Hmmm. Available in my retirement account. $5M minimum investment. Closed to new investors.
Sorry if I pry, but are you guys such high flyers that you trade in and out of a $5M minimum fund? Or maybe the minimum has not always been that high?
There are several classes of this fund - including load classes and an investor class MFNDX at a $2500 minimum, apparently open. Are you invested in one of these lesser classes, and using MFLDX as a proxy for what you own?
JMO - I'd expect an investor with above $5M in MFLDX would be in the super-$25M investable assets range, and I would expect them to employ professional money management services. Maybe not ...

Just FYI for Champlain fans. I have owned the CIPSX and CIPMX for sometime. So this was automatic for me. I was moving some assets and bought CIPYX yesterday when the market was down.
Needless to say I'll be monitoring their SAI next year since fund is new to make sure manager has skin in the game. Champlain has shown to be good fiduciary and I have confidence I will not be wrong. The fund is already up 10% this year. One can never time these things perfectly, but I expect to hold and DCA into for long haul.
Artisan, Bridgeway, champlain are only few fund families I'm prepared to do "large","mid","small" with. Else its all boutique funds for me and indexing / balanced in retirement accounts.
I'm VF and I approve this message.

(My condolences to his family)
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1366043/000116204414000830/ocean497201407.htm
Oceanstone Fund
Supplement dated July 18, 2014
To Prospectus dated October 24, 2013
With deep and sincere regrets, the Board of Trustees hereby informs you that Mr. James J. Wang passed away. He was the Fund's portfolio manager since its inception in 2006. He was very sincere, hard working, humble, efficient and caring. On July 18, 2014, the Board of Trustees of Oceanstone Fund (the “Trust”) determined, based primarily upon the recommendations of Oceanstone Capital Management, Inc., R.I.A, the investment adviser to the Oceanstone Fund (the “Fund”), to close the Fund and provide for its orderly dissolution. Accordingly, the Trustees have authorized the officers of the Trust to take all appropriate actions necessary for the liquidation of the Fund on or about August 31, 2014. Upon the date of liquidation, those shareholders remaining in the Fund will have their shares redeemed and the proceeds will be distributed as directed.
As a result of these developments, the Fund is closed to new investors, and shares are no longer available for purchase by current shareholders, other than through reinvested dividends. The Fund is no longer pursuing its investment objective.
ANY SHAREHOLDERS WHO HAVE NOT REDEEMED THEIR SHARES OF THE FUND PRIOR TO AUGUST 31, 2014 WILL HAVE THEIR SHARES AUTOMATICALLY REDEEMED AS OF THAT DATE, AND PROCEEDS WILL BE SENT TO THE ADDRESS OF RECORD (For retirement plan accounts, federal taxes of ten percent (10%) of the proceeds will be withheld as per IRS rules if shares are not redeemed before August 31st, 2014). Prior to AUGUST 31, 2014 you may redeem your account, including reinvested distributions, in accordance with the “How to Redeem Shares” section in the Prospectus. Because of the extraordinary circumstances we are waiving the requirement for signature guarantee. If you have questions or need assistance, please contact Mutual Shareholder Services, LLC at 1-800-988-6290.
IMPORTANT INFORMATION FOR RETIREMENT PLAN INVESTORS
If you are a retirement plan investor, you should consult your tax advisor regarding the consequences of a redemption of Fund shares. If you receive a distribution from an Individual Retirement Account or a Simplified Employee Pension (SEP) IRA, you must roll the proceeds into another Individual Retirement Account within sixty (60) days of the date of the distribution in order to avoid having to include the distribution in your taxable income for the year. If you receive a distribution from a 403(b)(7) Custodian Account (Tax-Sheltered account) or a Keogh Account, you must roll the distribution into a similar type of retirement plan within sixty (60) days in order to avoid disqualification of your plan and the severe tax consequences that it can bring. If you are the trustee of a Qualified Retirement Plan, you may reinvest the money in any way permitted by the plan and trust agreement.
______________________________________
This supplement dated July 18, 2014 to the Prospectus dated October 24, 2013 provide the information an investor ought to know and should be retained for future reference.

