FYI:
Regards,
Ted
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/mutual-funds-erase-financial-crisis-from-history-2013-09-13/print?guid=5369909C-1C6A-11E3-9641-00212876B3FC

My impression is that for the purposes of financial planning Social Security is treated as an inflation-adjusted annuity. Isn't that pretty much the equivalent of a TIPS bond? In any event, when determining a stocks/fixed income split of your investments, I can't imagine why you wouldn't treat social security as part of the fixed income. The only argument I can think of is that people tend to be too confident about their risk tolerance therefore it might be a good idea to leave social security as something of a risk 'buffer' for them.

Reply to @MikeW: I'd invest broadly in EM. Additionally, emerging markets consumer stocks (ECON etf) are long-term interesting and have held up better than EM as a whole this year.
Article today about how chocolate is going up in part because of demand from EM as consumers in these countries can buy more. "That's up from about 6.9 million tonnes in 2009, when consumption dipped due to the global financial crisis, with demand being driven by growing affluence in emerging nations.
"In the regions like Asia-Pacific or Latin America, we are seeing more middle class consumers buying chocolates compared with five or six years ago because they have the money to do it," said Francisco Redruello, senior food analyst at Euromonitor International.
"That is what's driven the growth of chocolates." (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/13/chocolate-prices_n_3918942.html?utm_hp_ref=business)
In terms of Mexico, Wal Mart De Mexico (WalMex) remains down since the scandal of last year. If you think that that will pass, that's a lower-key way to play Mexico long-term. The foreign ordinary shares are about $2.65.
There are also a lot of other familiar Latin American names - Ambev (Budweiser Latin America), Kimberly Clark De Mexico, Femsa (owns stakes in Heineken, Coca-Cola Latin America and owns the largest convenience store chain in Latin America - also branching out further) and others.

Reply to @Old Joe : Yes - definition of terms is "Debate 101" and generally the first step in problem solving. Hmmm ... I took Joe's question to be a reference to something I recently heard John Bogle speak about. Bogle takes your annual Social Security benefits (with some yearly "COLA" figured in) and multiplies that by your life expectancy. OK - Let's say your SS will average about $20,000 a year and your life-expectancy is 20 years. Bogle than computes that into a $400,000 bond you're sitting on (20X$20,000). Now, if you're 66 years old and follow his other age-based rule (by holding 66% bonds or other fixed income at that age) than your equity investments should amount to 34% - or about $200,000. I suspect that for some here that $200,000 might well represent the better part of their accumulated retirement savings, and so would therefore question the wisdom of following Bogle's advice to the letter. But, depends on the individual.
Guess I should have been more explicit in my reply. As far as the poster goes, I offered some general observations based on having followed John Bogle a good many years. His writings were among the first I read and enjoyed on the topic of investing. Frankly, am loath to advise anyone on anything financial, believing - as I'm sure you do - the best long-range investment plans derive from within and are tailored specifically to address the circumstances and needs of the individual. Thanks for your thoughts as always :-)

Here we go again: let's not define any terms, it makes it more interesting that way. If there is a standard generally accepted definition of "portfolio", does it or does it not include assets other than financial market products?
If a standard, generally accepted definition says yes or no, then the question answers itself. If there is no standard definition, then anybody can include whatever they darned well want to, and the term "portfolio" means whatever you want it to, so essentially becomes meaningless.
FWIW, Investopedia gives the following definition:
"A grouping of financial assets such as stocks, bonds and cash equivalents, as well as their mutual, exchange-traded and closed-fund counterparts. Portfolios are held directly by investors and/or managed by financial professionals. "
If the question, as I suspect, is really "should SS be considered an asset for retirement planning purposes", I did, and believe that that is a valid approach. If you were to take a sum of cash and convert that to an annuity (which I certainly DO NOT recommend for the average investor), then that also should be included as a retirement asset for planning purposes. Likewise, a defined benefit retirement pension, if anyone still has one of those, and has confidence in the plan. Likewise income property, etc. Why would you not include any potential retirement income in your overall planning?

