FYI: Shift to government securities as financial-crisis reform takes effect.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/your-money-market-fund-is-about-to-undergo-some-changes-2016-09-02/print

The closing was hidden in the Summary Prospectus:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/915802/000139834416017861/fp0021369_497k.htm
Excerpt:
Purchase and Sale of Fund Shares
The Fund offers two classes of shares, an Investor Class and an Institutional Class, each of which is offered by this Prospectus. The minimum initial investment for the Investor Class is $2,500 for all accounts, except that the minimum initial investment is $1,000 for retirement and education savings accounts and $1,500 for automatic investment plan accounts. The minimum initial investment for the Institutional Class is $25,000 for all accounts. Investors generally may meet the minimum initial investment for the Institutional Class by aggregating multiple accounts within the Fund. If a shareholder invests in the Fund through a financial adviser or intermediary, the minimum initial investment for the Institutional Class may be met if that financial adviser or intermediary aggregates investments of multiple clients to meet the minimum. The minimum investment for subsequent purchases is $100 for both share classes.
Effective immediately after market closing on September 30, 2016, the Fund will close to most new investors. The Fund will be available for purchase only by the following investors:
· Existing shareholders of the Fund;
· Financial advisors, consultants and discretionary programs with existing clients in the Fund (i.e., they can continue to add new clients in the Fund);
· Retirement plans or platforms with participants who currently invest in the Fund;
· Model-based programs with existing accounts in the Fund; and
· Employees of Seafarer and their families.
Please note that some intermediaries may not be able to accommodate the conditions set out above.
If a shareholder closes an account in the Fund due to redemption or exchange, the shareholder will no longer be able to make additional investments in the Fund.
The Fund reserves the right to make exceptions to any action taken to close the Fund, or limit inflows into the Fund, and delegates such authority to Seafarer.

I think many dividend payers have gotten ahead of themselves but if you'd like to play just a little bit Cracker Barrel (CBRL) currently has a blue light sale going on with their shares. Yield is currently 2.96% and they toss in a special dividend every now and then. Note, I am in no way suggesting that you buy this as I have no clue with respect toward your financial situation whatsoever. Due diligence is required.

(With the deepest regards....)
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/913131/000091313116000022/nei497e082016.htm
497 1 nei497e082016.htm RULE 497(E)
Rule 497(e)
Registration No. 033-69804
1940 Act File No. 811-08062
SUPPLEMENT DATED AUGUST 29, 2016
TO THE PROSPECTUS AND STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION DATED JULY 31, 2016
OF
Nicholas Equity Income Fund, Inc.
THIS SUPPLEMENT UPDATES THE PROSPECTUS AND STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
PLEASE READ AND KEEP IT TOGETHER WITH YOUR COPY OF THE PROSPECTUS AND STATEMENT OF
ADDITIONAL INFOMARTION FOR FUTURE REFERENCE.
The purpose of this supplement is to notify the shareholders of Nicholas Equity Income Fund, Inc. (the “Fund”) with deep and sincere regrets that Mr. Albert O. Nicholas passed away on August 4, 2016. He was very hard working, diligent, humble, and generous. Effective immediately, Mr. Michael L. Shelton is the Lead Portfolio Manager of the Nicholas Equity Income Fund, Inc. and David O. Nicholas is the Portfolio Manager of the Fund. The information regarding the previous portfolio manager found in the following sections of the prospectus dated July 31, 2016 is deleted and replaced with the following effective August 29, 2016.
PART A: INFORMATION REQUIRED IN THE PROSPECTUS:
1. The section “SUMMARY -- Portfolio Managers” on page 4 of the prospectus is revised and restated as follows:
Portfolio Managers
Mr. Michael L. Shelton is the Lead Portfolio Manager of the Fund and is primarily responsible for the day-to-day management of the Fund's portfolio. Mr. Shelton is a Vice President of the Fund and has been the Lead Portfolio Manager of the Fund since August 2016. He formerly served as the Co-Portfolio Manager of the Fund from April 2011 to August 2016, and has been employed by the Adviser since 2006. Mr. David O. Nicholas is the President of the Fund and has been Portfolio Manager of the Fund since August 2016. He formerly served as the Co-Portfolio Manager of the Fund from July 2001 to April 2008.
2. The first paragraph of the section captioned “THE FUND'S INVESTMENT ADVISER” on page 12 of the prospectus is revised and restated as follows:
Mr. Michael L. Shelton is the Lead Portfolio Manager of the Fund and is primarily responsible for the day-to-day management of the Fund's portfolio. Mr. Shelton was the Co-Portfolio Manager of the Fund from April 2011 to August 2016. Mr. Shelton also serves as the Portfolio Manager to another fund managed by the Adviser, and has been employed by the Adviser since 2006, and is a Chartered Financial Analyst and a Certified Public Accountant. In August 2016, Mr. David O. Nicholas became Portfolio Manager of the Fund. Mr. Nicholas was the Co-Portfolio Manager of the Fund from July 2001 to April 2008. Mr. Nicholas is President of the Fund, a Director of the Adviser and the President, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Investment Officer of the Adviser. Mr. Nicholas also serves as a Lead Portfolio Manager or Portfolio Manager to other funds managed by the Adviser, and is a Chartered Financial Analyst.
3. The last paragraph of the section captioned “THE FUND'S INVESTMENT ADVISER” on page 12 of the prospectus is revised and restated as follows:
David O. Nicholas is a controlling person of the Adviser through his ownership of 60% of the outstanding voting securities of the Adviser which are held in trust for his benefit...