Hi Bhopali. Be very careful in thinking anyone on a discussion board or anyone marketing an investment news letter is a guru. We are all here to offer opinions and listen to the ideas of others. Not to say there are not a lot of smart people on this board to help you form your own style - there are. But take in ideas to form your own style, which I kind of think you already have.
With that, my opinion would be to DCA the new money into a diversified portfolio based on your age and risk tolerance. This bull is long in the tooth, so putting all the $ to work now could be a mistake.
If you have an urge to follow a news letter, set aside maybe 10% of the money for that purpose. It might be fun to play the game, but don't risk a lot of money on a stranger.
If it is a substantial windfall, it might not be a bad idea to talk with a 'fee only' financial advisor. They should give you more of the detail catch22 referred to (important considerations). It could be just for a one-time assessment and plan outline with no further obligations. I actually found that this type of assessment and financial advice is offered free through some of the big investment houses like Schwab and Fidelity. I'm in the process of rolling over my 401k to an IRA at Charles Schwab. I went to my local branch to speak with an advisor there. I was very happy and impressed at the personalized retirement and investment overview I received - for free.
Bhopali, just my 2 cents with a grain of salt. Congratulations on your windfall and good luck on your plans.

I too would get rid of FSCRX, because of its size. It's probably not a bad time to dial down on small caps anyway. I hate to pay taxes, but a concern with WSCVX is that its manager is also nearing retirement age (born 1945), so it's probably not one you will want to leave to your heirs, and I think it's pretty similar to VVPSX in its profile. GPROX I don't think overlaps with the others, since it's mostly global.
So my vote would be to sell FSCRX and, if you can sell something else at a loss to compensate for the capital gains, sell WSCVX too. Otherwise just sell FSCRX and call it a day.
Or you can just sit tight -- I think consolidation for the sake of consolidation is overrated, and FSCRX, with its low turnover and good downside protection, seems to be managing its size well.
Congrats on having chosen such good funds!

My thought:
After funding a (pension/social security/annuity income stream) which provides enough income to pay your month bills then,
- set aside 1-3 years of income and invest conservatively for emergencies, special expenses, and periodic buying opportunities (due to downturns in the markets).
The remainder of your portfolio:
Let the rest ride in:
- a fund like PRWCX (a managed 80/20 fund)...no rebalancing needed or,
- continue rolling out into the future with retirement dated funds that have an 80/20 make up or,
- just own individual index funds that provide an 80/20 allocation and rebalance periodically.

FYI: The intriguing argument by Research Affiliates founder Robert Arnott is that conventional retirement investing gets things precisely backwards.
As Mike Foster of Financial News this week aptly sums it up, Arnott argues investors should own more stocks the older they grow, not fewer, which also means those approaching retirement should cut back their participation in the bond market. He finds that 40-year periods since 1871 generally show his approach yields a superior result — more on those findings in a moment.
Regards,
Ted
http://blogs.barrons.com/focusonfunds/2014/07/16/retirement-investing-are-you-doing-it-all-wrong/tab/print/

If the investors owning the fund are aware of this change then there may not be a problem. However this could impact those close to retirement if a bear shows up.
This kind of tactic is better for asset allocation funds IMO. I do own one that can adjust its holdings within single digits percentage wise. ( AOMIX ). That was clearly spelled out in the prospectus. In my experience the allocation changes have been 5% or less.

FYI: Mutual fund companies are trying to juice returns of target date funds by giving their managers more leeway to make tactical bets on stock and bond markets, even though this could increase the volatility and risk of the widely held retirement funds.
Regards,
Ted
http://in.reuters.com/assets/print?aid=INL2N0PE23T20140714

