Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)
-   Delta (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/)
-   -   Side Hustle (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/113695-side-hustle.html)

forgot to bid 05-16-2018 01:56 AM

I stand on a street corner near Zoo Atlanta in biker shorts for tips.

Thinking of trying this at the Racetrac over near the landside employee lot.

IPAs 05-16-2018 04:48 AM


Originally Posted by SonicFlyer (Post 2594509)
Exactly... this makes complete and total sense (except for the index fund part).

Having one's excess income moved to an "aggressive growth" set of properly diversified minimally managed mutual funds is the safest way to accrue wealth over the long term because you own thousands of different businesses in different market sectors and locations.

Index funds tend to be actively managed and are not quite as diverse as one might think.

Having all of one's money tied up in real estate is actually pretty high risk, as is tying up all of one's money in a single business or two.

Index funds are passive cheap and very diversified. I agree with the rest.

Gunfighter 05-16-2018 05:42 AM


Originally Posted by freezingflyboy (Post 2594944)
Bingo! Great rule of thumb that has served me well. Don't look for the flashy condo in the trendy neighborhood in the sexy town. The ROI just isn't there (unless you want to go upscale AirBnB-type situation, but that's a whole 'nother conversation). If you wanna talk numbers: My first rental property I paid $135K (3BR, 2BA in a good subdivision on a nice lot). Currently rents for $1500/mo with my total cost being $800/mo (mortgage, insurance, taxes, HOA fees, management company fees). I've stuck to single-family homes and try to rent to families or young couples. The turnover tends to be lower which means lower costs and fewer headaches.[/LIST]

That is nearly an exact match of my first rental property purchase. It's amazing how good the numbers really are over decade or more. Splitting investments evenly between the DC plan and real estate for the last decade has created a buy and hold portfolio with more equity than the retirement plan. The portfolio also produces monthly cash flow that the retirement plan does not. I'm a huge fan of buy and hold real estate as part of a retirement plan.

Gunfighter 05-16-2018 05:59 AM


Originally Posted by Tummy (Post 2594496)
I invest over half of my income in total stock market index funds. I prefer the liquidity over brick and mortar real estate investments.

There is plenty of liquidity in brick and mortar. Too many novices think you have to sell a piece of real estate to get liquidity. You can convert equity to cash with a cash out refi. As a general rule, this is non taxable event up to a cash out amount that doesn't exceed the original purchase price of the property. Liquidating mutual funds creates a taxable event when selling at a gain. If you sell at a loss, well, you lost money. When you liquidate a mutual fund all you have is cash. If you access the equity in real estate via a cash out refi, you still have the asset and the cash flow.

For small amounts of liquidity, cash or mutual funds are ideal, but don't be afraid of having too much tied up in real estate.

Ed Harley 05-16-2018 06:59 AM


Originally Posted by SonicFlyer (Post 2594753)
This is the problem with many of them:




"Total market index funds are typically “cap-weighted”. In English, that means that most of your money, when invested, goes into the largest companies based on market capitalization. So if I buy a mutual fund investing in the entire US stock market I might own over 3,000 stocks, but most of the money I invested goes to buying companies like Apple, Exxon, GE, Chevron, IBM and other massive US firms.

That may sound good to some investors. “Great, I own the most successful US companies. Now I can sleep easily.” Here’s the problem. Concentrating too much money in ANY one area of the market can lead to less than desirable results over long periods of time. Case in point: From 1966 through 1982, the S&P 500 (another popular cap-weighted index) had an annualized return of 0% per year when inflation is considered. From 2000 through 2012, the index lost .7% per year to inflation. Those are long stretches of time to go without returns, especially if you depend on your investments for income.

