http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1004655/000093247115007205/merged485awhitehall092015.htm
Vanguard International Dividend Appreciation Index Fund
Vanguard International High Dividend Yield Index Fund

Hi, willmatt!
And "nuts." I wrote a response a couple hours ago, hit "post" and ran off to a meeting. Upon return, I discovered no-post. Nuts.
GLDSX has all of the trappings of a friends and family fund. Golden Asset Management runs 10 strategies, including this one, through separately managed accounts. They've got about $6.5 billion in AUM. This appears to be the only one also available as a '40 Act fund.
The small core strategy launched in 2002 and claim they're managing about $300 million in the strategy. Why "claim"? Because the performance composite for the strategy lists a composite value of $87 million. Even if you count the fund's $98 million separately, you're still under $200 million.
In any case, it's a focused, even-weight, sector-neutral portfolio. 60 stocks with a 1.67% target weighting. Over the past three and five years, it's beaten the Russell 2000 by 250-300 bps/year. That said, returns tend to be lumpy and performance strikes me as unpredictable. That's not automatically bad but since I don't know why they do what they do, it's hard to know what to make of them.
I did write Golden today and I'll happily share whatever I hear back.
As ever,
David

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/809593/000080959315000072/amrtipsretearneststephens.htm
Too long to post, but here are the funds:
To be liquidated: AMR Class shares of the American Beacon Balanced Fund, American Beacon International Equity Fund, American Beacon Large Cap Value Fund, American Beacon Mid-Cap Value Fund and American Beacon Small Cap Value Fund,
(the A, C, and Y Class shares of the )American Beacon Treasury Inflation Protected Securities Fund, American Beacon Earnest Partners Emerging Markets Equity Fund; and
Reopening: American Beacon Stephens Small Cap Growth Fund

@VintageFreak, I'm sorry to tell you GPEOX hard closed roughly a year ago. Only the new Stalwarts funds are open now and the subscription period has started for the Global Micro Cap fund. GPEOX is already down 15% from it's high in May and it's a bit below the original offering price 21 months ago so maybe it's time to open the fund again and add to their 9% cash stake.
I assume it's clear to everyone from past discussions, but my understanding just in case is that GPMCX is only being sold for direct accounts at GP and existing shareholders of other funds. So Shadow needed to demonstrate existing holdings but won't be able to use an account at any third party to invest in Global Micro Cap. I actually transferred a holding from E*TRADE a month ago in order to open an account and be prepared for GPMCX.

FYI: Current valuations and distribution rates mean long-term investors should take notice.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20150922/BLOG09/150929986?template=printart

I'm thinking of adding GPEOX to my "Artisan" portfolio at Fido. Since I'm not too keen on their new Emerging Markets fund. I hope it does not close too soon.
I just know once I buy it will tank 10-20%.

When I called the transfer agent to have them email me the subscription offering form at work, they asked for the usual verification questions (account number with GP, SSN, confirmed my bank account number). Once I verified all their questions, they emailed me the form.
The transfer agent probably wants some type of proof of GP fund ownership prior to emailing out the form to existing shareholders. I am sure they are going to be busy for the next two weeks with the subscription offering form having to be returned by October 2.
I believe someone mentioned in an earlier GP post that the transfer agent wanted some type of proof of GP fund ownership prior to enrollment and/or possibly emailing out the form as a precaution. Here is that post:
http://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/22531/grandeur-peak-funds-2q-commentary-and-new-funds-launch-info#latest
I would call the GP transfer agent (855) 377-7325 to ascertain what they need for when your account is with a brokerage/third party intermediary.

Strange, indeed. First, I would hope M* gives its employees the option of a self-directed brokerage 401k. Second, there is surely very little imagination put into the selection of the list shown. Since many M* plan participants are rather knowledgeable, I would imagine they would pretty quickly opt for the self-directed option. I know that I would.

@PRESSmUP
And now, for y'alls viewing pleasure, a video to watch the man in action (gloves, boots, face mask, and shovel highly recommended):
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2015-09-21/why-turing-increased-price-of-daraprim-over-500-

@Catch: As of July 2015, the national average pay for RNs was $57,000 annually - Not rich in my book. I will say - a little better than I expected.
After state & federal taxes, social security, contributions to a pension plan & professional or union dues, what's left to live on. Maybe $40,000?
http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Registered_Nurse_(RN)/Hourly_Rate
(Need to enter "RN" in search field at top of page)

We have GPROX (retail) @ Schwab. The last GP info that we received via Schwab was on 10/5, and was presumably revised prospectus info dated August 31. That info dealt with GPEOX/GPEIX; GPGOX/GPGIX; GPROX/GPRIX; and GPIOX/GPIIX. No mention of Grandeur Peak Global Micro Cap Fund (GPMCX).