Thanks Ted,
Prior to being un-retired (from work) I usually didn't have time for projects or the pursuit of lifestyles.
My working day was pretty much spent catching up. A week's vacation here and there did little to foster a new lifestyle and project around the home usually waited for my later attention. Emergencies got done (car and home repairs) by a roll-a-dex of somewhat skilled and hard to schedule professionals who always charged professional prices and sometimes did professional work.
Just prior to retirement, I realized my working salary qualified me for a much larger conforming home mortgage and with rates at 4ish % I stepped back from being a home owner (I owned my home...not the bank) to being a home-loaner (30 yr fix @ 4.3%).
I mention this because by leveraging my debt to income prior to retirement I still felt comfortable with the monthly payment in retirement and the "cash" I acquired provided me with inexpensive dry powder to fund my retirement projects and occasional lifestyle choices.
Now with "all the time in the world" I had a few extra bucks to fund material costs while I supply most of the labor for projects. My skill set is constantly developing and being refined in retirement as I take on more and more challenging projects which I just didn't have time for when I worked.
Well, off to welding class...

FYI: When most of us imagine retirement, our minds wander to what we’ll get to do then that we don’t have enough time for now. If we’re lucky, we can push the uncertainty of our investment.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/12/your-money/saving-for-a-bucket-list-thats-likely-to-evolve.html?ref=your-money&_r=0

I own MPW Medical Properties Trust which is heavily into the rapidly growing senior citizen market with retirement communities plus other related medical properties. Pays a nice dividend too.

Hi Bob- Ditto on Skeet. I found your comments on less greed and reduced risk after retirement to be very interesting, especially coming from a pro like yourself. Those are the reasons we keep such a large cash position. As long as the investment stuff manages to offset the inflationary depredations on the cash, I'm quite happy.
I highly recommend retirement- it's just great!
Regards- OJ

Sorry people. Anyone buying ARIVX knows how Cinnamond invests. Unless of course one did not do one's homework. ICMAX which Cinnamond also managed is run in the same way. Check out the cash stake in that one.
Finally we should not complain about how much money fund managers are making on their ER. Why invest in active managers then? Invest in index fund. That's what I do in my retirement accounts.

Hi bee,
I noticed that too as I have a metals fund is my asset compass. However, I have become more income oriented, now being in retirement, and less apt to make special investmets in assets that don't produce income. Junkster made a good call at the first of the year about high yield muni's and form what I can tell he has done well with his position. However, its seems hi yield muni's have been meeting some headwinds during the past month. Now, I am not an unhappy camper with what my portfolio has done year to date being up 7.5% as I write. I have had some stull that has posted in the double digits but none that match the metals. My best performing sleeve within my portfolio during the past thirty days has been my small/mid cap sleeve which is up about 4.5% for the thirty day period.
Old_Skeet

FYI: Copy & Paste 7/1/14: Laura Saunders: WSJ:
Prohibition Applies to Both Fidelity and Non-Fidelity Mutual Funds
Fidelity Investments and other asset managers are telling U.S. clients who live outside the country that they can no longer buy or trade mutual funds in their brokerage accounts.
Stephen Austin, a spokesman for the financial-services firm, said the change, effective Aug. 1, was prompted by "today's continually evolving global regulatory environment," but he said it wasn't in response to a specific issue.
The change will affect about 50,000 accounts, or less than 0.3% of Fidelity's 20 million accounts, he said.
"Customers will not be forced to sell holdings simply because they live in a foreign country," Mr. Austin said.
Observers said fund managers are becoming more conservative in the wake of global developments such as the U.S. Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act and other U.S. efforts.
Following large settlements paid to the U.S. by Credit Suisse Group AG CS +1.66% and BNP Paribas SA, BNP.FR -2.05% "Other countries are getting angry about the size of the fines and are grumbling about retaliation," said Jonathan Lachowitz, a cross-border investment adviser based in Lexington, Mass., and Lausanne, Switzerland.
Mutual funds are regulated differently from other investments and could be a target, he said.
David Kuenzi, an investment manager in Madison, Wis., who works with Americans abroad, said that selling U.S. mutual funds to those investors had long been prohibited. "But it was matter of 'Don't ask, don't tell.' Now the firms are getting more aggressive about compliance," he said.
Other fund companies also are changing policies for investors who live abroad.
A spokesman for Putnam Investments said the firm is no longer accepting additional investments into existing accounts held by non-U.S. residents.
The spokesman said the changes were made "in accordance with U.S. anti-money-laundering and 'Know Your Customer' policies" and in response to recent tightening of European laws limiting sales of funds not registered in their jurisdictions.
A spokesman for Charles Schwab Corp. SCHW +2.55% said the firm "has made changes and will continue to make changes to our policies" in reaction to regulatory changes but declined to specify them.
In a recent letter to overseas clients, Fidelity said that its prohibition would apply to both Fidelity and non-Fidelity mutual funds, and to exchanges between funds.
However, account holders still will be permitted to reinvest dividends in additional shares of a fund.
Employer-sponsored plans such as 401(k) and 403(b) plans aren't affected by the prohibition, but individual retirement accounts and Roth IRAs are, the spokesman said.
The letter also said that if an investor has an automatic investment plan with periodic deposits of cash, then the additions can continue but the money won't be invested in mutual funds. Instead, the funds will be added to the investor's other "core position," such as a money-market fund. The letter added that additions to such funds will still be permitted, but that this could change in the future.
The Fidelity spokesman said that account holders' ability to purchase individual securities or exchange-traded funds varies from country to country.
A spokesman for the Investment Company Institute, a fund industry group, declined to comment.
A spokesman for Vanguard Group said its funds are typically only for sale to people who live in the U.S., although there are some exceptions for investors residing abroad, for example, some people with inherited accounts.