Social Security as part of your portfolio
BY ANDREA COOMBES,
MARKETWATCH
COPYRIGHT © 2013 DOW JONES & COMPANY, INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
MARKETWATCH — 08/19/13
Counting benefits as fixed income: opportunities and risk.
You may be counting on Social Security but if you’re not counting Social Security as a part of your overall asset allocation, you may be missing out on bigger gains in your retirement-savings portfolio.
Some financial advisers say retirement investors should consider the value of their Social Security benefits as a piece of their fixed-income investments.
Generally, adopting that strategy would mean shifting a big portion of your investible assets out of bonds and into stocks.
For example, if you’ve got $300,000 worth of Social Security benefits and a $700,000 investment portfolio, then your total portfolio is worth $1 million. If you wanted 50% of that portfolio, or $500,000, allocated to fixed-income investments, then just $200,000 of your investment portfolio would be in bonds, while $500,000 would be in equities.
There are different ways to gauge the present value of future benefits; one simple tactic is to add up your monthly benefit (you’ll have to guess how long you’ll be alive to collect benefits).
“We go through a process where we value someone’s Social Security like a TIP,” or Treasury Inflation Protected security, said Bill Meyer, chief executive of Social Security Solutions, which offers fee-based claiming tools and services. “Then we add it into the household’s allocation.”
In one scenario involving a hypothetical single person who claimed benefits at age 70, owned an investment portfolio worth $500,000, and employed a tax-efficient withdrawal strategy, Meyer said he found that this strategy led to 8 extra years of retirement income, compared with not counting Social Security in the person’s investment allocation.
Famed investor Jack Bogle, founder of the Vanguard Group, seems to agree. In an interview in June with investment researcher Morningstar, Bogle suggested retirement savers should consider the value of their Social Security benefits in their asset allocation.
First Bogle cited his penchant for basing one’s asset allocation on one’s age. (If you’re 40 years old, you have 40% of your investments in fixed income and 60% in equities. By the time you’re 60, you’ve got 60% in fixed income, 40% in equities).
Then he talked about Social Security, citing a saver who has $300,000 saved in an investment portfolio.
“If you capitalize that stream of future payments, most people’s Social Security is going to be…let’s say $300,000 for an average investor,” Bogle said. “If you have $300,000 all in equity funds, even equity-index funds, and $300,000 in Social Security, you are already at 50/50” fixed income versus equities, he said.
Meyer, of Social Security Solutions, acknowledged that many people “will be uncomfortable with taking on a larger stock position,” he said.
In his practice, after coming up with a value for a client’s Social Security benefits, the next step is a conversation with the client.
“That’s where Social Security meets risk management,” he said. “What does this really mean to have more stocks? How are you going to feel when the market goes up and down? A lot of people will say, ‘I understand this concept but I really don’t feel good when my 401(k) goes down $50,000,’” Meyer said.
People need to understand that “with the additional stock exposure there will be more volatility,” Meyer said. “With our clients, we’ll give them a target asset allocation and then we’ll give them a range.”
He tells clients: “Given your amount of Social Security, you could tilt your equity exposure as much as X.”
Then, Meyer said, “We show them the additional money they can get by having more stock. But then we run a Monte Carlo simulation to show them the volatility. What’s the most you could win, but what’s the most you could lose.”
Also, he warned, married couples—who can employ a variety of Social Security claiming strategies—might have a harder time estimating the value of their future benefits.
Income, not assets
Some disagree with this approach. “I advocate including [the value of Social Security benefits] in a net-worth statement, but I don’t necessarily go so far as to include it in a traditional investment allocation,” said Bob Klein, a certified financial planner and president of Retirement Income Center in Newport Beach, Calif. who also is a MarketWatch RetireMentor contributor.
“It’s a psychological issue, more than anything,” Klein said. “Say we’re in a real down market—they’re not going to be comforted necessarily by the fact that they have Social Security. They’re focusing on the fact that their portfolio is going down.”
Klein said he prefers to calculate the present value of projected retirement income from a client’s various retirement-income sources, such as an investment portfolio, Social Security and annuities.
“You’re not looking at assets per se. You’re looking at income and how the income is allocated,” he said.
One reason he likes that approach: It forces a focus on generating retirement income.
“The reality is you need income to live on and, furthermore, with life expectancies increasing, you’re going to be retired, chances are, for a lot longer than your parents were,” Klein said. “Income is the name of the game at that point.”
He added: “It’s important to recognize that Social Security does have value to it and include that present value, whatever it is, in a financial statement, but don’t include it in a traditional investment allocation format.”
How do you go about figuring the present value of your benefits? Looking at your statement on SSA.gov can help, but you will have to make a guess as to how long you will live. And if you’re many years away from retirement, you’ll have to make some guesses as to how much you’re likely to earn later in your career.
“You have to use a lot of assumptions,” Klein said. “The closer you are to full retirement age, the easier it is to do the calculation. However, you still have to make assumptions about longevity, which is tricky.”
Others agreed with Klein’s approach.
Counting Social Security as part of your investment allocation, and thus tilting your investments more heavily toward equities, puts your portfolio at too much risk, according to an article written in 2009 by Paul Merriman, president of the Merriman Financial Education Foundation, a longtime financial adviser and a MarketWatch RetireMentor.
Merriman said he still agrees now with what he wrote then.
“In a serious bear market, that heavy equity allocation could wipe out your portfolio’s ability to keep generating the income you need for retirement,” he wrote in the article.
“You’d still have your Social Security, but you might not have much else. You could be forced to drastically cut back your lifestyle—an unfortunate result that started when you didn’t think clearly about this,” he said.

I'm suspicious you are referencing the Gensler brothers, Rob & Gary. Rob left the Media & Telecom fund at Price in 2005 after a long successful tenure to become head of their Global Stock fund. So - there's a date match of sorts. Brother Gary was an analyst at Goldman Sachs in his early financial career around the time you reference. But, far as I can tell, this was not specifically at a mutual fund. Gary, of course, has written a book scathingly critical of mutual funds and has seen government service in Washington.

