You gotta put enough skin in the game, homie!!! (Buy enough shares to cover your fees)

“There's no barrier from buying just one share. Online brokers don't apply surcharges or other financial penalties if you don't buy a round lot of 100 shares. But there are costs to consider, especially for those investing relatively small amounts of money. For instance, most online brokers charge about $10 to place a trade. That's the commission whether one share or 100 shares are bought. The problem is a $10 commission is a big bite if an investor is just buying one share of Disney, for instance, for $80 a share.”

 --- Matt Krantz ---  http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/columnist/krantz/2014/03/15/downside-one-share-stock/5910523/

I am confident that I can make at least $1 on any share based on my valuations. If your fees are 9.99 buy/sell you need a single share of a stock to gain $20 in order to break even. If you buy 20 shares lump-sum of any stock you just need a gain of $1 per share to break even on a $9.99 buy/sell fee...the more shares you buy per transaction the lower your break-even point and the better chance you have to enjoy returns from capital gains.

Commission free S&P 500 funds/ETFs and commission free total market funds/ETFs are good if you just want to buy one share at a time because you do not incur transaction fees as long as you hold your share(s) for a period of 30 days, but it could be longer depending on the broker. You can also buy some sector funds/ETFs commission free, but they are best for traders as it is quite risky to own a single sector for an extended period of time.

And if you mistakenly bought 1 share of a stock you can always buy a bulk of shares to add to your position in order to lower the break-even point if your valuations still add up to a profit. 

Buy/Sell using Limit Orders! (Market Orders are a crap shoot)

Do not buy/sell stock using market orders. Set the price you are willing to buy/sell every stock as placing a market order is not a guarantee of price as the stock market can move very fast. No need to crap shoot a price when you can easily dictate terms….using limit orders over market orders can easily be the difference between being a thousandaire and a millionaire.

“A market order, which is telling your broker to buy or sell a stock without naming a price, can cost you, too. Because you’re basically telling your broker to fill your order at any price. As Cramer pointed out, you wouldn’t do this at a supermarket – I’ll buy this lettuce at any price? — so don’t do it with stocks. In fact, markets orders are how people ended up selling Procter & Gamble for $38, when it was worth much more, during the “flash crash” on May 6, 2010, when the Dow plunged nearly 1,000 points in a matter of minutes.”  --- Jim Cramer --- ( http://www.cnbc.com/id/42673538# ) 

THE END

iPhone vs Android (understanding the market).

Who cares!!!! If you can formulate an opinion on the products and understand the nature of the businesses you will be a better investor as you understand the communities, you understand the products, and you use the products leading you to have a better understanding on the effects of news developments in relation to the businesses.  Yes, you could invest in upstart bio-technology businesses, but if you do not understand the nature of the activities a business conducts you could lose a lot of money on speculation and misinterpreting information….which essentially makes you a gambler.

Allow me to quote the great Peter Lynch and the great Warrant Buffet via Ryan Guina:

“I can't think of anyone better to look to for investment advice than Peter Lynch or Warren Buffett. Lynch and Buffett are legendary investors who have amassed billion dollar portfolios through sound investment strategies, one of which I want to share with you today.

Peter Lynch, the legendary portfolio manager from Fidelity, is famous for offering the advice, "invest in what you know." Famed investor Warren Buffett often refers to investing within his "circle of competence" when discussing how he and his partners invest. "Circle of competence" may not mean much to you, but what Mr. Buffett is really stating is, "invest in what you know."