FYI: Copy & Paste 7/4/14: Jason Zweig: WSJ
Regards,
Ted
Workers are cutting back on the stock of their own companies. It is a welcome sign of investment maturity.
Trimming your exposure to your employer’s shares is one of the most important decisions—but toughest psychological challenges—any investor can face. The wisdom of such a move has been made stunningly clear by the demise of companies like Enron, Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers. In order to cut back, you will have to set your emotions aside and think hard about risks you otherwise might not be willing or able to recognize.
Even some people who work for Warren Buffett—arguably the best investor of our time—have gradually been reducing their holdings of Berkshire Hathaway’s stock.
Financial disclosures filed at the Securities and Exchange Commission at the end of June show that the 401(k) plans for employees of Burlington Northern, one of Mr. Buffett’s largest holdings, had slightly more than 10% of their assets in Berkshire’s stock at the end of 2013, down from nearly 22% in 2009. Employees at General Re, the reinsurer Mr. Buffett bought in 1998, shaved their discretionary Berkshire holdings to 4.6% from 5.1% over the same period. (The SEC requires companies to file these disclosures only for retirement or savings plans that hold the company’s stock.)
According to two people familiar with the matter, Mr. Buffett doesn’t set policy on retirement plans for Berkshire’s subsidiaries, and employees make their own decisions on where to put their money.
If you worked for Warren Buffett, why would you not want to put as much of your money alongside his as you could? No one can say for sure, but his employees are probably influenced by the nationwide trend to cut back on company stock.
The collapse of Enron in 2001 and Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers in 2008 brought out tragic tales of employees who had nearly all their retirement assets riding on those firms’ own shares. The Pension Protection Act of 2006 imposed new restrictions on companies offering their stock in their retirement plans.
As a result, companies have steadily been making it harder for employees to load up on their own stock in 401(k)s. Burlington Northern, for instance, doesn’t permit its staff to invest more than 20% in Berkshire’s shares.
Between the end of 2005 and mid-2011, the most recent data available, more than one-third of companies that offered their own stock either removed it from the retirement plan or stopped permitting new investments in it, according to fund giant Vanguard Group. And none of the more than 1,350 companies tracked by Vanguard during that period launched any new company-stock funds in their plans.
A decade ago, 36% of companies offering their own stock as an investment option in their 401(k) plans required that matching contributions be initially invested in their own shares, according to Aon Hewitt, the benefits-consulting firm. Today, only 12% do.
While the problem of holding too much company stock has dwindled, it hasn’t disappeared. As of 2012, according to the most recent available data from the nonprofit Employee Benefit Research Institute and the Investment Company Institute, a fund-industry trade group, 12% of employees who could invest in company stock had at least half of their 401(k) assets in it. And 6% had 90% or more of their money in company stock.
The company you work at is so familiar to you, it can be hard to think objectively about it.
Meir Statman, a finance professor at Santa Clara University, points out that familiarity isn’t the same as superior insight.
You know quite a bit about your company because you work there. But that doesn’t mean you know more about its customers, suppliers, products, technologies and competitors than the 100 million people who collectively price its stock every day.
Familiarity also “fools people into thinking their company is safe,” says Prof. Statman.
In 2002, right after Enron’s bankruptcy, I urged an audience of individual investors to “avoid the next Enron” by diversifying out of their own companies’ shares. One person protested that he knew with his own eyes and ears that his company was safe—while diversifying into other stocks would inevitably expose him to owning at least some of the next Enron.
You might be right that your company is the next Google or could never be the next Enron, says William Bernstein, an investment manager at Efficient Frontier Advisors in Eastford, Conn., but “the consequences of being wrong are dire.”
By diversifying out of company stock, you forgo the hope of a spectacular gain, but you also eliminate the risk of being wiped out if something goes disastrously wrong at your company.
You might dismiss the risk of an Enron-type implosion as ridiculously far-fetched. But bankruptcy isn’t the only risk that your company faces, nor the most probable.
Far more likely is what Daniel Egan, director of behavioral finance at Betterment, an online financial adviser, calls “tectonic risk”—the chances that your company could be hurt by new competitors, regulations or technologies that fundamentally alter the profitability of the business.
These risks tend to blindside everyone, including chairmen and chief executives; they can surely blindside you, too. Having more than a tiny sliver of your retirement money in your company stock is an idea whose time has come—and gone.