Hi Guys,
I want to especially thank the MFO members who took precious time to craft a reply to my post. I deeply appreciation the extra effort needed. The replies demonstrate a fine diversity of viewpoints necessary to explore some of the subtleties of the topic, and our sensitivities to it. That’s good. Thank you all.
You all know that I’m a pure amateur in financial planning matters. I have never earned a dime selling investment advice or forecasts. I only participate actively on this website, and primarily focus on mathematical subjects.
I’m motivated to do so by my general observation that many US citizens, including financial counselors, are relatively numerically challenged. This observation is not only in regards to sophisticated mathematical methods, but disappointingly to simple arithmetic operations. For example, many do not exploit statistical base-rate data when making investment decisions even when that data is readily accessible.
That deficiency alone could do major damage to a portfolio. My postings and references are mostly designed and selected to address and to reduce that defect.
“Remember, O Stranger, arithmetic is the first of the sciences, and the mother of safety.” I culled that quote from John Bogle’s most recent book. He referenced Supreme Court Justice Brandeis who purportedly quoted Sophocles. I hate complexity.
The long and incomplete list of “experts” that I cited in my original post all concede that a few money managers have the skill set, the resources, and the intangible talent to beat the market. The difficulty is to identify these fortunate souls in a timely manner. Bogle’s analogy is the finding of a needle in a haystack. He concludes that that is too daunting a task. His flippant recommendation is to buy the haystack.
As I read your comments, I reviewed my original post. Even the “experts” on my Index proponent list are not always so expert; they too are not immune to mistakes, and some of these are really gross errors. I was reminded of one such error by Peter Lynch that must be close to shattering records in that category. It’s a lesson learning good story.
It’s often called “The 7 % Fiasco”. In a 1995 Worth Magazine article, Lynch claimed it is perfectly safe to withdraw 7 % annually from a retirement portfolio that is 100 % committed to equities. The absurdity of that claim was immediately challenged by Scott Burns, then of the Dallas Morning News, after completing irrefutable research. To his credit, Lynch quickly acknowledged his error and rescinded the article.
The original article could have done considerable retirement planning damage if not corrected. I was doing Monte Carlo drawdown simulations during that timeframe and was getting acceptable withdrawal rates in the 4 % annual range. By the way, add Scott Burns to my list of passive Index supporters.
I suspect we all fall victim to what the behavioral wizards call Confirmation bias. We more or less screen and sort information in a manner that reinforces our existing investment philosophy. It is very hard to resist this bias. Like one of my favorite Paul Simon songs “The Boxer” says: “A man hears what he wants to hear, and disregards the rest.” I think most of us recognize that there is no single way, no magic formula, to engage and profit from the markets.
What works to make the individual investor comfortable is right for that person. It seems that David Snowball operates this website with freedom of opinion as a guiding principle. We and our portfolios will prosper from that go-anywhere, open-minded freedom. Thank you David.
Controversy and debate is good. It generates better investment decisions. In doing so, please focus on the merits and shortcomings of the various arguments, not on any perceived personal traits of those making their cases.
Personally, I welcome opinion deviances while critically examining the substance of the supporting analysis, not its presentation style. I believe most of you guys do the same.
I suspect far too many among us invest far too much time in seeking an imaginary miracle money man. This financial miracle master will have the uncommon wisdom to correctly gauge the worldwide economic environment, be able to project the differential performance advantages between fixed income and equity market holdings, properly project critical market tipping points, assemble a portfolio that generates market-equivalent rewards while avoiding any market meltdowns, and can accomplish these Herculean tasks without incurring any major cost leakage impacts. Wow!
Such an investment superman is an unrealistic myth. A century of searching the records and scores of academic studies fail to discover more than a handful of these financial heroes, none of which were pre-identified for such extraordinary performance before the fact.
This is an overwhelming mission impossible assignment. Now, if pigs could fly ……
In closing, my number One takeaway from this exchange is that grand illusions die hard.
As a dedicated and informed group, we generally feel that both technical market timing and stock picking are almost fictional art forms, at least from a reliability and persistency perspective. We recognize that these active management techniques work sometimes, but also fail in a costly manner at other times. Yet we still pursue the golden dream of excess returns.
I suppose we all share some animal spirit genes. Hope is eternal and often conquers logic.
Good luck everybody.
Best Wishes.

