09
Mar 10

Current fastest mile

Alright just out of interest I wanted to know what the current fastest Mile time ever recorded is….this is kind of unbelievable. 

The current world record in the mile is 3 minutes 43.13 seconds, set by Hicham El Guerrouj of Morocco on July 7, 1999.

If you have ever attempted to run the mile the thought of doing it in 3:43 is hard to fathom.  I think I have done a 5:44 as my quickest recorded.  I have to mention that I did feel as though my heart may stop at the conclusion of that run and I was racing a good friend of mine that I do not like to lose to at the time.  I can’t imagine the pace needed for 3:43.

4 minutes may not be achievable for me at this time but atleast I know it is possible thanks to Roger Bannister.

Posted via email from Paul Larmand | Financial Advisor


09
Mar 10

Impossible is Nothing!

I had an opportunity to be in on a session with John Kanary yesterday.  John is a phenomenal presenter and personal development coach that works with people to achieve their goals.  I am currently involved in a program with John working on reaching my own potential and growing my business and overall personal skills.  John shared this quote during his presentation yesterday and it really stuck with me.  I realize it is a little cliché as there are commercials etc. using this “Impossible is Nothing” slogan.  The thing that hit home with me was that John  shared the story of Roger Bannister breaking the 4 minute mile for the first time in 1955.  When Roger was preparing to break the record there were doctors telling the media that is was impossible to do and that he would have a heart attack attempting this.  At that time Roger was quoted telling the media that he was going to break the 4 minute mark on that very day.  He made the choice to do this and was not going to allow anyone to push him off course.  We know today that this is possible and there are thousands of other such situations where individuals made a decision to do something and would not let others tell them they could not.  Think of the things that even today we view as impossible that will eventually be realized.

Here is the quote. 

Impossible is just a big word thrown around by small men who find it easier to live in the world they’ve been given, than to explore the power they have to change it.  Impossible is not a fact.  It’s an opinion.  Impossible is not a declaration.  It’s a dare.  Impossible is potential.  Impossible is temporary.  Impossible is nothing.

Have a great day.

Posted via email from Paul Larmand | Financial Advisor


05
Mar 10

RDSP changes presented in 2010 Federal Budget

Check out this information on RDSPs.  I have had a number of conversations with people in regards to RDSPs and their applicability.  Some good information below:

Registered Disability Savings Plan changes

A Registered Disability Savings Plan (RDSP) allows families and friends to save for the long-term financial security of a person with a severe disability.  Where an RDSP has been established for an eligible beneficiary and their family meets certain income tests, the government may contribute Canada Disability Savings Bonds (CDSBs) of up to $1,000 annually ($20,000 lifetime).  Where eligible contributions are made, the government may also contribute Canada Disability Saving Grants (CDSGs) of up to $3,500 annually ($70,000 lifetime) to the plan. 

CDSG and CDSB room will now carry forward – Currently, if a contribution is not made or an RDSP is not established during a year of eligibility, the CDSG and CDSB “room” for that year is lost.  The Budget proposes to allow CDSG room and CDSB room to carry forward for up to 10 years.  The amount of the CDSG and CDSB that will be awarded in any given year will be based on the family income during each of the prior 10 years (but not before 2008, the year RDSPs became available).  There is no limit on the CDSB amount that can carry forward, but CDSG will only be paid on unused entitlements up to an annual maximum of $10,500.  The carry forward will be available starting in 2011.

Rollovers from RRSPs/RRIFs to RDSPs – Currently, upon an individual’s death, if their RRSP/RRIF proceeds are payable to the individual’s financially dependent infirm child or grandchild, they can be transferred to that child or grandchild’s own RRSP/RRIF on a tax-deferred basis.  The Budget proposes to extend these rollover provisions to include transfers to the child or grandchild’s RDSP.  The amount transferred to the RDSP would count against the RSDP beneficiary’s lifetime $200,000 contribution limit, but these “rollover contributions” would not be eligible to receive the CDSG and would be taxable when withdrawn.  These measures will be effective for deaths occurring on or after March 4, 2010.  Special transitional rules will apply for deaths that occurred after 2007 (when RDSPs became available) and before 2011, effectively allowing the proposed measure to apply as of January 1, 2008.  To allow time for financial institutions and the government to adjust their RDSP systems, RDSP contributions benefiting from the proposed RRSP/RRIF rollover measures cannot be made before July, 2011

Posted via email from Paul Larmand | Financial Advisor


03
Mar 10

Market commentary…how far have we come from last March?

