Investment Losses

James Kobzeff asked:


cle covers six dynamite real estate investing tips intended to help anyone just getting started in real estate investing to successfully launch and hit the ground running with real estate investment property.

1. Develop the Correct Attitude

To stand a chance of succeeding at real estate investing, foremost, you must understand that real estate investment is a business, and you will become the CEO of that business.

As your first order of business, then, it’s crucial to develop the correct mind-set about investment real estate and be able to make this distinction between buying a home and investing in real estate:

“You buy a home to live and raise a family; you buy real estate investment property to pay for the home, live comfortably, and raise your family in style”

As one very successful real estate investor said, “Only women are beautiful, what are the numbers?” In other words, you will not succeed at real estate investing until you acknowledge that it’s not curb appeal, amenities, floor plan, or neighborhood that should turn you on or off to the investment opportunity; what counts most is the property’s financial performance.

2. Develop Meaningful Objectives

A meaningful set of (realistic) objectives that frames your investment strategy is one of the most important elements of successful investing. Yes, we may all desire to make millions of dollars from real estate investing, but fantasy is not the same as expressing specific goals and a method on how to achieve it.

Here are some suggestions:

How much cash are you willing to invest comfortably? What rate of return are you hoping to achieve by making the investment in real estate? Are you expecting instant cash flow, looking to make your money when the property is resold, or merely looking to achieve tax shelter benefits? How long are you planning to hold the property before you dispose of it? What amount of your own effort can you afford to contribute to the day-to-day operation of running the property? What net worth are you hoping investing will help you to achieve, and by when would you like to achieve it? What type of income property do you feel most comfortable owning, residential or commercial, or does it matter?

3. Develop Market Research

If you’re new to real estate investing, you undoubtedly know little about investment real estate in your local market. So, do market research to learn as much as you can about income property values, rents, and occupancy rates in your area. The better prepared you are, the more likely you are to recognize a good (or bad) deal when you see it.

Here are some good resources:

(a) The local newspaper, (b) A local appraiser, (c) The county tax assessor, (d) A qualified local real estate professional, (e) A local property management company

4. Run the Numbers

I can’t stress enough the importance of running the property’s cash flow, rates of return, and profitability numbers. Remember, real estate investing is a business, and as the CEO of your investment enterprise, you’ve got to know what you’re buying, especially if you’re trying to determine which of several investment opportunities would be the most profitable.

You have two options:

(a) Invest in real estate investment software. This will enable you to discover for yourself the investment property’s cash flow and rates of return, and create your own analysis reports. Plus, by running the numbers yourself, you gain a broader understanding of real estate investing nuances, and in turn might be less likely to fall victim to the wiles of someone with little concern about how you spend your money.

(b) At the very least, work with a real estate professional that has invested in real estate investment software and can calculate, present, and discuss the property’s financial data with you.

5. Develop a Relationship with a Qualified Real Estate Professional

Working with a qualified real estate professional is a great way for beginners to get started with rental property investing because an astute professional can acquaint you with local market conditions, recommend a property that meets your investing objectives, and discuss strengths and weaknesses about specific property performance.

Here’s a warning, however: Work with a real estate person who understands investment real estate.

Be sure the agent has a firm grip on key financial measures inherent to real estate investing, knows how to measure profitability and rate of return, has the ability to present the data you need to make wise investment decisions, and, most importantly, shows a genuine interest in how you spend your money. The last thing you want to do is to get involved with a real estate agent that would throw you under the bus just to make a commission.

Here’s a good way to interview for an agent. Ask them for the property’s cap rate and then request an APOD. If their response (even to these basics) is to stand there looking at you like a deer into the headlights of a car, find another agent.

6. Start Investing

Hopefully, this has given you some insight into real estate investing, highlighted a few things to make you a more prudent real estate investor, and perhaps alerted you to a couple of things that should be avoided.

Okay, that does it for us, now it’s time for you to get started. Here’s to your success.



AMOS

Michelle Kour asked:


Why invest and why take out an investment loan?

People’s needs for investment are as varied as the investment vehicles themselves. Some want to own their home outright, pay the kids’ university fees, or take world trips; while others want to start their own business or retire on a comfortable income.

The reality for most of us is that we won’t be able to afford these things on our salary alone (unless you’re fortunate enough to be the CEO of a major corporation). The key to successful investment is to leverage, that is, to use an investment loan to improve your capacity and increase your return.