Hi @hank
You noted:
"(And I haven't met any rich nurses lately.)"
From recall, the current line worker at GM in Michigan earns $22 or $25/hour ($45,800 annual gross). They have a healthcare plan and I believe had about $5,600 last year in a profit sharing scheme.
Lower peninsula, mid-state towards metro Detroit finds a nominal pay scale for an RN nurse at:
---pay at about $32/hour after 5 years of service
---health plan that includes dental/eye
RN's with union representation, in some cases are considered full time employees with only 16 hours of work/week; which allows them to qualify for full benefits...health, etc.
A full and normal work week of 40 hours arrives at $72,800 gross/year. There are RN's, of course; who have a "fair" amount of overtime, which bumps the annual gross.
You're not looking hard enough for the rich nurse. :)
Take care,
Catch

haha, right, not interesting or complex in the least, just dirtbag comedy:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2015/09/21/ceo-of-company-that-raised-the-price-of-old-pill-hundreds-of-dollars-overnight-calls-journalist-a-moron-for-asking-why/

Single payer would be awesome, but unlikely in this country for now.
The daraprim $1-to-$750 story may be a little bit more interesting and complex than the headlines. Or not:
https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2015/09/20/huge-overnight-increase-drug-price-raises-protests/DH94tAOlMzZVDIZj55Y6NP/story.html
The stay-in-business argument:
Daraprim, known generically as pyrimethamine, is used mainly to treat toxoplasmosis, a parasite infection that can cause serious or even life-threatening problems for babies born to women who become infected during pregnancy, and also for those with compromised immune systems, like AIDS patients and certain cancer patients.
Martin Shkreli, founder and chief executive of Turing, said the drug is so rarely used that the impact on the health system would be minuscule and that Turing would use the money it earns to develop better treatments for toxoplasmosis, with fewer side effects.
“This isn’t the greedy drug company trying to gouge patients. It is us trying to stay in business,” Shkreli said. He said many patients use the drug for far less than a year and that the price was now more in line with those of other rare disease drugs.
“It really doesn’t make sense to get any criticism for this,” he said.

I can justify the $14,500 annual cost of the Regeneron/Sanofi cholesterol drug Praluent which dramatically lowers the LDL cholesterol levels for acutely ill or statin-resistant subjects.
I can even justify the $85K treatment course for the new Hep C drugs, given the fact that you are then cured of the disease.
But I can't justify the cost of a tab of a 62 year old medication going overnight from $13.50 to $750 based on a hedge fund manager's takeover of the company.
The goose that laid the golden egg now has a spotlight on it due to this latest goofball.

@Crash: This is the link I post above !
Regards,
Ted
https://www.artisanpartners.com/content/dam/shared/documents/press-releases/mf/International-Closing-Global-Value-Reopening-21-Sep-2015-vR.pdf

Like it or not drug pricing was bound to be an issue over the next year in the run-up to the election, at the likely expense of anything even remotely related to health care. Hillary waged war with the drug companies 20+ years ago and is doing so again.

She did?
"Health-care sector, once a critic of then-first lady's plans for reforms, now lavishing contributions on senator.
July 12 2006: 10:41 AM EDT
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The health-care industry, once a fierce critic of then-first lady Hillary Clinton's reform plans for the sector, is now lavishing campaign contributions on the U.S. senator ahead of her expected presidential bid.
According to Center for Responsive Politics, a non-partisan group that tracks campaign finance filings, Clinton has received $781,112 in contributions from the health-care sector during the current election cycle, which makes her the No. 2 recipient of funds from that sector, behind only Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., who received $977,354."
http://money.cnn.com/2006/07/12/news/newsmakers/healthcare_clinton/

FYI: Biotech investors must have been thinking “not again” today when the group tanked after Hillary Clinton tweeted about the high cost of some drug prices. That’s because a similar event occurred back on July 16th of last year. On that day, Biotech got unexpected attention from Fed Chair Yellen when she singled out the group as an area that has “substantially stretched valuations” in a prepared report that went along with her Senate testimony.
Below is a chart of the Nasdaq Biotech Index with Yellen’s comments highlighted:
Regards,
Ted
https://www.bespokepremium.com/think-big-blog/biotech-chart/

Sadly, Scott, you are correct.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=950192265023019&set=p.950192265023019&type=1

Nice hed. This is chiefly cuz it's her, not cuz there is news here.
From Politico a month ago:
… there is growing evidence that even GOP voters are more concerned about curbing drug prices than dislodging [ACA]. In April, the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation was surprised by a poll showing more Republicans view drug prices as the No. 1 healthcare priority than repealing Obamacare. So the foundation looked further, asking Americans what steps they would back to reduce drug costs.
The results, released [Aug 20], were equally striking: Nearly three-quarters of Americans think drug prices are unreasonably high — and most blame that on drug companies’ drive for profits. That’s true among Republicans, Democrats and independents — a rare point of accord in politics.
… Kaiser’s April poll found repealing the law and its individual mandate came in as Republicans’ second and third top healthcare priorities, chosen by 60 percent and 52 percent, respectively. That trailed the 66 percent who want the president and Congress to address high drug costs for chronically ill patients.
Nonetheless, Republicans are also part of the huge bipartisan majorities that back strong government measures to make drugs affordable, including requiring drug makers to release information on how they set prices (86 percent), allowing Medicare to negotiate for drugs (83 percent), capping what companies can charge for drugs to treat cancer and other life-threatening diseases (76 percent) and importing drugs from Canada (72 percent).