I found this market commentary and thought it was worth sharing.  We are approaching the one year anniversary of the “bottom” we found on March 8th 2009.  It is interesting to note the growth we have seen since that time and yet there still is a sense of doubt from many investors.  I wonder if this last market correction or hiccup has forever changed our perspective, or is it merely the proximity to the dip.  Will the outlook from investors as a whole be different in another years time when we are a full two years out from that “bottom”? 

Check out the commentary below, it is interesting information.

The S&P/TSX composite index rose today for the second straight session and, in the process, moved above December 31, 2009 levels. Historical market analysis shows that after rapid market advances such as the one experienced since March, 2009 markets typically enter a consolidation phase. Further volatility is possible as an economic recovery is not an express route; there tends to be lots of stops along the way.

Today’s increase also means that the TSX has risen more than 56% since the record low experienced in March, 2009.

Investor success continues to be determined by an ability to maintain a long-term perspective and keep an eye on the big picture despite market moves and economic news.

Posted via email from Paul Larmand | Financial Advisor


26
Feb 10

I’m back!

"He that is of the opinion money will do everything may well be suspected of doing everything for money."
– Benjamin Franklin

I have been a little busy with the RSP deadline fast approaching and my daily blog has become more like a weekly blog.  I was doing great getting information out on virtually a daily basis for about the first month of the year….this was one of my New Year’s Resolutions….to blog each day. 

So I am making a pact to get back on the blogging train and hopefully continue to put out some insightful information. 

I thought the quote at the top of this blog shed some light on why I have been a little lazy with the blogs. 

Posted via email from Paul Larmand | Financial Advisor


17
Feb 10

Mortgage Changes

I think I called this….well I guess the writing was on the wall. 

Although this may pose problems for those individuals that were considering buying a first time home or an income property it should help curb the growing concern with interest rates.  I am not suggesting that this is the cure all as the Bank of Canada will surely be raising interest rates as soon as possible but this should help.

Posted via email from Paul Larmand | Financial Advisor


11
Feb 10

Changes to the mortgage system may be coming…

Here is an interesting article from the Globe and Mail www.globeandmail.com that is giving some information that I have seen and blogged about on a few occasions.  The housing market is presenting as though it is strong, this is in large part due to the lowest interest rates that we may ever see again.  It is a given that these low interest rates are making mortgages that they would never have been able to afford become affordable.  The good thing is that we have rules in place and as the article states these rules may be tightened up to ensure that lending is not taking place that is going to put our economy in another precarious position. 

I had a conversation with a friend recently about a mutual friend from Florida.  This friend from the South purchased a $500,000 home before the housing market in the States (Florida in particular) was hammered with foreclosures and his home has since depreciated in value to the $300,000 mark.  At this stage this individual has claimed bankruptcy and is now in a position where he is no longer paying his mortgage or property taxes…..the crazy thing is that he is not alone.  He has taken the bankruptcy route as the best case scenario since there is no way out of the accumulated debt.

Luckily our overall housing market in Canada has greater protection through the lending guidelines we have in place. 

I thought this was an interesting read and something that is going to affect many of us in the next year when interest rates begin to climb. 

Ottawa weighs stricter mortgage rules Under pressure from major banks, Flaherty considers tougher regulations to govern how mortgage borrowers are evaluated Tara Perkins and Boyd Erman

Thursday, February 11, 2010

Ottawa is considering new rules that would force banks to use tougher criteria to evaluate mortgage borrowers, a move to ensure that consumers aren’t taking on more debt than they can handle when they buy a home. The key proposal under discussion would see the creation of new conditions the banks would have to follow when determining whether a customer can afford a mortgage, according to sources. Those rules would require banks to consider whether a person who takes out a variable-rate mortgage on a home can continue to make the payments if interest rates were to go up significantly.

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty is under pressure from a number of experts, including executives of major Canadian banks, to take action in the face of surprising strength in the country’s housing market, which shows no signs of letting up. The fear is that many of the borrowers who are buying homes because of unusually low mortgage rates will struggle with their monthly payments when interest rates rise. That could have a dampening effect on the broader economy by prompting consumers to cut back their spending as they direct all their money toward their mortgages.