REITS have had a nice one-year run-up from a trough hit last autumn. I suspect the rally in bonds has helped, as real estate is highly interest rate sensitive.

@hank, you are right on with the interest rate correlation. Now that Fed is more likely to raise rate this year, REIT is declining from its height reached several weeks ago. As long as the rate increase is slow and small, less than twice a year and 25 basis point as a time, REIT should still be okay.
Now that REITs will be part of the financial sector of S&P 500, I will trim some REIT funds so that the total REIT exposure is less than 5%.

From the article: "Index funds don’t set prices; they only accept the prices that active investors have already set." Is this true? Doesn't it assume that index mutual fund and ETF investors are as robotic and passive as the funds themselves? But that is not true. If for instance Apple has a good or bad earnings report index fund investors--financial advisers, pension plans and retail investors--are going to react to that, buying or selling more shares of the index funds. Yes, index funds are passively run, but that isn't necessarily the case at all for the investors in index funds who adjust their exposure to index funds based on macro and micro-economic information. And considering that the largest 100 companies account for 45% of the entire market cap of all stocks in the U.S., it isn't so hard for index fund investors to react to new information regarding those specific companies. So I think it is quite possible for fund shareholders to set prices at those companies.

Hello @LLJB,
I am thinking much like you on this that it will be a net to net movement as real estate securities get moved from the financial sector to the new real estate sector. Perhaps, some new money might flow into the real estate sector as some investors might wish to overweight real estate in view of its late performance. Currently, by my math, once this change takes place I will have an estimated position of seven to eight percent in real estate and, for me, with real estate being a minority sector I will be overweight in the sector.
I strive to maintain at lease a five percent weighting in the minority sectors of materials, real estate, communication services, and utilities. Currently, I am overweight in each of these sectors based upon my target weightings.

"Demand for REIT stocks and REIT exchange-traded funds will likely increase, if only from passive index funds that are linked to the S&P 500. The financial sector will drop to about a 12.7% weighting in the S&P 500 from 15.7%."
I'm not sure I understand how this would happen. Shouldn't any passive index fund linked to the S&P 500 already have all those stocks? It seems like the massive amounts of money in passive investments shouldn't change much and that any new demand might be more likely to come from active funds or individual investors who start paying more specific attention to real estate.

Intriguing topic. Sketchy at best on exactly what the SEC is proposing. Maybe this is the proposal the article references? https://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/2015/33-9776.pdf
If I read the above correctly, funds would no longer be required to make paper copies of fund reports available to investors. I get it. Saves money and trees. Can't stop progress I suppose.
Personally, much as I enjoy pleasure reading in digital form, there's something unique about legal/financial language and content that I find easier to digest in print. I wouldn't want to sign off on a 30 year mortgage for which I'd seen only a digital copy. I find Barrons much more more rewarding in print. And I don't like the thought of handing over my hard earned money to a firm whose reports exist only in the digital realm.
The suggestion in the article byline that most investors don't bother to read their fund reports sounds absurd. If you trust your manager enough to give him/her your money to invest, surely you value his or her insights into the markets and his/her unique perspectives on why the fund is invested the way it is. Not read the reports? Nuts.

Morgan Housel is awesome.(tm)
I still say many of these analysts don't know the industry they cover beyond cookie-cutter MBA financial analysis techniques. It's almost like Wall Street needed to give some of its own a job, so they found a way to generate quarterly 'estimates' they can use to create trading catalysts for the markets and short-term traders. Give any MBA holder an Excel spreadsheet, a few SEC documents, access to a Bloomberg terminal, and poof! They create conditions for tradeable events.
But this also creates a mindset where "long term" is at most one quarter or until the next report that may or may not meet 'expectations' set by the brokerage equivalent of the so-called 'ratings agencies'.
Estimates aside, don't get me started on the value of Wall Street "analysis" either ... ugh.