Hi Guys,
Do you consider yourself an Active or a Passive investor?
I fully recognize that this is not an either/or question for most investors. Many of us would likely characterize ourselves as somewhere in the mid-spectrum that exists between the polar 100 % active advocate and the opposite 100 % passive proponent bookends.
I propose that how an investor answers two simple questions goes a long way at identifying his position on that spectrum. Here are the two basic yes/no questions.
Do you believe that market timing is a repeatable skill?
Do you believe that stock selection is a lasting skill?
The yes/no replies to these questions establish a 2 by 2 dimensional matrix.
If you answered yes/yes, you are in group 1. If you responded yes/no, you are in group 2. If you replied no/yes, you are in group 3. And if you concluded no/no, you are in group 4.
The interpretation of the matrix assignment is not rocket science. The group 1 residents are likely strong active fund true believers. The group 2 and group 3 residents are still active fund management supporters, but perhaps less adamantly so. Within the group 4 box you will find the passive Index fund proponents.
I’m sure this simplistic and linear interpretation shocks nobody. A more interesting question is: Does your investment style conform to the matrix answers that you provided?
I suspect some noteworthy exceptions exist. This little quiz might serve to crystallize your thinking on the subject; it might also help to adjust your investment style such that it is more compatible with your feelings towards the two investment dimensions that these questions probe.
I answered no/no with little hesitation. So, I am firmly in the group 4 category camp. Yet my portfolio has both active and passive mutual fund/ETF holdings. I suppose that’s because I do think that some talented professionals can enhance performance at the margins with a smidgen of superior stock selection and/or timing skills. The issue with me is that I question if they can accomplish these demanding tasks persistently, and with enough excess rewards to overcome the incremental costs. Deep down, I seriously doubt persistency, and I see the cost hurdle as almost insurmountable.
I am surely not alone in the group 4 category. My cellmates come with extraordinary credentials and authority.
From the investment community there is Warren Buffett, Charley Munger, John Bogle, Benjamin Graham, Peter Lynch, Ted Aronson, Rick Ferri, and Charles Schwab.
From the ivy covered walls of academia we have Bill Sharpe, Burton Malkiel, Paul Samuelson, Daniel Kahneman, David Swensen, Jack Meyer, and Andrew Lo.
Continuing, from the financial journalists army, there is Mark Hulbert, Jason Zweig, Jonathon Clements, Allan Roth, and Holman Jenkins. Ted’s posting of Mark Hulbert’s Butter and S&P 500 article actually prompted me to post. Hulbert is a recent convert into the group 4 rating.
It’s a mighty crowded room that is currently more heavily populated by institutional agencies. These agencies are replacing active management with a passive Index approach because of disappointing results over time..
The empirical evidence says that superior, persistent active management outcomes are sparse with miniscule odds of success. A recent Dimensional Fund Advisor study showed that only 1 % of actively managed equity funds beat their benchmarks for 5 straight years (23 out of 2,231).
I certainly could not a priori identify members of this illusive group of winners. As Winston Churchill remarked: “The greatest lesson in life is to know that even fools are right sometimes.” The debate over skill and luck within the investment community remains unresolved, but the smart money is more and more betting the luck side of that controversy.
The active fund management landscape is littered with fallen idols. Ken Heebner’s CGM Focus fund was the very best performing mutual fund from 2000 to 2009. It has hit hard times over the last 5 years. It is an extremely volatile fund that induces frequent investor turnover. Even while it was returning 18 % annually during that period, its clients were rewarded with a startling minus 10 % annual loss. That’s tragic.
Bad entry/exit timing seems to be the norm among active mutual fund supporters. They love to play the “Hot” hand. History demonstrates that Hot reverts to Cold very quickly and very unpredictably. Once again, individual active fund investors are victims to the market’s “regression-to-the-mean” law.
DALBAR annual studies consistently conclude that private investors receive less than one-half of the returns that their purchased mutual funds deliver. Individual investors have a notoriously negative timing sense that erodes their wealth.
All these studies and data are distressing and depressing, but also enlightening. Years ago, I was 100 % committed to active mutual funds. That is no longer the case. Today, two-thirds of my portfolio is consigned to passive holdings. I’m slowly learning and migrating in the passive direction.
Why not all the way? One answer is that I like the excitement, the fun, the entertainment value. Another is that I enjoy the challenge. Yet another is that I’ve been lucky all my life and hope that luck continues.
However, none of these reasons are compelling. None of these considerations override my desire for cost containment and overarching reliability. The marketplace is wild enough without accepting the additional risks of downside excursions introduced by sometimes hot, sometimes cold, often unpredictable active management. The normal market risk completely satisfies any residual boldness risks that I might still harbor.
Your thoughts on this matter will greatly enhance the value of this posting line. Please contribute to balance and extend the scope of this topic.
Best Regards.

FYI:
Regards,
Ted
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/mistaken-lessons-from-the-financial-crisis-2013-09-06/print?guid=1D55AB34-16F8-11E3-8D89-00212876B3FC