·        

Senior bankers have privately urged government officials to increase the minimum down payment on homes from 5 per cent, or shorten the maximum time over which borrowers can spread out their payments, which is currently 35 years.

Mr. Flaherty and officials within the Finance Department and Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp. have been meeting with various players in the mortgage industry to consider options.

But Ottawa does not believe that there is a housing bubble at the moment and, having done some analysis to determine the impact that higher down payments and shorter amortizations would have, the Finance Minister believes that such moves would take too much heat out of the market and damage the economic recovery, according to sources.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/forums/globe-investor-1_economy_housing-bubble/

Other options that have been suggested include measures that would apply only to people with bad credit scores, or to people who are buying investment properties that they don’t intend to live in. But some banks argue that such rules would be difficult to enforce.

Instead, the idea now gaining traction is creating new rules that would govern how the banks evaluate mortgage borrowers. For example, Ottawa could say that in order to qualify for federally backed mortgage insurance, which most new mortgages require a borrower seeking a three-year variable-rate mortgage must be evaluated as if they are applying for a five-year fixed-rate mortgage.

If the three-year variable rate is 3 per cent and the five-year fixed rate is 5.5 per cent, such a rule would help ensure that the customer could lock in their rate and still afford their monthly payments when the Bank of Canada pulls the trigger on interest rate increases.

While some banks are already doing this behind the scenes, there is no standardization. Each bank has its own underwriting criteria and some are tougher than others. For instance, some banks ensure that their customers can afford their monthly mortgage payments if they were 100 basis points or 200 basis points higher. What Ottawa is considering doing is imposing standard minimum rules that banks would use to determine whether customers can service their mortgage debt. It’s not clear how stringent the rules would be, or whether they would only apply to variable-rate mortgages. This would be a much easier move, politically, for Ottawa than increasing down payments an idea prospective buyers are more likely to react negatively to.

Peter Aceto, the chief executive of ING Direct Canada, said that such a move would be a better solution than raising down payments or decreasing amortizations.

“This is a more surgical approach, as opposed to using a sledgehammer,” he said. “I think this is certainly a step in the right direction.”

ING has recently begun inserting a new line on customers’ mortgage commitment letters that tells them not only what their monthly mortgage payments are, but also what they will be when interest rates rise.

In an interview on the Business News Network yesterday, former Bank of Canada governor David Dodge said that “CMHC should be very careful about the terms and conditions on which they’re giving mortgage insurance.”

A lot of people are probably being induced into the mortgage market who won’t be able to carry their mortgage debts over the long term, he suggested.

Posted via email from Paul Larmand | Financial Advisor


08
Feb 10

Are you a CEO of something?

Here is a great article/interview with Mark Pincus founder of Zynga.  This is from the New York Times and I sourced it from www.crossfit.com

The question in the title got me thinking about my current position….I really like the OKR’s and the comparison to sports.  Coming from a sports background I also feel as though there are certain traits or qualities in an athlete that you know translates to their career.  I think back to some of the guys that I played basketball with over the years and those players that were hard workers and dedicated and all about “team” have all gone on to be successful.  I don’t think that is coincidence….

Check out the article.

Are You a C.E.O. of Something?

This interview with Mark Pincus, founder and chief executive of Zynga, a provider of online social games, was conducted and condensed by Adam Bryant.

Skip to next paragraph Q. What are the most important leadership lessons you’ve learned?

A. If I was going all the way back, it would be playing on my school’s soccer team, because we were on the same team together, most of us for eight or nine years, and we were at a really little school in Chicago that had no chance of really fielding any great athletes. But we ended up doing really well as a team, and we made it to the state quarterfinals, and it was all because of teamwork.

And the one thing I learned from that was that I actually could tell what someone would be like in business, based on how they played on the soccer field.

So even today when I play in Sunday-morning soccer games, I can literally spot the people who’d probably be good managers and good people to hire.

Q. Based on what?

A. One is reliability, the sense that they’re not going to let the team down, that they’re going to hold up their end of the bargain. And in soccer, especially if you play seven on seven, it’s more about whether you have seven guys or women who can pull their own weight rather than whether you have any stars.