Why invest in property?

Investing in property is the safest way to invest, but we also believe in a diversified portfolio to minimise risk. Similarly, Australians have trusted investment property as their favoured investment vehicle for generations – and with good reason.

We recognise the cycles, the incredible advantage that appropriate leverage (making capital gains from borrowed funds) offers, the benefits of rent return and taxation relief in servicing those borrowings, and the significant growth achievable over time. It is not unusual for ordinary investors to accumulate four or more properties over 10 years – and the financial flexibility and cash flow outcomes can be exceptional, giving you piece of mind.

Property allows you to leverage. With only $20 000 cash invested (plus around $10 000 upfront costs) it is possible to invest in a $200,000 property, making your earning potential greater.

Can you afford to invest in property?

The question should really be, “can you afford NOT to invest”, whether it be in investment property or some other form of investment? While everyone should be investing to give them more options in life, property investment may not be suited to everyone. Most people on a standard wage can service an investment loan. After all, the investment loan interest is first met by any rental income you generate. As a general rule there will only be a small shortfall on the interest on your investment loan. Traditionally the investment loan shortfall, as well as other costs relating to your investment property would be met by your personal income. Many investors however include a capitalising line of credit in their investment loan package so that they can draw on this to meet any shortfall costs as opposed to paying same from their personal income. Instead, they use as much of their personal income as possible, not to pay any shortfall interest on the investment loan but to make additional repayments to their home loan. This way their home loan is paid off much more quickly.

With your investment loan you should also remember that negative gearing does deliver some relief to servicing your investment loan on the way through. While most investors will wait until the end of the financial year to claim their tax deductible shortfall you can in effect claim the investment loan shortfall on a monthly basis. Check out the ATO website on deductibility of interest on investment loans.

What history can tell you about property

History shows us that all property whether it be investment or owner occupied doubles in value every 7 to 12 years. Each property market is cyclic, that is, it goes through times of fast growth followed by little or no growth. When one market eg Sydney is in strong growth, other markets eg Brisbane will be in a little or no growth phase. The markets are referred to as being counter cyclic – when one is doing well, another is doing not so well.

This means for example that when the Sydney’s growth slows, Melbourne’s picks up followed by Brisbane. This is the reason we emphasise the importance of investment property as a mid to long term investment. The key however is to identify the markets with the highest probability of short to medium growth and lowest probability of downside risk. This enables you to build equity faster and therefore add to your investment property portfolio.

It also means that there are always new opportunities for investment property as there are always markets somewhere which are experiencing their growth phase. Choosing investment properties in growth markets assists in developing well-balanced, diversified portfolios.

Property in the future

In the past all property was good investment property, and a lot of people did very well out of it. While those days are gone, there are still exceptional opportunities for investors who understand the current market influences such how our population is changing, how family size is changing, how types of employment are changing, and how the economy is changing and what influences it.

So why wait? Research property – buy with your head not your heart – be an informed purchaser and most importantly make sure your investment loan is also working for you.



JOSEPH

Franco asked:


I accept sums of minimum USD2000 or GBP1000 for investment in my private stock market business scheme.
Profits last 3 years: 23%, 13.5% and 20.5%
Charge: 5% annually if in profit and no charge if no profit

Not suitable or those seeking a quick buck and even quicker loss.
If interested please contact me privately.

GLEN

scrabble_word_game asked:


We can’t win everytime. Everyone stumbles upon a hurdle and not all can make it across. How do you console yourself and how do you accept losses as part of life?

I mean for even everyday stuff like losing a sporting event, while playing cards with the family or at the casino, stock market investments etc.

LEMUEL

NobleTrading asked:


Balanced investment strategy is perhaps the most followed and successful investment strategy for portfolio management. Its primary aim is to keep a balance between investment risk and return. A balanced investment strategy combines the merit of aggressive and defensive investing strategies.

Aggressive investment strategy involves investing in high return high risk investments with the sole purpose of maximizing return from investments. It involves allocating major portion of portfolio capital to invest in equities, equity based funds and highly volatile markets. Investors following aggressive investment strategy often look for comparatively short-term profiting and wish to invest more in growth stocks, and small caps and mid cap stocks. Advantages of aggressive investing include quick profit, high return over investment and no need of large portfolio capital. It can work really well for experienced investors and investors who are very strict in their money management. Disadvantages include high risk, high volatility in total portfolio value and no surety of profit. It less supports novice investors and investor looking for monthly earnings or living costs.