Thanks to MFO / Snowball / partner researchers, I've been tracking these two 'new' mutual funds since last Nov, and they are matching or outperforming everything else, pretty smoothly (including early Feb dip) except for some niche equity funds.
What gives? I am seriously thinking of transferring the majority, nonsmall, of retirement moneys to DSENX and RGHVX, 50-50. What could go wrong? (I know, if you have to ask....) I mean compared with what other funds?

Not that they have any institutional blindness on the matter. ETF Trends argues that the major fund firms are lobbying hard for semi-transparent or non-transparent ETFs. Clearance for those funds plus evidence that major retirement plan providers want ETFs (why? why, why, why? Low cost index funds, yes. But why a product whose strength is intra-day trading in a vehicle with a decades-long horizon?) would unleash, they say, a flood of new products.
David

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1141306/000089180414000604/hend59755-497.htm
497 1 hend59755-497.htm HENDERSON GLOBAL FUNDS
HENDERSON GLOBAL FUNDS
Henderson European Focus Fund
Supplement dated July 3, 2014
to the Prospectus and Summary Prospectus dated November 30, 2013
IMPORTANT NOTICE
This supplement provides new and additional information beyond that contained in the prospectus and should be retained and read in conjunction with the prospectus.
Effective as of the close of business on October 31, 2014, the Henderson European Focus Fund (the “Fund”) will be closed to new purchases, except as follows:
·Shareholders of record of the Fund as of October 31, 2014 are able to: (1) add to their existing Fund accounts through subsequent purchases or through exchanges from other Henderson Global Funds, and (2) reinvest dividends or capital gains distributions in the Fund from shares owned in the Fund;
·Trustees of the Henderson Global Funds or employees of Henderson Global Investors (North America) Inc. (the Fund’s investment adviser);
·Fee-based advisory programs may continue to utilize the Fund for new and existing program accounts;
·Purchases through an employee retirement plan whose records are maintained by a trust company or plan administrator;
·Current and future Henderson Global Funds which are permitted to invest in other Henderson Global Funds may purchase shares of the Fund.
The Fund is taking this step to facilitate management of the Fund’s portfolio. The Fund reserves the right to re-open to new investors or to make additional exceptions or otherwise modify the foregoing closure policy at any time (including establishing an earlier closing date) and to reject any investment for any reason.
PLEASE RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT FOR YOUR FUTURE REFERENCE.