So I’d rather be on a team that has no bad people than a team with stars. There are certain people who you just know are not going to make a mistake, even if the other guy’s faster than them, or whatever. They’re just reliable.

And are you a playmaker? There are people who don’t want to screw up, and so they just pass the ball right away. Then there are the ones who have this kind of intelligence, and they can make these great plays. These people seem to have high emotional intelligence. It’s not that they’re a star player, but they have decent skills, and they will get you the ball and then be where you’d expect to put it back to them. It’s like their head is really in the game.

Q. How has your leadership style evolved, given your experience running several companies?

A. You can manage 50 people through the strength of your personality and lack of sleep. You can touch them all in a week and make sure they’re all pointed in the right direction. By 150, it’s clear that that’s not going to scale, and you’ve got to find some way to keep everybody going in productive directions when you’re not in the room.

And that, to me, is a huge amount of what it means to manage. But I went to Harvard Business School and that never occurred to me the whole time. And I’d started a bunch of companies and never gotten to that understanding, even with one company I had that I did take up to over 200 people.

Q. So give me an example of what you did to change that.

A. I’d turn people into C.E.O.’s. One thing I did at my second company was to put white sticky sheets on the wall, and I put everyone’s name on one of the sheets, and I said, “By the end of the week, everybody needs to write what you’re C.E.O. of, and it needs to be something really meaningful.” And that way, everyone knows who’s C.E.O. of what and they know whom to ask instead of me. And it was really effective. People liked it. And there was nowhere to hide.

Q. So who were some of your new C.E.O.’s?

A. We had this really motivated, smart receptionist. She was young. We kept outgrowing our phone systems, and she kept coming back and saying, “Mark, we’ve got to buy a whole new phone system.” And I said: “I don’t want to hear about it. Just buy it. Go figure it out.” She spent a week or two meeting every vendor and figuring it out. She was so motivated by that.

I think that was a big lesson for me because what I realized was that if you give people really big jobs to the point that they’re scared, they have way more fun and they improve their game much faster. She ended up running our whole office.

Q. Did everybody want to be C.E.O. of something?

A. There are people who want the comfort and structure of a job where they’re given tasks and told what to do. I think it’s actually a minority of people. The majority of people don’t want that, but I’d say that the companies I’ve built are full of people with something to prove.

Q. But don’t most people have something to prove?

A. Some more than others. I keep my eye out for someone who has achieved a lot, so they’ve been a great athlete or on a great team, but then something didn’t go quite right, and they’re still very hungry and want to be C.E.O. of something. I like to bet on people, especially those who have taken risks and failed in some way, because they have more real-world experience. And they’re humble.

Skip to next paragraph

I also like to hire people into one position below where they ought to be, because only a certain kind of person will do that — somebody who is pretty humble and somebody who’s very confident.

This is another thing I really, really value: being a true meritocracy. The only way people will have the trust to give their all to their job is if they feel like their contribution is recognized and valued. And if they see somebody else higher above them just because of a good résumé, or they see somebody else promoted who they don’t think deserves it, you’re done.

My approach is that you have to earn the respect of people you work with. And so, if you come in and you start bossing people around and they don’t want to work with you, they won’t. In our company, if you want to switch teams, you can. In hiring, it’s also a sign of a great manager when you tell me that there’s all these people who want to come with you, or when you join us and we find other people are all sending us their résumés because you’re here.

Q. What else is unusual about how you run the company?

A. John Doerr [the venture capitalist] sold me on this idea of O.K.R.’s, which stands for objectives and key results. It was developed at Intel and used at Google, and the idea is that the whole company and every group has one objective and three measurable key results, and if you achieve two of the three, you achieve your overall objective, and if you achieve all three, you’ve really killed it.

We put the whole company on that, so everyone knows their O.K.R.’s. And that is a good, simple organizing principle that keeps people focused on the three things that matter — not the 10.

Then I ask everybody to write down on Sunday night or Monday morning what are your three priorities for the week, and then on Friday see how you did against them. It’s the only way people can stay focused and not burn out. And if I look at your road map and you have 10 priorities for you and your team, you probably don’t know which of the three matter, and probably none of the 10 are right.