Defensive investment strategy is just opposite of aggressive investment; it’s purpose is to preserve the capital and ensure some return from investments. It involves investing in low profit low risk investments like bonds, money market funds, treasury notes, and equities with minimum price volatility and good dividends. Defensive investors look for long-term profits and/or monthly earnings. Advantages of defensive investment strategy include reduced risk, predictable income, better investment planning and diversification of portfolio. This strategy mainly suits beginners. Disadvantages include low return from investments and requirement of high capital investments.

In balanced investment strategy, the investor tries to keep a balance between his aggressive and defensive behaviors. It involves balancing of both return and risk by diversifying investments in both high return high risk and low return low risk investments. Balanced investors often follow a portfolio capital allocation rule telling how much to invest in equities and bonds and how much to invest in treasury notes, precious metals and funds. Usually one portion of portfolio is actively managed and other portion is left to grow automatically. Balanced investment strategy can be slightly aggressive or slightly defensive with respect to investments made.

The greatest advantage of balanced investment strategy is the diversification of portfolio and hedging against high total portfolio value volatility. It is good for investors looking for medium-term (3 to 5 years) profits. Other advantages include flexibility in portfolio management, better results with better capital investments, (almost) predictable income and manageable portfolio risk. Balanced investment strategy support both beginners and experienced investors and can be an option for monthly earnings for living.



BLAKE

spencer asked:


In the years when Britain was colonising, why did the British trade with China end? It was a monopoly, and the end of trade led to huge losses for the Straits merchants - and thus they then get the British to intervene into the Malay states for new fields of investment and markets. But why did the Britain-China trade end?

GARTH

mission_viejo_california asked:


Would it be wise for the government to bail out those stupid people that took advantage of sub prime loans? I believe you are responsible for your own choices and you should pay the price for your decisions
Last Friday the U.S. Federal Reserve cut the rate at which it makes direct loans to banks, sending a signal to Wall Street that it is aware of the credit contraction that has hit global financial markets. At the same time, the Fed wisely refrained from lowering its target federal-funds rate, through which it controls monetary policy, although Fed officials have indicated that a cut could be in the offing if markets don’t stabilize soon. The Bush administration has also demonstrated admirable restraint, resisting calls to let troubled mortgage buyers Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac charge into the market and increase their holdings.

Demagogic politicians (and frantic investors) have shown less self-control, and the inevitable pressure to “do something” is bound to intensify. The administration and the Fed should resist this pressure. For one thing, the current crisis is unlikely to affect the economy in any significant way. As that becomes clearer, the hysteria will subside. For another, it is necessary that those lenders, borrowers, and investors who created the sub-prime mortgage mess bear its consequences.

What we are seeing now is a necessary market correction. Several years of poor lending and borrowing decisions in the sub-prime mortgage market have resulted in a large increase in the number of foreclosures this year. Accordingly, Wall Street is reevaluating the credit quality of billions of dollars worth of mortgage-backed securities. Having found many to be overvalued, the market is making the necessary adjustments:

Lenders are making fewer risky loans. Some of the biggest, such as Countrywide Financial, have tapped large lines of credit to cover short-term borrowing needs, announced layoffs, and instituted other cost-cutting measures.

A few hedge funds have imploded, and a few more are in deep trouble. This is because these lightly regulated funds typically leverage their bets with billions in borrowed money, compounding their losses when risky investments — such as sub-prime mortgage debt — turn sour.

Some of Wall Street’s biggest credit-ratings firms have taken a well-deserved hit in the press for giving many securities backed by sub-prime mortgage debt higher ratings than they actually deserved. The next chapter for them could be investigations into whether they fraudulently manipulated their valuations.

Several members of Congress and some ’08 Democratic candidates have argued that these market adjustments are not enough and that we need additional layers of regulation. Back in February, when the crisis began in earnest, John Edwards attacked “predatory” lending practices and proposed a new government agency to regulate mortgage lenders (in addition to the five that already exist). Of course, that was before the Wall Street Journal revealed that a hedge fund Edwards invested in and worked for had ties to sub-prime lenders that had foreclosed on Hurricane Katrina victims.

