More Stuff From Kiyosaki
I saw Yahoo Finance posted a new column from Robert Kiyosaki recently. With an open mind, I decided to read it, thinking perhaps he has something positive to say. I wasn't planning on commenting about the article until I read the third and fourth paragraphs. He's trying so hard to sell his point of view that he's willing to leave out important details that conflict with his reasoning, hoping readers will overlook the gap in logic.
Here we go! Paragraph 3:
I have been highly critical of the standard financial planning advice -- "work hard, save money, get out of debt, invest for the long term, and diversify" -- for a long time. Such guidance is often more a financial advisor's (subway rider's) sales pitch than a solid investment guide.
I understand Kiyosaki here. Everyone has a sales pitch and is looking out for their own interest, not the customers'. In some cases, one could argue it is in the advisor's best interest to retain customers, and one way to accomplish that is to give solid advice. Moving on:
But while I think it's courageous that Spitzer slaps millions in fines on a few Wall Street firms for their bad investment guidance, I believe the investors who accepted that unsound advice have some responsibility, too. Isn't knowing the difference between good and bad advice part of knowing what you're doing?
Also, I can agree with the idea that responsibility should be shared, for the most part. (Can a patient share the blame when a medical doctor misdiagnoses a problem? It depends.) Here's the problem. In less than one hundred words, Kiyosaki linked, albeit surreptitiously, the buy-and-hold strategy in paragraph 3 with the bad advice that garnered Eliot Spitzer's fines, mentioned in paragraph 4. That is deceptive and misleading. The bad advice according to Spitzer is advice that involves conflicts of interest, advisors selling specific securities that create the best kickbacks for the advisor, and other related charges.
Skimming the rest of the article, the only items of "evidence" Kiyosaki cites are previous articles he has written for his Yahoo Finance column recently. I had to stop reading this newest article, even after beginning with an open mind (I promise). Kiyosaki's digestive system is upside-down, if you know what I mean.
So there's a new Exchange-Traded Fund that tracks commodities. In this case, oil, aluminum, gold, corn and wheat. It seems like a good way for ordinary investors to get into commodities without dealing with futures contracts and such. So, should I invest? Read
Based partly on feedback when I listed my investment holdings, I made some changes to my retirement contributions for 2006. Read
I was wondering how my investments were doing this year, so I whipped up a table. It appears my managed funds have generally outperformed my index fund. Some notes: * My 401(k) was recently rebalanced (it's automatic on a quarterly basis). * The YTD Return ... Read
Ben Bernanke has only one stock in his portfolio: Altria Group/Philip Morris/Marlboro [MO]. This has been talked about by Jeremy Siegel, CNN Money, Henry Blodget at Slate, and the New York Times. Altria is included in a few of my mutual funds I hold for ... Read
I have to agree with you. Kiyosaki's writing is all over the map, and much of it conflicts with itself. For example, in a recent Yahoo article, he touts cash flow by investing in quality dividend paying stocks. He says investing in stocks for growth is "a risky game he does not play."
Yet, his popular cash flow 101 game clearly touts a strategy of purchasing stocks in hopes that their value will go up rapidly to build large wealth.
His two main concepts in Rich Dad, Poor Dad of purchasing assets and the cash flow quadrant are excellent and always needed in our highly consumer culture. As for the rest of his advice from there, stay away from it!
In my view people often miss the mark in their criticism of Kiyosaki. His value as a writer is not in the technical advice he gives out, much of which is factually incorrect, or as Jason has pointed out, inconsistent. Kiyosaki's great value as a writer is his ability to inspire.
Thats something most writers never achieve.
I am a little confused. If you inspire someone with factually incorrect advice and inconsistent advice, what exactly have you inspired them to do?
If they are inspired to take actions based on that factually incorrect and inconsistent advice, is that a good thing?
I have read "Rich Dad, Poor Dad" in addition to all of Kiyosaki's Yahoo columns and have come to the conclusion that he's a complete idiot. I searched the internet to find out more about him and found this interesting article that I would recommend to anyone who is at all interested in Kiyosaki:
hahahha....i met john t reed once and asked him about kiyosaki....he just looked at me and rolled his eyes......didn't say anything else.....he truly feels like saying anything about him was a waste of his breath and energy....funny!
I've read a bunch of Kiyosaki's stuff, just to try to find out what has kept Rich Dad, Poor Dad on the top ten list of business books for so long. I think he is a pathological liar, narcisisstic, and 90% of the advice he dispenses is worthless and dangerous to the average person. The good 10% is his point that the rich and poor/middle classes have different investment and work habits, and that there is a profound lack of financial education in this country, as well as the rest of the world. If he would just stick to this in his books, I would have no problems with him. However, like nearly all of the multi-level marketing, real estate speculating "investors" out there, he finds stories of past financial success to be irresistable. Also, the whole Rich Dad, Poor Dad is a fictional account passed off as being factual.
In conclusion, with regards to Kiyosaki, caveat emptor.
