While the old saying is “time flies”, it is particularly true for businesses. Business owners tend to be fixated on two to three month time periods. As a result, they can fail to see developments over longer periods of time.

After you’ve taken care of all your holiday gift purchases, you should have some down time in the last two weeks of the month. Business tends to slow down as people deal with the holidays, travel to see family and so on. This is the perfect time to go back and consider the business year. Specifically, you should focus on where your business was in January 2005. What were your goals at that time? Did you meet them during the year? If not, why? You will almost always be surprised when you realize how the business developed over the last year. This global view can give you a better perspective and evaluation of how things are going.

Business Strategy – 2006

After contemplating 2005, you should give consideration to what you want to accomplish and where you want to be by the end of 2006. Ask yourself the following:

1. What is a reasonable revenue increase for 2006 compared to 2005?

2. Are their products or services you should pursue?

3. Are their products or services you should drop?

4. If a strategy is underperforming, does it make objective sense to continue pursuing it or cut your losses?

5. What are your biggest frustrations and how can you deal with them?

6. Who are your most valued employees and have you taken a moment to thank them?

7. Who are your least valued employees and what should you do about it?

8. Which vendors or suppliers do great work for you and which don’t?

Many other questions will run through your mind. There are no wrong ones. What is important, however, is you write the goals and thoughts down and keep them somewhere private. Next December, you should pull them out and see how things are going.

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.

There are many similarities between the U.S. economy today and the U.S. economy of the early 1970s. I don’t need to over-elaborate on the details of the likeness of the two eras, because it’s actually the one distinct difference that is going to matter going forward.

First I would like to take a brief look into some of the similarities. In 1959 the U.S. entered the Vietnam War. The U.S. was not well versed in jungle war fare. The war dragged on with no end in sight while support from the home land was waning. The price tag, along with casualties, continued to pile up at a very uncomfortable pace. Quite similar to the war in Iraq today…

Being that taxes are a very unfavorable way to pay for war, monetary inflation began to run rampant until the U.S. was forced to sever any formal tie between the dollar and gold. There wasn’t anything fancy to this situation. It was simply a case where the monetary base had grown so dramatically that there was absolutely no way to back the currency by gold anymore.

The greatest gold bull market in history ensued. We saw gold soar from $50 /oz to $850 /oz before a man by the name of Paul Volcker stepped onto the scene as chairman of the Federal Reserve. More on Mr. Volcker in a second.

Let’s discuss the main difference between then and now. It is very simple: personal consumer savings. I’m sure you are very familiar with the analogy of guns and butter. Essentially there is a maximum amount of economic output that can occur at any time, and the allocations of the land and resources has to be determined between industrial out put, and agricultural output. Now it’s obviously not quite that simple, but you get the idea.

During the Vietnam War, the U.S. was producing large quantities of tanks, ammunitions, air planes, and all of the other goods that are essential in fighting a war. They then shipped these goods to the front, and this contributed, in part, to a trade surplus and domestic savings.

There was also a significant amount of private savings. In the 1970s, the notion of a negative consumer savings rate would have been laughed at, but times change. Also at this time, Americans didn’t use their homes as credit cards to buy that new car or boat.

Banks were flush with the consumers’ savings, and because of this, they didn’t much have to worry about capital ratios like they do in today’s economy. They were able to make loans for investment spending, residential housing, and just about everything in between. When the war ended, the GIs came home and began doing just that; taking out loans and spending some of their savings.

At this time, monetary inflation as a result of the war and the large amount of savings sloshing around in these banks started creeping into the prices of tangible goods such as metals, food, and energy. Social Security benefits were rising at an annual pace of near 10%. The system, much like today, was flush with liquidity. The difference today is the price at which the money was loaned.

In 1979, Paul Volcker stepped in as chairman of the Federal Reserve. He realized one important thing, and that was that we needed to keep faith in the U.S. dollar or the Federal Reserve, along with the fractional banking system of the United States, would collapse. Volcker was not necessarily a champion of free markets. His goal was never to purge the system of excess liquidity, but raising rates to 20% brings that about as an unintended consequence.

This was a painful choice, but it was much less painful than the alternative. Mass bankruptcies ensued, and we truly saw the ultimate weakness of Keynesian economics. That weakness is the inability to tighten credit standards once the flood gates of easy liquidity have been opened. A contraction of money and credit in a Keynesian economy is painful proportionally to the extent of the initial growth in the monetary base and credit.