Hi Max- this conversation is a good example of how things can get muddled when there is no general agreement on key words in subjects under discussion. For example: "in-and-out trading and attempting to "time" the Market".
What does ""in-and-out trading" mean to you? Or me? Or Charles or David? Probably we would all agree that none of us are "day-traders"- that word at least is pretty self-descriptive. Looking at the long end though, things get pretty murky: If day-trade defines the short end, what defines the long? Twenty years? 10? 5? Pick a number, and someone is sure to be using it. At what point is someone then trying to "time" the market?
Personally, I think that folks like Flack are essentially "timers", because he uses a set of predefined evaluation techniques to determine a buy or sell position, year-in and year-out, pretty much regardless of macro changes in the world as we know it. And, it surely seems to work for him, more power to him.
But if I say that Flack is a "timer", and yet I also make but and sell decisions based on market conditions, what's the difference between us? Am I a "timer" also? Well, maybe in the eyes of some, and that's OK with me, but I don't regard myself as a timer. My major buy/sell decisions are based to a large degree on what I observe happening in the word... not just the S&P or some other gauge, but in the world as a whole entity.
Am I right? Sometimes: back in the 70s with double-digit inflation roaring away things were a mess. Well, either things were going completely to hell and it wasn't going to make much difference what we did, or somehow someone would get things back under control. I came across some Utah-issued muni bonds paying some 14% (!) tax-free interest. H'mmm- Mormons are pretty sharp businessmen, and usually pretty honest as well. What the hell, why not? Great move- Volker took care of inflation, the Mormons paid 14% for some five years until the first available call date. Wrong as hell sometimes too... that's life.
Speaking of bonds, the handwriting on the wall has been there for bonds for a long time now. Some folks decided to ride that train right to the last stop. I didn't- got off starting late last year, and as of May was almost completely to cash on that bond allocation. Back in May and June I also really lightened up on equity exposure, not to the degree on bonds, but light, because I simply cannot predict the degree of turmoil that will be seen as the Fed changes hands, and also, direction. I looked at the instability in Egypt, Syria and Iraq, and the potential problems with Iran, not to mention Israel doing something uncontrollable. What's happening right now in a country that affects the entire financial and international trade world- China?
I realize that there are plenty of folks that don't work this way: For example, Ted, certainly a very knowledgeable fellow, is able to sleep well without worrying about any of this stuff. And, so far this summer, he's a bit ahead in the game. But any one of those factors that I've mentioned is quite capable of taking this market, or some significant part of it, down sharply in a matter of days, if not hours. Given this mess of fish, I simply believed that I would sleep a lot better until we begin to see, if not resolution, at least a sense of direction on some of this crap.
I keep a relatively large number of funds, all managed, to spread the risk around as much as possible, including relatively small exposure (no more than10% aggregate) to a few things that seem to be doing well at the time, simply because they are. If conditions change, and they stop doing well, then that's it- goodbye PONDX, I'm gone.
Max, I don't mean to be critical, but there's no way that I would keep some 45% of a portfolio in bonds right here- anybody's bonds- simply because the goodness or badness of the entities issuing those bonds is NOT the issue right now: the issue, Max, is what kinds of stuff is happening in the big picture to affect ALL of those bonds, whether they are good, bad or indifferent?* It's not a question of loyalty to a geographic area, or to a fund house: it's just a recognition that the degree of instability and potential instability right now means that we have to be able to move things around perhaps more than we normally would because neither we nor anyone else can either predict nor control all of those gray ducks sitting out there waiting to become black swans.
At this point, though, I think that much of the damage has already been done. If anything, I would try DCA'ing out of PREMEX especially, maybe 5% at a time, watching very carefully how things are progressing generally. It's true- cash these days pays nothing. But "nothing" is a lot better than you paying 10% to the market, yes?
Good luck and take care-
OJ
* This is an excellent example of a "run-on sentence", and as such should generally be avoided.

