Discussion Board
Watch this board

Total 18 messages Pages | 1 | 2   Older >
Confused
by Sameer Pande on Apr 10, 2005 09:14 PM  Permalink 

I am totally confused will you please explain this again in a simple way.

    Forward  |  Report abuse
My Views
by Ashok Kumar Mittal on Apr 06, 2005 01:17 PM  Permalink 

The maximum limit for investing in PPF is Rs 70,000/- since there is no change in that limit in the budget 2005. It will be better if such articles are first scrutinised by some Authority before being placed for general public. The rest, many of my friends have already written on this.

    Forward  |  Report abuse
Amazing
by K.Purushottam Bhat on Apr 05, 2005 06:03 PM  Permalink 

To be frank with you, I started reading the article with lot of enthusiasm. After completing the reading, I have started doubting whether the person who penned this article is insane, or the ones who have published it. Amazing this should have been included in jokes column.

    Forward  |  Report abuse
??!!
by deepa on Apr 05, 2005 12:07 PM  Permalink 

This is foolery...to put such a ridiclous headline like 'get 60% risk free returns'. This is just a way to get more hits. I think rediff should refrain from using such means to garner hits.

    Forward  |  Report abuse
Big Deal!!!!!
by Rony on Apr 04, 2005 11:29 PM  Permalink 

God..sound and fury, amounting to nothing...why state the obvious and mask it as "61% risk free return"..firstly...if u earn above 350,000..ur tax rate is not 33%..it's 30% upto 10 lacs..if i remember correctly..so ur return is 108/(0.7*100)=54%....

so cut the crap....previously..as per the earlier tax regime...u were investing 0.15*1 lac=Rs. 85 k and getting 108k..so a return of 30%...

    Forward  |  Report abuse
Incorrect Interpretation
by Anchit Gupta on Apr 04, 2005 10:39 PM  Permalink 

I do not agree with the 61% return on investment.
Let us look at it correctly.When we invest in tax saving instrutments, we have to shell out Rs. 100,000 and not 67,000. Here we are having an implied saving of 33,000. This saving does not come back to us immediately on investment.
Instead we should look at it as a return of 33,000 on 100,000. Add 8000 Rs to it as interest on 100,000. hence total gain is 41000 or 41% in the first year. This by no means is less. I agree with the author that it is a good option but 61% is not correct



    Forward  |  Report abuse
Really?
by Arun on Apr 04, 2005 09:02 PM  Permalink 

Does rediff has to really put such stupid things on its site?

    Forward  |  Report abuse
thank you, i made a sale using these details.
by rohan on Apr 04, 2005 08:12 PM  Permalink 

thank you for this coloumn, i could effectivly use this article and have a sale done of an insurance policy
hope you come up with these kind of articles.
Thanks once again.
Rohan

    Forward  |  Report abuse
Calculation is Wrong!!
by Ajit Singh on Apr 04, 2005 07:01 PM  Permalink 

Hello Mr. Bajaj,

I think the effective rate of return (or internal rate of return as per text books) can be calculated in excel like this:
(I have taken an optimistic 7% return for 5 yrs and your logic of net investment of 67,000 rupees)
period      Regular bond      Deep discount bond
0      -67000       -67000
1      7000       0
2      7000       0
3      7000       0
4      7000       0
5      107000       140255.1731

Rate of return      17%      16%

So the net return would be in the range of 15-20% and not astronomical 61%.

Please provide the correction to your readers.

Regards,

Ajit.



    Forward  |  Report abuse
Total 18 messages Pages: | 1 | 2   Older >
Write a message