Hi @clacy
Now, what you and @kevindow noted does make financial sense, eh?
But, money managers would put themselves out of work, yes?
I do believe that ego, the human essence and any other self esteem word one may discover has relationship to money managers.
I don't follow science up close; but the last time I checked, these folks sit upon the toilet just like the rest of us.
This recent CALPERS article offers clues and potential guidelines, if managers would accept defeat of their egos. Although one can not imagine many folks whose money is being invested are raising a glass of wine to these folks in celebration.
Hell, I've had to adjust my directions several times over the years from "realization factors"; and I'm not even investing "other peoples money" from which a poor rate of return (as with CALPERS) would cause me to be wholly embarrassed. I continue to be asked upon occasion about where to invest. My suggestions have changed from 10 years ago.
Take care,
Catch

The story is a little more complex, as there are also the rapidly growing number of actively managed (by methodology) funds/ETFs, such as those offered by DFA, WisdomTree, PowerShares and others, as well as the assortment of quality factor and volatility factor ETFs.
The common investor has come to the conclusion that investment expenses matter, and after-expense performance matters more. If an actively managed fund is not consistently outperforming (after expenses) its reference index, then it should experience a net outflow of assets. And if its assets decline sufficiently, it should cease to operate. It is in fact a jungle out there, and there is no safe space or concern for hurt feelings in the investment jungle.
I agree with MJG that there will always be folks who think that they can beat the market -- such as hedge funds, self-proclaimed "smarter than the average" investors, and poorly informed investors who "trust" financial advisors who state that they can beat the market.
In general, objective data indicates that the default investment should be passive rather than active. That being stated, one must always respect the data, specifically SPIVA (S&P Indices vs. Active):
SPIVA 7/21/16
As this document illustrates, investors should favor actively managed funds only in Real Estate (Domestic Equities), International Small Cap (International Equities), and a small number of sectors within Fixed Income (Munis, Loan Participation, MBS, and Short/Intermediate IG bonds). The data indicates that investors should go passive for all other asset classes.
Kevin

The embedded article by Scott Opsal is a good read that spans several financial cycles from 1991.

FYI: New rules aimed at strengthening one of America’s most popular savings products -- the money-market mutual fund -- are causing a minor tempest in financial markets, drawing complaints about unintended consequences.
Actually, where they’ve been applied, the rules are working as they should. To avoid the unintended consequences, they need to be applied more comprehensively.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-08-22/money-market-mutual-funds-should-tell-the-truth

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/89043/000091957416015083/d7240544_497.htm
497 1 d7240544_497.htm
SEQUOIA FUND, INC.
Supplement dated August 22, 2016
to the Prospectus dated April 29, 2016
At a recent meeting, the Board of Directors of Sequoia Fund, Inc. (the "Fund") considered and approved offering the Fund's shares to all new investors, including those seeking to purchase shares of the Fund through financial intermediaries with which the Fund has agreements. Effective August 23, 2016, the Fund will begin accepting orders for the purchase of Fund shares from all new investors. At that time, Fund shares will be available for purchase as described in the section of the prospectus titled "Purchase and Sale of Shares" as amended by this supplement.
Accordingly, the first paragraph under the heading "Purchase and Sale of Fund Shares" on page 4 of the Prospectus is deleted in its entirety, and the first paragraph under the heading "How to Buy Shares" on page 7 of the Prospectus is deleted in its entirety.
In addition, the fourth paragraph under the heading "How to Buy Shares" on page 7 of the Prospectus is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:
Important Note to New Taxable Investors: As of August 16, 2016, the net unrealized appreciation of the Fund's portfolio was approximately 50.4% of the Fund's net assets. If the Fund sells appreciated securities and distributes the profit, the distributed appreciation will be taxable to you either as capital gains or as ordinary income, depending upon how long the Fund held the appreciated securities. You should carefully consider the potential tax effects prior to making an investment in the Fund.
* * * *
YOU SHOULD RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT WITH YOUR PROSPECTUS
FOR FUTURE REFERENCE.