What is important to understand is that different areas of the market, which are not well represented by these funds, did quite well during these periods in history. Smaller companies, which only make up a tiny fraction of the holdings of total market funds, can be the real game saver when large stocks go through their periodic seasons of draught. We also need to recognize, as investors, that the biggest and most important companies of today will likely become the “has-beens” of tomorrow due to changes in technology and competition. "

SOURCE:
An Easier Way To Invest? ? Paul Winkler, Inc

I’m not sure where you or Paul Winkler gets the numbers you quote. The S&P has increased by a mean of 11.7% over the past 60 years. A conservative index fund like Vanguard nearly matches that. Factor in that it cost next to nothing to manage the index fund and there’s not too many traders that can beat that performance. Plus the benefit of rarely looking at my account frees up my spare time to have fun on the lake and live stress free.

gloopy 05-16-2018 08:20 AM


Originally Posted by qball (Post 2594667)
Just one word.
Plastics.

Latex is way better.

gloopy 05-16-2018 08:33 AM


Originally Posted by tunes (Post 2594854)
For the military guys their option to comply with USERRA is either do exactly that, or remove the restriction on mil

And there's also some civilian restrictions on flying and other aviation related things, including flight and duty time. But to say you can't do anything whatsoever "on the side" is completely unenforceable and so broad its slam dunk lawsuit material if even attempted.

The mil/USERRA issue is currently being challenged and I think they will probably prevail at least to some extent. But either way that's nowhere near a total and complete fantasy ban on 100% of all "side hustle" gigs.

OldFlyGuy 05-16-2018 08:42 AM


Originally Posted by Hank Kingsley (Post 2594782)
I've flown with guys that have so much side, either hustle or a little something, I don't know if they enjoy the time off. Remember the 3 F's and pick the right spouse. This is not brain surgery.


I'll tag on to your thought. Over the years I've flown with a number of very good pilots who "weren't quite right" on a given trip. Most had personal/family issues, but often they were working hard on a side business, or doing projects for ALPA/DAL. There minds were somewhere else. I've had to ask a number of them to get off the cell phone so we could run the preflight checklist. Side businesses are great but you gotta set them aside when you get in the jet. OFG

jagbn 05-16-2018 09:07 AM


Originally Posted by gloopy (Post 2595170)
And there's also some civilian restrictions on flying and other aviation related things, including flight and duty time. But to say you can't do anything whatsoever "on the side" is completely unenforceable and so broad its slam dunk lawsuit material if even attempted.

The mil/USERRA issue is currently being challenged and I think they will probably prevail at least to some extent. But either way that's nowhere near a total and complete fantasy ban on 100% of all "side hustle" gigs.




Assuming it's true that Delta is going to impose a blanket restriction on other employment, I strongly suspect it's aimed directly at the military reserve guys.



One of the provisions in USERRA requires companies to treat military reservists exactly like other employees, so any restriction on outside work cannot be targeted only at the military. As long as it applies to everyone equally, it would be ok.


Delta isn't the only airline to get in a tangle over USERRA and military reservists. I remember seeing a lawsuit involving American from 10 or 15 years ago. Guys dropping trips, especially with little or no notice, for military stuff hits airlines hard and costs a lot of money in extra reserve coverage requirements, etc. Anything the airlines can do to minimize such disruptions, they're going to do.



I'm not picking sides here, just acknowledging reality. I retired out the reserves just a couple years ago, and was absent from my previous airline (a regional) for nearly 4 of the 10 years I was there. I've seen abuse from the company side, but I've also seen rampant and flagrant abuse from the pilot side as well. Actions by either party have consequences, and the proposed new FOM policy, assuming it's coming, is one of the consequences.

Varsity 05-16-2018 09:24 AM


Originally Posted by SideSticker (Post 2594816)
Paul Winkler, ChFC®, RFC®, CLU®, LUTCF, CASL®, AAMS®, RICP® is the President and founder of Paul Winkler, Inc.

Thats a lota bling behind his name, but conspicuously absent is the "CFP"-gold standard IMHO. Caveat emptor.

CFP is the gold standard of nothing. Aka "couldn't cut it in professional finance" or "scrambling for a job after partying through undergrad".

CFA and CPA are all that matter. Maybe CAIA if you're in some offbeat private equity profession. The rest are a joke.

Read "A random walk down wallstreet". It's all an airline pilots will ever need to know about investing.

-someone who worked in investment banking on wallstreet.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:37 AM.


Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands