Interesting Ted, but I wonder if TRP sold out of VRX already. PRGFX was down only -0.7% yesterday, not much different then the S&P500. SEQUX was down -7.7% with the VRX drop.
And actually, SEQUX's drop of -7.7% with VRX's drop of 52% says that the Sequoia percentage in VRX is "only" about 15% (all other investments being flat).

@MFO Members: From the what its worth department, of the largest ten holders of VRX T. Rowe Price has five funds who's total holdings are almost as great as Sequioa's.
Regards,
Ted
Sequoia 12,803,392
T. Rowe Price Growth Stock 4,878,500
T. Rowe Price Blue Chip Growth 2,722,700
T. Rowe Price Health Sciences 2,319,205
T. Rowe Price Instl Large Cap Growth 1,567,179
T. Rowe Price Value 1,165,000

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1215880/000141304216000370/neimansupplargecap497.htm
497 1 neimansupplargecap497.htm
Neiman Large Cap Value Fund
Class C Shares (NECMX)
For Investors Seeking Long-Term Capital Appreciation
Supplement dated March 16, 2016 to the
Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information dated August 1, 2015
____________________________________________________________________________________
The Board of Trustees of Neiman Funds (the "Trust") has concluded that it is in the best interests of the Neiman Large Cap Value Fund (the "Fund") and its shareholders that the Fund cease offering Class C shares. Effective immediately, the Fund will not accept any new investments in Class C shares.
Class C shareholders of record as of March 29, 2016, will have their Class C shares exchanged for load-waived Class A shares (NEAMX) effective March 30, 2016. That is, Class A shares will be issued without any sales charge. Exchanges are made at net asset value such that the value of your investment does not change as a result of the exchange. Additionally, Class A shares have lower operating expenses than Class C shares. An exchange of shares is not a taxable event for federal tax purposes.
IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, PLEASE CONTACT THE FUND AT 1-877-385-2720.
________________________
This Supplement and the existing Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information ("SAI") each dated August 1, 2015, provide relevant information for all shareholders and should be retained for future reference. The Prospectus and the SAI have been filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, are incorporated by reference, and can be obtained without charge by calling toll-free 1-877-385-2720.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1215880/000141304216000371/neimansupptacticalincome497.htm
497 1 neimansupptacticalincome497.htm
Neiman Tactical Income Fund
Class C Shares (NTCFX)
For Investors Seeking Total Return With Capital Preservation as a Secondary Objective
Supplement dated March 16, 2016 to the
Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information dated August 1, 2015
____________________________________________________________________________________
The Board of Trustees of Neiman Funds (the "Trust") has concluded that it is in the best interests of the Neiman Tactical Income Fund (the "Fund") and its shareholders that the Fund cease offering Class C shares. Effective immediately, the Fund will not accept any new investments in Class C shares.
Class C shareholders of record as of March 29, 2016, will have their Class C shares exchanged for load-waived Class A shares (NTAFX) effective March 30, 2016. That is, Class A shares will be issued without any sales charge. Exchanges are made at net asset value such that the value of your investment does not change as a result of the exchange. Additionally, Class A shares have lower operating expenses than Class C shares. An exchange of shares is not a taxable event for federal tax purposes.
IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, PLEASE CONTACT THE FUND AT 1-877-385-2720.
________________________
This Supplement and the existing Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information ("SAI") each dated August 1, 2015, provide relevant information for all shareholders and should be retained for future reference. The Prospectus and the SAI have been filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, are incorporated by reference, and can be obtained without charge by calling toll-free 1-877-385-2720.

@MFO Members: Here is today's M* article placing Sequoia "under review" !
Regards,
Ted
http://news.morningstar.com/articlenet/article.aspx?id=745818

Sequoia (SEQUX) has always been a Gold fund in the judgment of Morningstar's analysts. Today it was placed "under review." Morningstar offers two reasons for that: (1) investors are bailing out and have pulled $800 million over the past six months. That goofs with both execution and tax efficiency. (2) "[T]he team does not seem to have taken any steps to mitigate the risks of such a large position.... Because of these concerns, we have placed this fund under review."
Oddly, they also placed it "under review" on October 30, 2015. At that point, Valeant was over 30% of the fund, investors had presumably been pulling money and the management team conducted their slightly-freakish public defense of their Valeant stake. Following the review, the analysts reaffirmed their traditional judgment: Gold! The described it as "compelling" in the week before the review and "a top choice" in the week afterward.
There's no evidence in the reaffirmation statement that the analysts actually talked to Sequoia management. If they didn't, they were irresponsible. If they did and asked about risk management, they were either deceived by management ("don't worry, we're clear-eyed value investors and we're acting to control risk") or management was honest ("we're riding out the storm") and the analysts thought "good enough for us!" I don't find any of that reassuring.
Similarly, up until quite recently Morningstar's stock analyst assigned to Valeant recognized "near-term pain" while praising the firms "flawless execution" of its acquisition strategy and the "opportunities [that] exist for Valeant long term."
David

I have personally known 4 people who chose a lump sum option from their employer in retirement vs annuity option. All 4 are in serious trouble now.

Ya I know someone who did the same thing when he retired 5 years ago at 62 and is in trouble now.
Spent every dime. Really sad to see someone work 30+ years at a tough job and end up with so little in retirement.
Maybe our schools need to teach the kids a jingle (to the tune of a Dinsey song I remember as a kid):
"D-I-S-C-I-P-L ... I-N-E spells Discipline." (dumb - I know)
Gets back to BobC's comment too about avoiding credit card debt.

Bee, I believe the less movable parts the better for a portfolio which is why I like 60/40 to 50/50 funds which balance it for us and make withdrawals easier. I have learned thru the years there are layers and dimensions of risk far beyond the day you buy any other alternative and your post hit on one of those. It seems investors are always confronted with a decision to make of some unpredictable origin if other strategies are adopted and each one of those decisions can be wrong which wipes out all the previous right decisions.

M* shows 46% in its top 5 holdings. Ya gets what ya pays for.

FYI: (Click On Article Title At Top Of Google Search)
The US public continues to vote decisively against traditional fund management, which attempts to manage equities actively, and beat broad benchmarks, in return for a fee. In the 12 months to the end of January, according to Morningstar, some $245bn flowed out of active funds while $408bn flowed into passive funds, which merely seek to match the returns of a benchmark and to minimise their fees. Once a niche category, passive funds now account for 32.5 per cent of US assets managed in mutual and exchange traded funds.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=active+fund+managers+find+their+voice+FT

I would like to hear from other retirees who have successfully navigate a portfolio's downside risk in retirement from the point of view of a safe withdrawal "method". In other words, along with a SWR (Safe Withdrawal Rate) there also needs to be guidance on managing a SWM (Safe Withdrawal Method). What part of the portfolio will serve as the vehicle for this safe withdrawal "rate" and when will that withdrawal happen. Cash seem to be a part of a retiree portfolio that might help with this.
@hank lamented as to the "when" with his comment,"We don't take a lot out, but have been traditionally taking the full year's distribution in January. Worked well up until this January. Got stung a little. In the future we'll stagger withdrawals over a full year." As a follow up question, what did you decide to redeem; stock, bonds, or cash?
Obviously redeeming and withdrawing shares of equities that have lost 50% of their value (due to market volatility) doesn't sound like a very safe withdrawal method, but holding cash (or a cash like investment) as the withdrawal vehicle would seem to help remove market volatility out of a portfolio withdrawal.
I have found that saving into market volatility (both up or down) isn't nearly as a emotional as spending down a portfolio's assets. Separating out a portion of one's portfolio into cash for emergencies or for future spending might be one way to calm the emotional side of the withdrawal.
Thanks for the thread @shipwreckedandalone...Additional thoughts?

@MFO Members: From 2012-YTD the S&P 500 Index has outperformed SEQEX. I agree with BobC, its time to move on.
Regards,
Ted

The rate is important, but living within ones means in retirement is even more important. I have said it many times before, and I say it again: Starting retirement with no mortgage and no burdensome credit card debt can be the most important goal of retirement planning. This alone can reduce spending by 30-50% and makes a huge impact on the withdrawal rate.

VRX dropped 51% today.

Didn't SEQUX go down 7.69% today, 3/15?

Looks like the fund went down by 15% today. At first, I thought they had sold Valeant but the quote from Morningstar was 3/14. When I saw the quote was old, I searched and found today's.

Asset Allocation RPHYX
Type %
Net %
Short %
Long Bench-
mark Cat
Avg
As of 02/29/2016
Cash 46.66 — 46.66 — 4.42
US Stock 0.00 — 0.00 — 1.33
Non US Stock 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.01
Bond 51.02 — 51.02 — 92.87
Other 2.32 — 2.32 — 1.36

Hi Carefree. If you didn't own SEQUX, would you buy it to fill that space? I always thought I would like to buy that fund if it ever opened up again, but I now feel like it is not the same fund it was 5-10 years ago. Trust in management and stewardship, a term borrowed from M* is not there for me, even though M* still ranks the fund gold for that aspect.
What's your gut say? For me. the best fund in the world is now in question. There are plenty of good funds to choose from.

For those who might like to listen in:
Wednesday, March 23, 2016
3p.m. ET
30-Minute Live Webcast Followed by Q&A
Current market fluctuations may have you concerned — particularly as you approach or are in retirement. T. Rowe Price can help you take steps to more confidently manage your investments despite market uncertainty.
Sign up here:
TRP event webcast

FYI: Morningstar manager research analysts upgraded the Morningstar Analyst Ratings of one fund and four target-date series in February, but downgraded 11 funds and three target-date series. We also initiated coverage on two funds and two target-date series. Some notable changes are highlighted here; a complete list can be found in the tables below.
Regards,
Ted
http://news.morningstar.com/articlenet/article.aspx?id=745317

FYI: If you have so much as tiptoed into the arena of personal finance over the past few decades, you will have heard about the virtues of passive investing. The argument goes like this: the stock market will outperform other investments over the long term, yet no individual is in a position to outsmart the market as a whole. So the best way to reap the rewards of investing in stocks with minimal risk is to put your money in a fund that tracks the performance of some broad, indexed measure of the market, such as the S. & P. 500.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.newyorker.com/business/currency/is-passive-investment-actively-hurting-the-economy?mbid=rss
Cullen Roche: Passive Investing Isn't hurting The Economy
http://www.pragcap.com/passive-investing-isnt-hurting-the-economy/