Hi Guys,
Thank you all for a very nice and informative discussion.
I like Charlie Ellis. He is a winner by any measurement standard. I believe his revised 2010 edition of “Winning the Loser’s Game” is a superb, easy to digest, introduction to a wealth generating investment approach.
Most investment advisors and financial writers serve a useful purpose. Most often, they make astrologists look good. They have the rare talent for extrapolation and seeing trends based on a single data point. Most of their forecasts are sheer nonsense. Following most of their advice is equivalent to following Custer into the Little Big Horn.
But they do sell their advice and a ton of books. I suspect they make far more money from selling their advice than from putting it to the test with hard cash. Certainly count me as less than euphoric over their products.
Given the historical volatility of equity returns, it is always treacherous business to make a one-year prediction. There are just too many random-like plus and minus one-year returns in excess of 20%. In the longer decade-long timeframe, market returns are much better behaved and far more predictable. That’s why I’m a buy-and-hold investor. It relieves me from the duty of having to make unreliable yearly forecasts which almost always are wrong in both scope and direction.
Enough pontificating for now.
Best Wishes.

I suspect the proliferation of ETFs, ETNs, and particularly the "enhanced" versions (3X bull, 3X bear, etc.) has made the star manager a relic. I for one wish the financial press would not list ETFs alongside MFs when highlighting the quarterly, yearly, and longer performance figures. If gold rose during the last quarter, of what utility is to the average investor to see some ETF on anabolic steroids at the top of the performance ranking for all funds? What use is it to show that bearish ETFs top the list of 10-year losers? These days, such lists do not reveal talented managers. Old-timers like me enjoy poring over MF statistics the way I studied MLB stats as a kid. Unfortunately, what appears in the NYT, WSJ, and Barron's these days is dreck contaminated by funds most investors ought never touch.

Sovereign indebtedness has continued to increase since the 07-08 crisis. Much of that used to boost ongoing consumption until the economy returns to "old normal" growth rates (which is just not happening). Govts have 'carried the ball' for almost a decade now, with respect to fiscal deficits.
And QE/ZIRP & now NIRP in some geographies have created created conditions which SHOULD have lowered the IRR hurdle with respect to investments by the commercial/business sector. But instead, businesses seem to prefer to divert their cash-flows to investors in the form of divds and cash-buybacks. Money spent rewarding shareholders today, is money not invested to create jobs tomorrow.
With respect to US-domiciled businesses, they've used accounting gimmickry (primarily transfer-pricing shenanigans) to move accounting profits and cash offshore.
Tax policy could probably be used to disincent financial engineering in favor of physical investment, create tax revenues which fund govt infrastructure projects, and to bring all that overseas cash back to the USA.
But I wouldn't hold my breath.

Yes, and furthermore, the fund owns Cardinal Financial, which is in talks with U.S. Bancorp to be acquired. CFNL up 5% as of 1010 EDT.

@MFO: Members From the Mairs & Power Website:
Regards,
Ted
Mairs & Power's Small Cap Fund Closes to New Investors
Announcement - August 15, 2016
After careful deliberation, Mairs & Power has decided to close the Small Cap Fund (MSCFX/ the "Fund") to new investors effective as of the close of business on September 30, 2016 (the "Closing Date"). The Fund will remain open to investment by existing shareholders, existing Mairs & Power private clients, retirement plans with an existing agreement and new or existing clients of an individual financial adviser representative with pre-existing investments in the Fund.
Mairs & Power Growth Fund (MPGFX) and Mairs & Power Balanced Fund (MAPOX) remain open to new investors.
"With our disciplined, low turnover and long-term investment approach, we hold relatively concentrated positions in a carefully selected portfolio of companies. This strategy means that we manage our asset base carefully," said Mark Henneman, Chief Investment Officer of Mairs & Power, Inc. (the "Adviser"). "We manage capacity for each of our Funds individually, taking a conservative approach that considers, among other factors, total assets under management, the rate of asset growth and the availability of securities that meet the Funds' investment objectives."
"We beleive this decision is in the best long-term interest of the Small Cap Fund's existing shareholders, as it allows us to maintain stable and balanced growth with the Fund. We remain confident in our ability to continue to find attrative investment opportunites within the small cap universe and we reamin committed to protecting the interests of our Fund's shareholders. This soft close demonstrates that commitment," said Andrew Adams, lead portfolio manager of the Mairs & Power Small Cap Fund.
Launched in 2011, the Small Cap Fund has experienced significant, but manageable, asset flows. The Fund's performance success over one-, three-, and five-year periods led to strong asset growth from both existing and new investors. While this growth has not impacted the Adviser's ability to implement the Fund's stated investment strategy, the decision to close the Fund at this time followed careful deliberation and discussion on how best to serve the interests of existing shareholders by managing asset growth.