again, minus 12 percent (good);
- global stats by country; link here, new deaths since last report:
- China: 2
- South Korea: 4
- Italy: 1
- Austria halts train traffic with Italy
- Turkey closes Iran border
WTI: at $53.38.
CLR: will report earnings after the market closes, Wednesday, February 26; conference call, the next day, Thursday, at noon eastern time; brown-bag your lunch. Or UberEats, I suppose.
I scanned the column very quickly but it seemed so ridiculous I had to go back and take another look.
From the WSJ, by Jason Zweig:
The writer's thesis:
Firms no longer want to offer investment products from all sources. Instead, they want to milk their customers’ cash and manage all the assets themselves. Investors need to understand the rules of the new game.That's not my experience at Schwab. They have so many "partners" one can invest almost any way one wants at Schwab.
This seems to be the writer's beef:
Morgan Stanley, E*Trade and Schwab all own banks to which they route much of their customers’ cash. E*Trade pays its customers 0.01% to 0.25% on their uninvested cash; Morgan Stanley, 0.03% to 0.2%; Schwab, 0.06% to 0.3%.Hey, yoo-hoo, it's a low-interest environment. Everyone knows these "sweeps" pay very, very little. That's why the smart investor will check her account daily and move money where it will make most sense. If customers don't want their money in "sweep accounts" earning 0.01%, one or two clicks and one can invest in high-dividend, and very safe, ETFs.This is not rocket science.
This is the writer's beef:
Schwab, which has hoovered up $220 billion in bank deposits, earned 61% of its total net revenues in 2019 from the interest it captured on those balances.This must be a millennial thing: I learned to look for and work for "win-win" situations. Both Schwab and its customers can win. But the writer seems to think that if Schwab wins, the customer loses.
Anyway, enough of this. I thought this was the writer's thesis and complaints, but like I said, I read it quickly. I re-read the article; my initial impression was correct.
Just wait until the federal government places a "very small tax" on all Wall Street trading events, currently being advocated by Bernie Sanders, et al. Now, that would be worth complaining about.
The writer is irritated that Schwab is making money off its customers. He would prefer Schwab go broke?
From the WSJ, by Jason Zweig:Disclaimer: this is not an investment site. Do not make any investment, financial, career, travel, job, or relationship decisions based on what you read here or think you may have read here.
Morgan Stanley’s takeover of E*Trade Financial Corp. for $13 billion shows how drastically the brokerage industry’s business model has changed.Here, hold my Schwab statement.
Firms no longer want to offer investment products from all sources. Instead, they want to milk their customers’ cash and manage all the assets themselves. Investors need to understand the rules of the new game.
For decades, big banks and brokers aspired to become “financial supermarkets” where consumers could open bank accounts and buy stocks and bonds, mutual funds, insurance and the like.
For a gazillion years, for reasons (somewhat) out of my control, I had a small equity account at a local bank. The annual fee was "only" 0.5% and trading fees (commissions) were $4.95/trade. Sounds good, doesn't it? Only 0.5% and $4.95/trade.
On average, over the years, I made one trade/year.
Over the years, I gradually built up a dividend-focused, growth-focused equity account. Yes, growth and dividend (not value and dividend) and after thirty- forty years it's become a very nice account. The dividends alone would pay for living expenses for a small family for a year, if need be. When I started the account, I had few options, and 0.5% was not an issue. The portfolio has exceeded all my expectations. I still trade on average once/year. (Thank goodness I don't have automatic dividend reinvestment.) It now turns out that the 0.5% annual fee eliminates the entire dividend for one of the better dividend payers.
The trust department at the bank was simply acting as a bookkeeper and getting an incredible fee. A fee that would cover my annual mortgage (if I had a mortgage). And that was to make one trade/year.
As far as "choice" goes, about which Jason Zweig is so concerned, Schwab offers a gazillion ways to invest, including competitive money market accounts. And Schwab has so many non-Schwab partners, there is [practically] no limit on where/how to invest.
If one is only earning 0.3% in a "sweep" account at a brokerage (including Schwab) you are doing it all wrong.
Yes, I'm closing that bank account and moving it to Schwab.