Buffett and his partners famously sat out of the Dot-com Bubble in the late nineties because technology wasn't a field he was comfortable with. While others speculated on technology start-ups, Buffett was scooping up value stocks which had fallen out of favor. A few short years later the bubble crashed and investors went back to the value stocks Buffet had been buying all along. Buffett not only avoided substantial losses, but he made money because he stayed true to investing in what he knows. The idea of investing in what you know is not a new concept, but it is worth repeating because it is solid advice and can help you avoid serious investing mistakes.”  (http://www.usnews.com/topics/author/ryan_guina)

And for those that care about my opinion on iPhone vs Android read on:

My Take on Google

Google is an ad company that uses you browsing data, email data, and/or personal data to send you targeted advertisements to generate revenue. Google is not as reliant on consumer products for success as opposed to Apple. Hence, Google can have an open source operating system (you don’t have to use Google services on an android) where you can have alternative apps stores (Amazon, Samsung and 1mobile to name a few) and not deal with Google services at all. As Tim cook from Apple said, “you’re the product” for Google”  (http://gadgets.ndtv.com/internet/news/tim-cook-to-google-users-youre-not-the-customer-youre-the-product-594242 ) because a business that gives things away things for free will find a way to generate revenue for their business by some means. Google has an official app store that people choose to use, which makes it extremely easy for Google to constantly crank-out updates for Android even though they made it an open source project. Google got people to buy into the idea of an app store like Apple, yet Google gave people a way out from under its thumb. People wanted a Google ecosystem, which gave Google an easy way to profit off of ads because people want to use the official Google App store to buy/download apps which requires a G-mail account. However, Google even allows you to delete a Google Account (even set an inactivity timer to delete the account and email important info to another person if so desired) unlike Apple’s stuck for life ICloud/Apple ID which is a plus for Google in terms of privacy in my opinion. Google accidentally controlled the Android market place and will challenge any app makers to use alternative app stores to generate similar revenue. Also, Google is now in the position to challenge device makers to use another operating system and therefore Google can set the standards for the hardware used with Android.

Personally, I feel Google is in communications takeover mode so they can distribute ads in new ways.  I feel they will become a MVNO to provide cellular service and possibly an internet service provider over LTE. I think Google can go where Clear wireless's Wimax has failed consumer wise. Wimax signals have a hard time penetrating buildings making it hard to receive the signal outside of a modem/hub at home…cell phones struggled to pick up Wimax connectivity across the board. Google already has its hand in internet and television services through by way of Google Fiber, so a strong presence in being a communications service provider is not a far stretch.  And based on Google historical love for targeted ads….Google may even use their hoards of personal data for targeted TV ads in the future that go beyond the current demographics of a show and the time that a show airs.

My Smartphone Usage

From 2010-2012 I used Android as my first smart phone because I was a fan of Gmail, Youtube, and Google search. I felt open source was the way to go because I remember Apple losing to Microsoft in the 1990’s. Elementary school had Apple computers and the Real World was using Windows…and when I got my first computer in 1997 (not counting the hand-me down one from 1996 with the big floppy drive, DOS, monopoly, and a red power switch labeled 1 & 0) it was a Windows 95 computer. I was using a word processor at home for elementary school papers (4^th and 5^TH grade it was write in cursive or Type it out) prior to a computer. However, at that time I did not realize Microsoft was simply a licensing genius and that they could provide high functioning software on relative cheap systems compared to Apple. Microsoft was closed software, but open hardware in terms of compatibility and up-gradable parts.

And on an unrelated note since I have not been into computers games since half-life/counterstrike/team fortress classic, unreal tournament, quakes etc in the early 2000 as FPS have improved on game consoles to a level I did not need a mouse & keyboard. I only used my PC entertainment wise for instant messaging, music, web browsing, and social media most of last decade. Flash forward 2014 I only need a PC to stay current with Microsoft Office on a windows environment as it is still the defacto business standard. Most job agencies and some companies still test MS Office on Windows for competency. Maybe Microsoft in the very near future can keep the software standard across windows, mac, Chromebook/web versions so people can stay on top of the features. Microsoft being consistent across platforms is important so kids that may have only used Google Docs and MS Office Online grade school through college do not look stupid when applying for a job depending on the field as Job agencies and companies do not test Google Doc skills.

Anyways… by 2012 I was frustrated with android phones be it speed, apps crashing every day, battery life, and the displays based on the Froyo and Gingerbread phones I had on boost mobile and sprint. I switched to an iPhone in 2012 and did not look back until the end of 2013 when I used an Android temporarily with FreedomPop as I knew iPhone was coming very soon.  I used the Samsung Epic Touch 4g and used the Samsung victory LTE....and they changed my opinion on Android being a viable mobile operating system as of Jelly Bean.