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/745467/000119312513358529/d594379d497.htm
Meridian Equity Income Fund®
Meridian Growth Fund®
Meridian Value Fund® (now known as Meridian Contrarian Fund®)
(each, a “Fund” and collectively, the “Funds”)
Supplement dated September 5, 2013 to the
Prospectus dated November 1, 2012, as supplemented
On May 15, 2013, Arrowpoint AIM LLC, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Arrowpoint Asset Management, LLC (“Arrowpoint”), entered into an agreement with Aster Investment Management Co., Inc., the previous investment adviser to the Funds (“Aster”), to acquire substantially all of Aster’s assets, including its management rights with respect to the Funds (the “Transaction”). The Transaction was subject to certain conditions to closing, including, among others, approval by Meridian’s Board of Directors and by each Fund’s shareholders of a new investment management agreement between Arrowpoint and Meridian, on behalf of each of the Funds; such approvals were obtained on June 11, 2013 and August 28, 2013, respectively.
The Transaction closed on September 5, 2013, and, as a result, the following proposals have become effective as of this date:
• Approval of a new investment management agreement between Arrowpoint and Meridian, on behalf of each of the Funds.
• Amendment of each Fund’s fundamental investment restrictions with respect to issuer diversification requirements.
• Amendment of each Fund’s fundamental investment restriction with respect to entering into repurchase agreements and making loans.
• Amendment of each Fund’s fundamental investment restriction with respect to short sales of securities.
• Elimination of each Fund’s fundamental investment restriction with respect to purchasing and writing put and call options.
In view of the foregoing, and other related matters, the Prospectus for each of the Funds is hereby supplemented as follows:
1. Change of Fund Name. Effective as of the date of this supplement, the name of the Meridian Value Fund is being changed to the Meridian Contrarian Fund. The investment objective, investment policies and the investment strategies of the Fund are not being changed in connection with the name change for the Fund and the current portfolio managers will continue to manage the Fund.
As a result of this change, all references to the “Meridian Value Fund” in the Prospectus are deleted and replaced with the “Meridian Contrarian Fund”, except as the context may otherwise require.
2. Change of Investment Adviser. Arrowpoint is the investment adviser to the Funds.
• All references to the “Investment Adviser” in the Prospectus are deemed to be references to Arrowpoint, except as the context may otherwise require.
• The information under the caption “Management” in the “Fund Summary” section of each Fund is hereby replaced with Arrowpoint Asset Management, LLC.
• The first paragraph in the section of the Prospectus entitled “Organization and Management – The Investment Adviser” is deleted and replaced in its entirety with the following:
Arrowpoint Asset Management, LLC, located at 100 Fillmore St., Suite 325, Denver, CO 80206, serves as the investment adviser to the Funds. The Investment Adviser, an investment adviser registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) since 2009 and privately owned by its principals, manages the investments of the Funds’ portfolios, provides administrative services and manages Meridian’s other business affairs. These services are subject to general oversight by the Board. Pursuant to an Investment Management Agreement and Service Agreement between Meridian, on behalf of the Funds, and the Investment Adviser, dated September 5, 2013 (the “Management Agreement”), the Investment Adviser provides investment advisory services to the Funds.
Prior to September 5, 2013, the Funds were managed by Aster Investment Management Co., Inc. (the “Previous Investment Adviser”) pursuant to an Investment Management Agreement and Service Agreement between Meridian, on behalf of the Funds, and the Previous Investment Adviser, dated July 13, 2012 (the “Aster Management Agreement”). On May 15, 2013, the Previous Investment Adviser entered into an agreement (the “Asset Purchase Agreement”) to sell substantially all of its assets, including its rights with respect to the Aster Management Agreement, and transfer certain liabilities to Arrowpoint AIM LLC, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Investment Adviser (the “Transaction”). The Transaction was subject to certain conditions to closing, including, among others, approval by Meridian’s Board of Directors and by each Fund’s shareholders of a new investment management agreement between the Investment Adviser and Meridian, on behalf of each of the Funds; such approvals were obtained on June 11, 2013 and August 28, 2013, respectively. The closing of the Transaction occurred on September 5, 2013 and resulted in the automatic termination of the Aster Management Agreement.
There are no material differences between the Management Agreement and the Aster Management Agreement. In this regard, the Management Agreement and the Aster Management Agreement contain the same terms, conditions, and fee rates, including applicable breakpoints, and provide for the same management services.
3. Portfolio Manager Changes. The portfolio managers primarily responsible for overseeing the investments of Meridian Growth Fund have changed.
• The information under the caption “Portfolio Management Team” in the “Fund Summary” section of the Meridian Growth Fund is hereby replaced with the following:
Chad Meade serves as a Co-Portfolio Manager of the Fund. Mr. Meade, who joined the Investment Adviser in 2013, has served as a Co-Portfolio Manager of the Fund since September 5, 2013.
Brian Schaub, CFA, serves as a Co-Portfolio Manager of the Fund. Mr. Schaub, who joined the Investment Adviser in 2013, has served as a Co-Portfolio Manager of the Fund since September 5, 2013.
• The information in the section of the Prospectus entitled “Organization and Management – Portfolio Managers” is deleted and replaced in its entirety with the following:
James England, CFA
Co-Portfolio Manager of Meridian Equity Income Fund and Meridian Contrarian Fund.
Employed by the Investment Adviser as an investment management professional since 2013. Mr. England was formerly employed with the Previous Investment Adviser since 2001. Before that, Mr. England was an equities derivatives trader with TD Securities from 2000 to 2001.
Chad Meade
Co-Portfolio Manager of Meridian Growth Fund
Employed by the Investment Adviser as an investment management professional since 2013. Mr. Meade previously served as a co-portfolio manager and Executive Vice President of the Janus Triton Fund and the Janus Venture Fund. He has 14 years of experience in the financial industry and focused on small and mid-capitalization stocks in the health care and industrials sectors as an equity research analyst at Janus Capital Management LLC from 2001 to 2011. Prior to starting with Janus in August 2001, Mr. Meade was a financial analyst for Goldman Sachs’ global investment research team. He graduated summa cum laude from Virginia Tech with a Bachelor’s degree in Finance and was a member of the Omicron Delta Kappa Honor Society.
James O’Connor, CFA
Co-Portfolio Manager of Meridian Equity Income Fund and Meridian Contrarian Fund.
Employed by the Investment Adviser as an investment management professional since 2013. Mr. O’Connor was formerly employed with the Previous Investment Adviser since 2004. From 2003 to 2004, Mr. O’Connor was a Research Associate with RBC Dain Rauscher. Mr. O’Connor was an Investment Bank Intern at RSM Equico in 2002. From 2000 to 2001, Mr. O’Connor was a Compliance Associate at Thomas Weisel Partners.
Brian Schaub, CFA
Co-Portfolio Manager of Meridian Growth Fund
Employed by the Investment Adviser as an investment management professional since 2013. Mr. Schaub previously served as a co-portfolio manager and Executive Vice President of the Janus Triton Fund and the Janus Venture Fund. He has 13 years of experience. Mr. Schaub served as an equity research analyst at Janus Capital Management LLC from 2000 to 2011, focused on small and mid-capitalization stocks in the communications sector. He graduated cum laude from Williams College with a Bachelor’s degree in Economics. Mr. Schaub also holds a Chartered Financial Analyst designation.
The SAI provides additional information about James England, Chad Meade, James O’ Connor, and Brian Schaub, including their compensation structure, other accounts they manage and their ownership of securities in the Funds they manage.
4. Short Sales. The following sentence is inserted as the last paragraph in the section of the Prospectus entitled “Further Information About Investment Objectives and Principal Investment Strategies – General”:
The Funds do not engage in short sales, but the Board may permit a Fund to engage in such transactions in the future.