I can look at everyone’s piece of paper, and their road map shows every item you were going to do and your predicted results and actual results, and then the results are in red if you missed them, yellow if they’re close and green if you passed them. I think road maps are a great principle just for managing your life. It keeps everybody focused, and it lets me know what trains are on or off the tracks.

Q. What has surprised you most after you really started focusing on leadership and management?

A. The most general thing is it surprised me how rewarding it is to focus on management and being a C.E.O. And how much you get back from places where you weren’t expecting it. I’m surprised how much people at the far reaches of the organization are touched by it, and that touches me. I’ve been surprised how much they can achieve without me being involved. That’s been awesome.

Posted via email from Paul Larmand | Financial Advisor


02
Feb 10

Renting vs. Owning

I just received this chart from a mortgage specialist and thought it was worth sharing.  The objective is to show people that with interest rates being at an all-time low the opportunity to buy a home is presenting itself to individuals and families that may not have had the chance previously.  Or perhaps you were thinking about buying an income property and previously couldn’t afford the monthly mortgage due to higher rates.  I currently have an income property.  This property is a duplex and is great when both units are rented.  At the moment one of these units is empty and there are not the same number of individuals looking to rent…..likely due to the low interest rates available.  At the very low interest rates this income property is great….the problem arises when interest rates increase and the roof needs to be replaced and the washer and dryer stop working etc. etc. etc.  More and more I am feeling that the landlord world is not for me!

Check out the table below if you are considering buying vs renting.  Understand that there are many hidden costs to becoming a home owner that you do not have to deal with while renting. 

Example One – $100,000 Mortgage

At 4% the P&I payment is $526.03

At 5% the P&I payment is $581.61

At 6% the P&I payment is $639.81

Example Two – $150,000 Mortgage

At 4% the P&I payment is $789.04

At 5% the P&I payment is $872.41

At 6% the P&I payment is $959.71

Example Three – $200,000 Mortgage

At 4% the P&I payment is $1052.05

At 5% the P&I payment is $1163.21

At 6% the P&I payment is $1279.62

Posted via email from Paul Larmand | Financial Advisor


02
Feb 10

First Time Home Buyers Plan…

Check out the information piece below on the First Time Home Buyers Plan.  For those individuals looking to buy their first home with some RRSP savings, this is a great way to access some interest free money!  I have been running into a number of individuals that have taken advantage of the FTHB Plan but did not fully grasp what they were getting into.  The key is that you have to make those annual contributions back into the plan for 1/15th the borrowed amount.  The amount you are able to access increased to $25,000 this year which is great.  If utilized properly this strategy can make a big difference in the amount of money needed to be borrowed…..for some it is the difference between being able to afford the downpayment for their first home. 

The Federal Government’s HOME BUYERS PLAN introduced in February 1992 allows first time buyers to access their RRSP savings for use towards a down payment on a home.  If you have not owned a home during the past 5 years, you qualify as a first time buyer.  Homebuyers are allowed to use up to

 $ 25,000 of their RRSP funds (couples a combined $ 50,000) for use on a downpayment on either a new or existing home.  Monies need to be in the plan for only 90 days.

Many first time buyers have taken advantage of the program.  No taxes are incurred on RRSP funds withdrawn under the Home Buyers Plan – provided that the funds are paid back to the RRSP on schedule (in installments over a 15 year period).  If payments are not made as scheduled, the unpaid amount is treated as taxable income in that year.  Moreover, the missed amount cannot be put back into an RRSP at any point in the future.  Failure to make a payment, therefore, not only incurs taxes, at the participant’s marginal tax rate, on the missed amount, but income is also lost from the amount not being paid back into the RRSP, earning tax free interest.

Yet despite the obvious financial disadvantages of not paying back their RRSPs on schedule, many Home Buyers’ Plan participants are failing to do so.

The Home Buyers’ Plan CAN work to the financial advantage of first time buyers – but only if it is fully understood and used properly.  An analysis conducted by Clayton Research in 1992 for the Canadian Home Builders’ Association showed that this means using the RRSP funds to reduce the size of the initial mortgage (and not to purchase a more expensive home than they could have otherwise afforded).Using the savings on a smaller mortgage to pay down the mortgage faster and/or to contribute more to an RRSP (but not to increase current consumption).  And it certainly means making sure that the RRSP funds are repaid as required or in a lump sum.  

Posted via email from Paul Larmand | Financial Advisor