However, during my experiences using Android and IOS (Jelly Bean and ios 7/ios8) for the last several months in the iPhone 4S and Samsung Victory LTE respectively; I feel the iPhone is still the superior phone today…but Android should be the future. I feel the iPhone is better today simply because of the quality and selection of apps. I understand the importance of customization and widgets for those that like them (Personally, I cannot stand more than a weather or music widget) but apps makes the phone at the end of the day and iPhone is superior in everyday app design & everyday stability. I prefer the design of IOS apps and some apps are only available on IOS…Android still has a ways to go. See the comparison below:

iPhone has number of members in twitter list

Android does not have number of members in twitter list

My Facebook (Paper) page looks cooler on iPhone

My Facebook page looks mediocre on Android

Hyperlapse on iPhone

Hyperlapse ain't on Android 

Infinity Blade Trilogy on iPhone

Android has that amazing game Epic Citadel instead of Infinity Blade

Chrome has back button at the forefront on iPhone

Chrome for Android has the forward button hidden in the menu

Google Drive on iPhone has a status bar so you can monitor progress

Google Drive on Android uploads without indication of progress

 I like Android because I am not locked into Google Services and can easily see the things that are synced online with google sync manager plus I can delete a Google account and start over for any reason under the sun. iCloud/Apple ID is permanent though I can switch the Apple ID to another email address, change various info in iTunes, delete all my cloud emails, and then destroy the email account of the apple ID (requires some work). Also, I like Android because I can render my phone effectively useless with ease by un-syncing all of my person info if someone needs to use my phone, I like that I can have multiples of the same shortcut if apps fit business & personal groupings, and I like the Fact that Android Lollipop will support multiple users so I can easily separate my environments be it personal or business.

Lastly, I like Android because smartphones are like computers and I assume smartphones with interchangeable parts for upgrades could become popular just as they were with a desktop PC.  And with interchangeable parts we can create powerful phones and save money by only upgrading certain aspects of the smartphone. However, that concept would require certain standards for cases and that companies find it profitable to produce parts for the upgrades. However, the likely hood that smartphones with interchangeable parts taking off is slim as most laptop parts are not interchangeable beyond upgrading ram or a disk drive...and laptops are a portable that has been around much longer than the smartphone. PC Upgrades were driven by gamers the most…and Android is lacking in the quality of apps department as it stands. Hey, but it would be cool to pick up parts at a 24hr Wal-Mart if a camera broke or a screen broke. Plus having spare antennas is feasible as cellphones are the lifeline for many that do not want to bear the cost of a home phone and it could be a matter of life or death… though it is recommended to have an extra smartphone/cellphone in the house as all phones are able to call 911 without paying for cellular service.  I do think the key to smartphones with interchangeable parts ( http://www.xda-developers.com/android/project-ara-android-l-hot-swap/) is emerging markets as I was shocked to find out smartphones ( by watching Bloomberg and CNBC) were some of the first home/personal computers for many people because of the cost. Due to such matter of facts in emerging markets, interchangeable smartphone parts would be a good way for people to reduce expenditures compared to upgrading an entire smartphone.  

Conclusion

Android should be the future as I expect big-time developers to have their own apps stores/websites since they would have the capacity to not rely on Google play services and therefore increase profit margins. I believe companies will be able to provide their own operating system without Google constraints because they will no longer need their play store as people will be able to get games directly from developers. People will just rely on reviews and comments on app review sites for information….plus developers can advertise their apps through social media, advertise through internet ads, and advertise through through traditional outlets of newspaper, radio, & television. I will hang on to my iPhone or at least have an iPod touch until the potential of Android is realized beyond having a larger market share than iPhone... Unless of course HTML5 ( http://www.infoworld.com/article/2610329/mobile-development/forrester--html5-apps-still-not-as-good-as-native-apps.html )  apps dominate smartphones to render smartphone platforms and computer platforms useless as in simply the devices being reduced to televisions with a Brand Label.

***BRAIN EXPLODES***