Reply to @Ted: Speaking as a retired radio technician, I would allow some flexibility before making any sort of definite statement such as "there is nothing wrong with my computer".
In fact, that might be completely true, in the sense that there is no electronic or software malfunction on the part of your computer. But it just isn't as simple as that, in this day of ridiculously complex systems. Your computer may be just fine, but have stored in the browser settings some obscure "yes" or "no" that deals with retaining cookies from MFO.
When attempting to sort out this kind of thing, it is invaluable to be able to step back from any preconceived judgement, and try to apply some sort of logic test. Here's a few tests, for example:
• If I use a different browser, say "Firefox", does the same thing happen? If not, then there is probably some setting in the IE browser which is the root cause of all this.
• Since it worked just fine for quite a while, is there anything at all that I've changed lately? Or maybe anyplace that I've visited on the web that I don't ordinarily go to?
• If I have a backup drive (which is a really good idea) and I start from that, what happens?
• How about if I use a different computer?
• If very few others or even no one else on MFO is having the same problem, what are the odds that the problem lies with MFO rather than something at my end? What does the lack of other folks posting similar problems suggest?
• On the other hand, if a number of others are having this problem, what might we have in common, either hardware or software (browser, especially)?
I really don't think that changing passwords is going to affect anything one way or the other. Getting mad and going away certainly won't solve anything. Computers will drive you nuts.
A word on cookies: I've had a number of similar problems with sites other than MFO over the years. If you do manage to contact someone in their technical "help" (HA!!) the advice is always the same- "Try clearing out ALL of your cookies". Great. Just great. Wait until the next time you try to access your brokerage account, your credit card account, your bank account, etc. No cookies, no access. I don't use IE, so I'm not familiar with how that browser allows you to manipulate it's stored cookies. But the hard thing is, you've either got to find the one that's set wrong, or clean house and start from the very beginning. Not a lot of fun.
On my Firefox browser, for example, under "Preferences/Privacy/Show Cookies", there is a folder named "mutualfundobserver.com", and in that folder are some 10 or 11 cookies. What do they do? I have no idea. But if I had a problem like yours, I would dump/clear/get rid of that entire folder, and then start all over again with MFO. Perhaps a new password at that point might make sense.
One more thing- since I don't like cookies to start with, I have my browser set to ask permission each time a site wants to set one. I usually say "no", but sometimes say "until end of session". Once you say "no", it's all over- the next time you visit that site your browser won't mention cookies again, but some modules of that site may not function. If you use "session", you will get asked every time. For a very few sites, such as financial accounts and MFO, I accept the cookies permanently.
It sounds to me as if you might have either said "no" to something at some point, or maybe you are set for "session" only, and that might account for the unpredictability at your end.
Hope all of this is some help.
Regards, OJ