It’s the Keynesian school that has, more or less, driven monetary and fiscal policy since the Great Depression

Keynesian Economics Today

Now one might think that the essential failure of the Keynesian school of economics is a reason to do something else…anything else. It sure makes sense to me, and I’m sure it makes sense to you dear reader, but by now, you are well aware of our ability as a nation to commit the same dumb mistakes again and again.

At this point I would like to bring these ideas into present context, but I am going to break down Keynesian economics into its most basic form, and then we can relate it to our current economic situation.

The example I’m going to use is not my own. I do not know its original author, but it is an example I read in an economic journal. I apologize that I do not have the original source, but it is an awesome way to describe Keynesian economics.

In economics, it is often very useful to breakdown a theory and apply it to an elementary situation. It is very important to understand this notion, as I will relate back to it throughout the rest of this essay.

Imagine that there is an economy of just 3 farmers and a lending unit. Each farmer borrows $100 to sow his land. So at this point, we essentially have a monetary base of $300.

As with any loan, the farmers must pay interest. Let’s say the interest is 10% on each loan. All three farmers have a fine year and produce a significant enough crop to pay back each loan. The first farmer pays the $110 that he owes. The second farmer pays the $110 he owes. The problem is that there is now only $80 left in the monetary base, and there is no possible way for the last farmer to pay off his loan.

Well, not necessarily. There are two options. Option one is that the authority can increase the monetary base. Option two is actually a spin off of option one and essentially carries the same end result.

Let’s say a fourth farmer enters the scene and borrows a $100 dollars for his crop. Now there is significant funds in the monetary base for the third farmer to pay off the last loan, but the forth farmer is left holding the short straw.

You see, the only way to keep a Keynesian economy growing is to increase the monetary base and/or aggregate credit outstanding, otherwise there will simply not be enough money to pay back the due credit.

This scenario regarding the three farmers is a grossly simplified version of the U.S. economy since the great depression. Please note that when short term lending dried up, our economy ceased to function properly. Our inability to exist without lending is a result of decades of Keynesian economics. As always, please feel free to send in your email questions, but don’t think that through complex investment derivatives and globalization, this scenario is suddenly sustainable. I understand that there are many other issues that factor into this equation, but what you will actually see is that these investment vehicles and globalization have only postponed the inevitable and exasperated the system.

The next part of this series will take a deep look into what role our trade deficit has played in the growth of our Keynesian based economy, and how foreign reinvestment of U.S. dollars into our domestic economy has been our lifeline.

Nicholas Jones Analyst, Oxbury Research

Investing !! What’s that?
Judging by the fact that you’ve taken the trouble to navigate to the Learning Center of website, our guess is that you don’t need much convincing about the wisdom of investing. However, we hope that your quest for knowledge/information about the art/science of investing ends here. Sink in. Knowledge is power. It is common knowledge that money has to be invested wisely. If you are a novice at investing, terms such as stocks, bonds, badla, undha badla, yield, P/E ratio may sound Greek and Latin. Relax. It takes years to understand the art of investing. You’re not alone in the quest to crack the jargon.
To start with, take your investment decisions with as many facts as you can assimilate. But, understand that you can never know everything. Learning to live with the anxiety of the unknown is part of investing. Being enthusiastic about getting started is the first step, though daunting at the first instance. That’s why our investment course begins with a dose of encouragement: With enough time and a little discipline, you are all but guaranteed to make the right moves in the market.
Patience and the willingness to pepper your savings across a portfolio of securities tailored to suit your age and risk profile will propel your revenues at the same time cushion you against any major losses. Investing is not about putting all your money into the “Next Infosys,” hoping to make a killing. Investing isn’t gambling or speculation; it’s about taking reasonable risks to reap steady rewards. Investing is a method of purchasing assets in order to gain profit in the form of reasonably predictable income (dividends, interest, or rentals) and appreciation over the long term.
Why should you invest?
Simply put, you should invest so that your money grows and shields you against rising inflation. The rate of return on investments should be greater than the rate of inflation, leaving you with a nice surplus over a period of time. Whether your money is invested in stocks, bonds, mutual funds or certificates of deposit (CD), the end result is to create wealth for retirement, marriage, college fees, vacations, better standard of living or to just pass on the money to the next generation. Also, it’s exciting to review your investment returns and to see how they are accumulating at a faster rate than your salary.
When to Invest?
The sooner the better. By investing into the market right away you allow your investments more time to grow, whereby the concept of compounding interest swells your income by accumulating your earnings and dividends. Considering the unpredictability of the markets, research and history indicates these three golden rules for all investors 1. Invest early 2. Invest regularly 3. Invest for long term and not short term While it’s tempting to wait for the “best time” to invest, especially in a rising market, remember that the risk of waiting may be much greater than the potential rewards of participating.
Trust in the power of compounding Compounding is growth via reinvestment of returns earned on your savings. Compounding has a snowballing effect because you earn income not only on the original investment but also on the reinvestment of dividend/interest accumulated over the years. The power of compounding is one of the most compelling reasons for investing as soon as possible. The earlier you start investing and continue to do so consistently the more money you will make.
The longer you leave your money invested and the higher the interest rates, the faster your money will grow. That’s why stocks are the best long-term investment tool. The general upward momentum of the economy mitigates the stock market volatility and the risk of losses. That’s the reasoning behind investing for long term rather than short term.
How much money do I need to invest?
There is no statutory amount that an investor needs to invest inorder to generate adequate returns from his savings. The amount that you invest will eventually depend on factors such as:
Your risk profile
Your Time horizon
Savings made
What can you invest in?
The investing options are many, to name a few
Stocks
Bonds
Mutual funds
Fixed deposits
Others
Whether you are new to investing or have been investing for a while, our online courses can help you learn how to invest better and smartly. The courses are comprehensive yet simple and easy to understand. It has been our endeavor to empower our customers and the learning module is a step in this direction.
The courses include modules on:
Equities
Futures
Options
Mutual Funds
Tax
ULIP Vs Mutual Funds
So start now… Becoming a smarter investor has never been easier!

