Select to expand quote
Ted the Kiwi said..
Yes that is always going to be a risk. But its a balance of probabilities. Think of oil - its terribile right now if you had all your money in oil and gas stocks - but as a commuter you are benefiting big time. In Nov I was paying $48 to fill my car up - yesterday at $1.019 it cost me $32. There will always be winners and losers. Most super funds will take a balanced portfolio approach - some sectors will cost you money in a slump but others do well - essentially called defensive stocks / strategies. Choose your super fund wisely. Look at the returns that are generated - not just over 1 year but 3, 5 and 7yrs and make a call. Not all equity markets will crash at the same time or for the same reasons. Think back a few years to Cyclone Larry - ruined banana crops in Innisfail in 2006 - they produce approx. 90% of all bananas for Australia. The producers in Coffs Harbour won big time as prices went form $2 a kg to $16 (peaked at approx. $26). So whilst there is a degree of risk that your super fund equity investments might lose 25% in one year - its fair to say that if that was to happen other markets would be going the other way and the balanced approach would limit your loses (or it might even benefit you). The reason for this is that there is still a lot of money that needs to find a home. If the world is negative equity markets they will hunt yield. Price and yield have an inverse relationship. So as demand for govt bonds etc increase - prices go up and interest rates go down, then the reserve banks drop rates, further driving the price of bonds higher. Do not be losing sleep over this - there are lots of strategies to reduce your risk if this is your main concern. I guess what I am trying to say is that your superfund is highly unlikely to have all of its eggs in one basket - eg Australian stocks or Media stocks. They will be taking a semi-balanced approach at a bare minimum. A lot of them though are crap - you would be better off just buying the index and keeping your transaction costs at a minimum as that is essentially all they do. Do your homework.
The plunge in fuel for average Joe and Jill is good. Like most things, there are two sides to a story. The main reason fuels, and oil, are so cheap is because the major oil producing nations in the Middle East are trying to out-muscle the "Johny come lately" in the USA. These smaller oil producers are extracting oil from shale rocks. It is a high cost operation, but there is plenty of it in the ground. Apparently, just in the USA, there is as much, if not more, of it than the Middle East combined

The Middle East nations are not happy about it in terms of political and financial aspects. Less dependent on them means the West will not pay as much attention to them as in the past. Financially, the shale oil industry will cut into their share. So what they are doing now is to suffocate the shale oil production by flooding the market. Lower oil price will make the higher cost shale oil companies suffer.
These high cost shale oil companies are viable because the oil price is high. As soon as it dips below a certain level, they are almost running at a loss. No big deal one may say. However, looking at the big picture, these small shale oil companies borrowed money to start. If they can't service the loans, then the banks will take a hit, just like the housing fore-closures during the 2007-2009. I believe a lot of money had been borrowed to start such "adventure". The oil rush just may be another dream turned into a nightmare, just like the "DOT COM" and the "housing loans" bubbles.