http://www.financial-planning.com/news/how-to-succeed-in-the-wealth-management-industry-2686470-1.html?gpt_units=/DCDB
http://investwithanedge.com/
limbo season
http://investwithanedge.com/index.php?s=editor+
Editor's Corner
Limbo Season
Ron Rowland
It’s limbo time, and we aren’t referring to the Caribbean dance where participants lean backward to pass under a pole. However, some political pundits would proclaim that President Obama’s recent contortions regarding military actions in Syria are quite limboesque as he tries to avoid touching the pole of political fallout. Today, we are going to use the non-dance and non-religious definition of limbo: “an uncertain period of awaiting a decision or resolution; an intermediate state or condition.”
Last week, as evidence mounted against Syrian President Assad, President Obama declared he was prepared to begin launching missiles immediately. After U.K.’s Parliament voted against military action and some U.S. citizens voiced their displeasure, the president reversed course and said he would first seek authorization from Congress. This process could take days or weeks, during which the status of U.S. military strikes against Syria remain in limbo.
Tapering of the Federal Reserve’s $85 billion in monthly bond purchases has been in limbo since May. Recent consensus suggests the Fed could begin tapering operations later this month at its next FOMC meeting. The September 18 post-meeting policy statement and press conference will be closely watched.
Remember the debt ceiling? It’s back. Latest estimates put mid-October as the time when the U.S. Treasury will hit its debt ceiling. Both sides of the aisle appear to be digging in their heels for a fierce and extended fight. Congressional leaders have had months to work out a plan, but this is expected to go down to the wire once again, leaving the debt ceiling in limbo for another six weeks.
We also had a little bit of limbo in the quote mechanics during trading today. The Nasdaq added to its quote problems of a couple weeks ago with a six minute outage today, and the NYSE piled on with its own nine minute lapse.
Last, and also least, the season is in limbo. Labor Day weekend and back-to-school define the “End of Summer” for most U.S. citizens. For many, this week marks a period of new beginnings, surpassed in importance only by the annual rollover of the calendar year on January 1. However, the autumnal equinox (for the northern hemisphere) doesn’t occur until September 22, marking the true end of summer and beginning of autumn. Summer is now in limbo and will remain there for the next 18 days.
Sectors
Technology held on to its first place ranking and even managed to post a gain for the week. However, upside momentum is slowly evaporating for it and most other sectors. Health Care, Consumer Discretionary, and Energy all climbed two spots and now hold the second through fourth place positions. Their improvement was made possible by declines in Materials and Industrials, which slid down to occupy fifth and sixth respectively. The bottom five categories are in downward trends and posting negative momentum larger in magnitude than a week ago. Their relative order remains the same with Real Estate firmly entrenched in last place.
Styles
The quantity of negatively trending Style categories doubled since last week from two to four. Additionally, Large Cap Growth is hugging the zero line and could easily be pushed either direction. Market leadership still resides in the lower-right-hand corner of the Style Box. Small Cap Growth and Micro Cap take top honors again, and their duopoly on control of the top is now entering its fourth month. Mid Cap Growth and Small Cap Blend swapped places, but the change does little to alter the overall landscape. Large Cap Growth edged into the top five, which now marks a clear market preference for Growth over Value. In fact, all three Value categories are now in negative trends along with last place Mega Cap.
Global
Just four Global categories are posting positive momentum scores today. China had an impressive week, moving up from second place to take the top spot away from Europe. Europe lost ground as both stocks and the euro came under pressure the past week when tensions in Syria escalated. The U.K. held steady in third place and is now attempting to renew its rally. Canada continues its slow climb up the rankings, not by displaying strength but by simply holding its ground the past few weeks. EAFE, the U.S., and World Equity all flipped over to negative momentum. If today’s upward moves prove to be sustainable, then all three could be back in positive territory by next week. Pacific ex-Japan posted excellent results for the week boosted by strength in all its constituents except Singapore. Japan slipped a notch, although it just posted a two-day rebound of better than 4%. Positive spin for Latin America can be hard to find. However, two things to keep in mind include the fact it found support this past week at its June and July lows and is now less risky than any other time in the past four years to establish a new position.

Playing the game of probability. What fund has he picked that's in the doldrums that he thinks will outperform?
With such funds, you like the manager, ,you invest. Yes, one has to time it. WHEN vs WHY. So new investors, sure don't buy. Existing investors, no reason to sell. It all depends on why you bought the fund. If you bought fund to get exposure to financial stocks? Please sell immediately.

FYI:
Regards,
Ted
http://www.financial-planning.com/fp_issues/43_9/unmatched-401-k-contributions-are-there-better-alternatives-2686297-1.html?zkPrintable=true

FYI: Hard to find yields above 3 to 4 percent in opened-ended- mutual funds.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.financial-planning.com/fp_issues/43_9/mutual-fund-strategies-manage-income-expectations-2686303-1.html?zkPrintable=true

FYI:
Regards,
Ted
http://www.financial-planning.com/fp_issues/43_9/hennessey-focus-fund-manager-profile-2686306-1.html?zkPrintable=true
M* Snapshot Of HFCSX: http://quotes.morningstar.com/fund/hfcsx/f?t=hfcsx

I wouldn't let one person's cynicism detract from a useful article. What Ted may have meant is that Merriman's points are very basic to investors and probably already well understood by 90% of the folks here at MFO. Yes - for the latest "inside scoop" look elsewhere. But, occasionally we need to be reminded of the basics. You really can't talk investing without an awareness of risk & risk assessment. That's the underlying premise for all the various target-date funds often discussed here and for many other funds as well.
I thought shutting-out daily financial news was great advice if you can do it. As I find the daily dribble often entertaining or amusing, it's hard for me to shut it out completely. A heavy dose of cynicism towards all the stuff that gets reported is probably about the best I can achieve. Can only hope that no one here is continually "adjusting" their investment plans based on every breaking morsel from CNBC, Bloomberg, or anywhere else. Yikes - the recent waffling over whether or not we're going to war with Syria would probably be enough to drive such a individual nuts!

Thanks MJG. Great simulator.Everyone should use the Sensitivity Analysis feature to plug in standard deviation factors as well as annualized returns that are readily available @ M*. The 15 year numbers, when available ,should factor in the dot.com bubble of 2001 and the "financial meltdown" of 2008-09. Try plugging in VFINX(16.19 standard deviation/5.46% 15 YR annualized return,WHOSX 14.67/7.13,BRUFX 14.18/13.62,CGMFX 29.20/13.73,TGLDX 33.53/13.83 or FPACX 11.46/9.13.To factor in a new car purchase, just add an average purchase/lease amount to the annual spending parameter.The standard deviation is as important to any long term investor as any up/down capture or a 1-3 Yr return that catches one's eyes.