Starting a business is an exciting venture but it is easy to get overwhelmed with all the various tasks needed for the initial launch of the business. Underestimating the difficulty of starting a business is one of the biggest barriers faced by entrepreneurs.

Many people think that starting a business is easy. I know for a fact that it is far from easy.

Before starting out it is important to list your reasons for wanting to go into business. Having a mentor to help guide you through the steps to starting a business is invaluable. Every little bit of advice helps when you’re starting a business – provided it’s good advice.

Before you start your business you need to ask yourself some serious questions:

(1) Can I handle the difficulties and challenges that come with starting a business?
(2) Who is my audience/or business aimed at?
(3) Where is my business to be located?
(4) Am I starting full-time or part-time?

Starting a business requires determination, motivation, and knowledge. Starting a business can be a complicated and daunting experience. Not everyone has what it takes to be successful in business. A lot of people fail because they jumped into business without honestly appraising their lifestyle to know if it fits in with running a business. It could also be possible that they underestimated the amount of effort involved in starting or running a business.

It is very important to discuss your intention of starting a business with your close family (and friends). Many a relationship has been broken because the ‘other half’ could not understand why all the attention seemed to switch from them to starting and nurturing a new business. In my opinion close friends and family need to be put in the picture regarding what to expect when you’re starting a new business

Have you got a good business idea? You would think this an obvious question anyone thinking of starting a business will ask themselves this question. Many people seemingly run with the first business idea that comes to their mind. They seldom pause to investigate the viability of their business idea. A good business idea is one that meets a customer’s need, fills an empty niche, solves someone’s problem or answers someone’s question(s).

A good way to generate good business ideas is to look inwards. What do you enjoy doing? What hobby or hobbies do you regularly indulge in? This may hold the key to your business idea. Unless you are a serial entrepreneur with a proven track record you may struggle badly if you venture into a business you do not have background knowledge of or one without any bearings to your previous experience(s) in life.

Location, location, location. Except when setting up an online business, the location is of great importance for your new business. You need to think very carefully about the location of your business. The over-riding factor in deciding the location for your business should be customers. After all the whole point of starting a business is to serve customers (and also make money, of course). As such the business should be located where the customers are located. You also need to think about the amenities available in the area such as bus, tube, train etc.

Not everyone has the confidence to go full hog into business. You may decide to continue with your day job while building your business part-time. Although this may mean taking more time to build your business to its full potential it nevertheless reduces the risk of loss of income if you were to pack in your day job to concentrate solely on building your business.

Once you’ve answered the pertinent questions enumerated above you then need to add the necessary ingredient of a successful business namely: A Business Plan. Many people often skip this very important step, thinking they are saving time. In the long run it costs them time if not money as well. This, I believe, is because working through a business plan will tell you whether or not your idea for starting a business is viable. A business plan may also be necessary for securing funding. A business plan explains your business concept, highlights the details of your business and generally helps you focus the direction of your business, amongst other things. Not giving these factors proper consideration may cost you time and or money in the future.