In fact, sub-prime lending is not an unmitigated evil. The advent of sub-prime lending brought about a fairly dramatic increase in U.S. home ownership, which for decades hovered around 64 percent until shooting up to 69 percent between 1994 and 2004. To be sure, unscrupulous players entered the market as sub-prime lending became more profitable, and some of them hid the true cost of risky loans from naïve borrowers. But borrowers were often complicit, wildly overstating their incomes to qualify for loans they could not afford. The New York Times reported in March that these “liar loans accounted for 40 percent of the sub-prime mortgage issuance last year, up from 25 percent in 2001.”

Hillary Clinton has proposed a $1 billion federal bailout to help such borrowers avoid foreclosure. And her fellow New York senator, Chuck Schumer, has joined her in calling for a wider role for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in stabilizing the mortgage markets. The Bush administration has correctly decided not to remove the limits on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that were put into place last year when investigators discovered that both institutions had engaged in significant accounting irregularities.

Fannie Mae officials argue that they can provide badly needed liquidity to the mortgage market. But as economist Brian Wesbury pointed out Monday, liquidity is not the real issue. The issue is a lack of information — no one seems to know how much these mortgages are really worth. The best thing the government can do is stay out of the way while the market reprices these securities.
That goes for the Fed, too. The Fed has hinted that it might cut the federal-funds rate if the market continues to slide. In the esoteric world of Fed policy, where words can affect the markets as much as action, this was the right thing to say. But it wouldn’t be the right thing to do. Fed chairman Ben Bernanke’s shrewd move to cut the discount rate instead of the more consequential federal-funds rate calmed panicky investors without interfering with the market adjustment already underway. By cutting only the rate that the Fed charges on its own loans, Bernanke offered a lifeline to big institutions in dire financial straits, and bought more time for the market to correct itself without a change in monetary policy.

Demagogues in Congress and on the campaign trail should learn a lesson here. Lenders, hedge funds, ratings firms, and, yes, foolhardy borrowers are paying a price for their excesses. Let’s not compound their folly by enacting a poorly thought-out policy.

ROSCOE

Sasha asked:


If your only source of income is stock investments but had a net realized loss for 07?

Anything negative would be below the minimum amount to report taxes am I correct? Any feedback would be appreciated.

MOHAMMAD

J.S. Kim asked:


Recently, there was an article on CNNMoney that spoke about the “secrets” of the elite rich in the United States. In turn, several articles were written about this article, including one that stated that the richest of Americans “built their wealth with diversification, wealth preservation and strategic growth.” That is a ridiculous statement in itself because two of those strategies, diversification and preservation don’t help build wealth. Perhaps the richest of Americans use these two strategies to maintain an even keel AFTER they have accumulated great wealth, but certainly they didn’t use them during the accumulation phase. According to this article, a survey of Northern Trust uncovered that the “richest Americans do not heavily rely on high-risk investment vehicles like hedge funds to make money, but are moderate risk takers who put more than half of their asset allocation into U.S. stocks and cash.”

Again, just as former hedge fund manager and multi-millionaire Jim Cramer said that he used certain financial journalists, including ones employed by the Wall Street Journal, as pawns to spread misinformation far and wide to benefit himself, again this is an example of investment institutions using the media as pawns to spread their myths to keep the masses of retail investors ignorant. The CNNMoney article made it appear that the richest of Americans built their wealth by being conservative and slowly growing their money over time. That’s an oxymoron right there. To state that the rich became rich by slowly growing their money over time. Well, if they are slowly growing their money and becoming even richer, then this implies that they were rich to begin with. So how did they accumulate wealth? Surely not by “slowly growing” their money.

Sure, some of the “richest Americans do not heavily rely on high-risk investments” because they ARE ALREADY EXTREMELY RICH. The majority of ultra-rich do NOT build their fortunes by speculating on high-risk investments as is commonly believed. Often they build fortunes utilizing volatile assets and investments but that does NOT mean they were engaging in risky behavior. Many times, investing in a hedge fund can be much riskier than investing in some of the assets that your investment firm will tell you is “risky”. But investment firms will gladly place a portion of your money in hedge funds because the fees they earn from hedge funds are so high even as they advise you not to put your money in a much less risky investment with much greater earning potential. And THIS IS THE SECRET that investment firms never tell you.