A well prepared business plan can help you secure funding for your business. In that wise money/funding is not as important as putting together a good business plan for your proposed business.

If you are not experienced in writing a business plan you can get someone else to write it for you. A good place to look is elance website. You can also try ebay website. Another good source of help is friends and family. Inform your friends and family about your intention of starting a business and ask if they can or know anyone who can be of help in putting together a business plan.

Now you’ve decided on a business idea and you’ve put a business plan together, what next? You need to source the funding for your business. The following, not an exhaustive list by any means, are sources of funding you may consider:

(1) personal savings
(2) loans from friends and family
(3) loan from a bank/building society/other financial institution

Running your own business is one of the most rewarding but challenging things you can do.

Starting a business is an exciting and sometimes confusing endeavour. The toughest part of starting a business is, in fact, making a start – going from your passion to the reality of running a business that fulfils your hopes and aspirations. Starting a business is incredibly hard work. Starting a business is a big step and it takes planning.

If you are thinking of starting a business my advice to you is to go for it – it’s very rewarding to create something from nothing.

Remember: “The person who risks nothing, does nothing, has nothing, is nothing, and becomes nothing. He may avoid suffering and sorrow, but he simply cannot learn and feel and change and grow and love and live.” – Anon.

Mark Twain’s oft heard adage – ‘buy land, they’re not making it anymore’ has been indirectly taken to heart by investors in the UK scouring the markets for the best investment. That is to say that in relation to the boom in the buy-to-let property market it is not the bricks and mortar which rises in value, but the underlying UK land on which the development sits. Indeed, the value of bricks and mortar deteriorates over time, so in some senses a UK property market investment is actually a UK land investment more than anything else.

In this article we will look not at the relative merits of a land investment vis-à-vis a property market investment but at whether the two (ie direct land investment versus indirect land investment) complement each other in an investment portfolio. The former subject is too extensive to discuss here and, at any rate, since many people already have property market assets the pertinent question for them is this: ‘does investment land complement property market holdings or is each investment opportunity best pursued in isolation?’.

Of course much depends on what type of investment land is being considered. For instance, self-build land investment is a natural bed-fellow of buy-to-let property market investment since it is common for investors to develop small plots of UK land and then retain ownership in order to earn rent from the resulting property. However, if your idea of the best investment is not one which involves buying land with planning permission or buying land without planning permission and then developing it out, there are land investment alternatives.

One such is buying land on a professional property and development project. This is sometimes known as Site Assembly land investment and often appeals to the investor for whom self-build land investment is not suitable. The growing market for investment land is being in large part serviced by Site Assembly investment land because, relatively speaking, the number of people investing in land is growing but only a small proportion have the necessary skills and/or appetite for self-build land investment.

With this in mind, we can refine the original question thus: ‘does Site Assembly land investment complement buy-to-let property market investment or is each investment opportunity best pursued in isolation?’ (since Site Assembly land investment is becoming more common).

The key considerations in land investment, and in fact any investment, are threefold:

-Risk (what is the chance of gaining/losing)

-Term (how long is the investment for?)

-Liquidity (how easy is it to exit the investment?)

These criteria will help elucidate whether buy-to-let property market investments and investment land on a Site Assembly project are complementary. In investment terms (ie land investment and otherwise), ‘complementary assets’ are those that provide diversity, so the Risk, Term and Liquidity should be different in each case.

Let’s see:

Buy-to-let property market investment

-Risk: Low

-Term: Long

-Liquidity: High

Site Assembly land investment

-Risk: Medium

-Term: Medium

-Liquidity Low

Although these are generalisations, the above broadly reflect the true nature of buy-to-let property market investment and Site Assembly land investment. Naturally, some buy-to-let property market investments can be medium term just as some Site Assembly land investment projects offer moderate or even high liquidity but generally speaking the information above holds true.

It is therefore reasonable to conclude, working from the premise that complementary investment assets display different profiles (Risk, Term and Liquidity), that Site Assembly land investment and buy-to-let property market investment do complement one another in a portfolio.

This article has not attempted to assess the extent to which investment land is superior to property market investments (or vice-versa). What it has attempted is to consider the growing popularity of investing in land (especially on an existing development projects) and whether such a venture is compatible with a buy-to-let property market investment portfolio.

Rational analysis, as set-out above, suggests that Site Assembly land investment and buy-to-let property market investment are complementary.