Volatile assets that often can be used to build great wealth are NOT RISKY if they are purchased at entry points that are extremely favorable and provide a low-risk point of entry. 99% of investors don’t understand what high-risk investments truly are because they have been misinformed by their advisors and their firms for the past half of a century. Purchasing volatile assets at low risk-high reward entry points greatly mitigates and neutralizes the great majority of risk of volatile assets. If you don’t understand this concept then you need to.

Many millionaires that are wealthy but that could be extremely wealthy fail to build enormous wealth because investment and financial institutions mislead them about certain investment opportunities and describe them as complex and risky and are able to convince their clients of this belief because they never properly explain risk-reward scenarios to their clients. However, those investors that are extremely wealthy are the rare breed that understand this concept. If investors had a choice between allocating $1,000,000 in a historically volatile Investment A that has a 78% chance of returning a 250% gain versus an Investment B that has a 95% chance of earning 9%, most investors would choose Investment A.

However, because Investment A may exhibit 50% more volatility than Investment B, the great majority of advisors would steer their client away from the former investment into the latter one. In fact, this is exactly what even “prestigious” firms that cater to ultra high net-worth clients do because they allow misinformed, uneducated investors dictate the rules of engagement to them, and they would much rather appease such powerful, important people with slow,minimal gains rather than empower and enlighten them and boost their returns like never before. They would choose to steer them away because they present the investment opportunities incorrectly, merely telling their client that while they could earn 350% from Investment A there was also a very realistic probability that they could lose $300,000, and that shooting for the slow but steady $90,000 a year is much better for them.

If you are thinking to yourself, “That makes absolutely no sense?” Why would firms not earn 20% a year for their clients if they could instead of 8% a year? The answer is because the overwhelming majority of investment firms, no matter how prestigious their brand, are merely highly glorified sales machines. They fail to convince clients to invest in phenomenal investment opportunities that sometimes arise like Investment A because in order for Investment A to be a moderate risk, very high reward investment, it must be entered at a low risk entry point so that the probability of being down $300,000 at any give time would be reduced from perhaps 50% to 20%.

And that even if their timing is not optimal, then a firm must educate the client that as long as they don’t panic when they are down, the odds are still extremely high that they will earn a 250% or better gain. However, the greatest factor that determines why firms will not seek this strategy is time. Engaging in much better strategies such as these for their clients would take massive amounts of time in client education and enough time in research that the amount of assets gathered would take a serious hit.

So because it is not in a firm’s interest to engage in activities that maximize portfolio returns (unless it is their own institutional portfolio), instead, we have Chief Investment Officers at top investment firms making statements like, “”Generally they [the richest of Americans] want to see prudently managed growth without a lot of surprises, which is why we emphasize diversification.” Again, this is a sales & marketing campaign statement, not an aboveboard statement about how to make money for clients.

If clients are uncomfortable with strategies that would actually built great wealth for them instead of producing mediocre or subpar returns, their discomfort only originates from the fact that the largest investment firms have been deceiving their clients, just as Jim Cramer had deceived the thundering sheep herd for years, about the realities of building wealth. This discomfort originates solely from the fact that he or she has been kept in the dark for so long. Thus, we have a misinformation-driven cauldron of investors making bad investment decisions that exists today. In 2007, you’ll still find Chief Investment Officers of very well known firms making ridiculous statement that investors need to invest at least 50% of their stock portfolio in U.S. stocks if they wish to grow their portfolios exponentially.

How are they going to grow their portfolios exponentially with more than half of their stocks in a stock market (the U.S.) that has NEVER been the best performing market in the past 25 years (even among developed stock markets)? How will they grow their portfolios exponentially by buying stocks in market that trades in what is quite possibly the worst currency on earth among developed markets (the U.S. dollar)? Yes I know that when the U.S. dollar shows a brief spike in strength as is likely to happen soon (I’m writing this article in April, 2007), that many people will question what I am saying, but this is only again because they are victims to the mass deception mind-games of the investment industry. I suppose if planning to earn better than subpar returns in your stock portfolio is engaging in risky behavior as Chief Investment Officers of various firms claim, then yes, I whole-heartedly endorse engaging in risky behavior.

And because so many people, yes, even those considered quite wealthy, fall victim to the preaching of investment industry demagogues, there is a second mistake that many rich investors will soon make.

Another survey of wealthy U.S. investors uncovered that a large percentage of investors with investment assets of over a million do not employ any type of investment advisor but plan to do so soon giving the increasingly gloomy nature of the U.S. stock markets. To that, this is what I have to say. Making money in difficult markets is ten times more difficult than making money in bull markets. If investors believe that it will be increasingly more difficult to make money in U.S. stock markets, but yet top investment firms in the U.S. continue to preach that more than half of your portfolio should be in U.S. stocks (mostly to cover their respective firm’s inadequate coverage of emerging markets), how is the hiring one of these men possibly going to improve these investors’ future performance outlook?

But there is an EXTREMELY important distinction to be made here. What I’ve written above applies to the behavior and mindset of some of the richest people in America, but not THE very richest people in America. The very richest people in America, those you might categorize as the world’s ultra-rich, possess a very different mindset and behavior set than those that are just rich. The ultra-rich have positioned their portfolios extremely differently from how the rich people discussed above have positioned their portfolios. The reason why articles regarding their behavior and investment decisions are virtually non-existent is because they don’t grant interviews and they don’t want people to know what they are doing. But I’ve investigated what they are doing, and trust me, it is nothing remotely similar to the behavior of wealthy investors described by Northern Trust and other investment firms.

If you would like to find out why the ultra-rich always manage their own money or able to find the 1 in a million consultant truly capable of providing them the returns they desire, consult our resource of “101 Reasons Why Managing Your Own Money is the Only Way to Build Wealth.” Even if the ultra-wealthy have someone managing their money for them, the only way they were capable of finding this 1 in a million financial consultant was due to the fact that if they had to, they could manage their own money successfully as well. Only be first fully understanding the most successful investment strategies themselves could they identify an advisor capable of employing such strategies. However, a great majority of ultra-wealthy continue to handle and make their own investment decisions.



CRAIG

Ramapati Singhania asked:


These countries are often less regulated than the host country and are hence preferred by offshore investors. Offshore investment gives greater freedom to the investor and has the potential for much greater return on investments. Since there is a wide portfolio of investments on offer offshore investment companies play a vital role in conducting these affairs.

Offshore investments can be made in the form of hedge funds, offshore investment funds, overseas mutual funds, offshore investment bonds, offshore unit trusts, offshore property funds etc.

An offshore investment offers a high level of privacy and is sometimes is looked at suspiciously as offering a channel for investing illegally acquired wealth. However offshore investments shield legitimate, affluent individuals from the financial pressures and constraints faced by them in their home country.

In fact offshore investments managed by offshore investment companies are completely legal and are regulated by the jurisdictions of those countries where investments are made.

Investors who live away from their home country, those who want to maintain their financial privacy and those who want to protect their assets legally usually opt for offshore investments.

Other reasons for offshore investments are benefits from a reduction in taxes, opportunity to remain discrete in financial affairs (due to family arrangements), and to expand investments beyond the investor’s current jurisdiction, to achieve a better return on investment.

Offshore investment companies with their years of investment experience gained by working in offshore jurisdictions help both corporate and individual investors to protect their assets through market savvy investments, thereby enabling investors to attain maximum return on their overseas investments.

Offshore investments shields investments from capital gain taxation and augments assets through a confidential and secure investment that is not governed by the rules and regulations of the home country.

It is very essential to choose the right offshore investment service provider to ensure that good advice is being obtained and more crucially an excellent ROI is achieved. Offshore investment companies work closely with their clients so as to get a detailed understanding about their investment and financial objectives, which enables them to give the best possible offshore advice.

Offshore investment companies prepare well constructed balanced portfolio of investments for their investors so as to ensure success. They update the investment portfolio because financial markets adjust according to world economies and are prone to internal and currency fluctuations. They make assessments on investments after every six months along with a full financial analysis once every 12 months. This is essential to maintain the growth of the investment portfolio.

Investing offshore can be a very attractive option to an investor who wants to explore and invest in markets outside the home country by acquiring overseas private investments. The common perception that offshore investments can be very risky does not hold any truth. In fact offshore financial centers rely heavily on offshore capital and as such are very concerned about maintaining their reputations.



BEAU