WOW, your response to the Can Carl Retire? series in January and last Friday’s results webinar were off the charts. I received so many kind comments and sharp questions from you. In today’s episode, I’ll answer a portion of your questions and will get to more next week. Please keep them coming. If you’re wondering, no doubt thousands of others are, too.
Want to Watch the Webinar Replay?
The webinar replay will remain available until Sunday, February 8th (11:59 pm). You can watch it by clicking below.
[button_2 color=”blue” align=”center” href=”http://www.rogerwhitney.com/webinar” new_window=”Y”]Watch the Webinar Replay HERE[/button_2]
Listener Questions Answered in This Episode:
- From Ken: “I didn’t see you mention an emergency fund. Why is that?”
- From Ken: “What provision is made to pay for taxes on his 401(k) plan when required minimum distributions are required since most of his wealth is in tax-deferred plans?”
- From Randy: “Quicken sells software, called “WillMaker Plus”, to create “a Will, Health Care Directive, Durable Power of Attorney for Finances and other essential documents.” Do you have an opinion on the value of such software?”
- From Joe: “I appreciate the webinar yesterday; helps me in thinking thru retirement planning. The question came up around pensions and taking a lump sum vs. taking annuity payments. You said something to the effect of “99% of the time it’s better to take the annuity.” That’s one of my central planning questions, as I have a company pension that I will eventually be drawing from.
- From Ken: (Ken was getting into this) “I just listened to the replay and thought it was very informative and provided a nice example of the process. As you mentioned during the webinar, given Carl is lucky enough to have a healthy pension which is rare these days, it would be interesting to know what the equivalent lump sum in current investable assets would need to be to get him to the same answer if he did not have the pension.”
- From Dave: Good podcast and interesting information about Carl’s situation. I am wondering whether your estimated returns for Carl were too aggressive. Where the estimated returns (8+%) that you were showing after tax returns? It just seems, while the portfolio would be a nice blend, that the return estimates were higher than I have been estimating in my personal returns. Regards, Dave.
Question for You: What do you want next?
The Can Carl Retire? series really resonated with most of you. It’s been exciting to see you participating and asking questions.
What would you like me to focus on next?:
- Another real world example?
- Case studies of plans I’ve worked through (good and bad)
- What to do if you’re behind on savings?
- More webinars? If so, on what? Social Security Maximization, goal planning or understanding market returns are some topics that come to mind.
Let me know in the form below:
The Retirement Answer Man Episode #51
Well, hello there and welcome to the Retirement Answer Man! My name is Roger Whitney. Thank you so much for joining me today. This is the show dedicated to helping you dream up your ideal retirement, plan a course to work towards it, and finally live out a plan that fits you best.
I’m so excited to have you here today. Today, we have sort of a recap show. We’re going to review the webinar that we had on January 30th and tell you how you can see a replay in case you missed it or you had so much fun you just want to watch it again. It was my first one. I haven’t watched it yet. I’m a little worried about that, I don’t know why.
And then, we’re going to talk about Carl. I think Carl ended up being happy with the results. He will be on hopefully next week to give us a debrief on some of the lessons learned and his thoughts on the experience. I’m really excited that the whole event, the whole January “Can Carl Retire?” really seemed to resonate with a lot of people. Your feedback and engagement was just off the charts which is awesome because that means we’re starting to have the right conversations that matter.
What we’re going to do today is answer some listener questions, give you a few thoughts or things to consider based on the process that I outlined last week in the webinar and through the month of January. And then, I want to talk about what’s next for the Retirement Answer Man and for you, and I’m really going to need your help with this so stay tuned for that, please, and listen till the end.
Now, one thing you can do for me, and I don’t ask this very often but, if you’ve enjoyed the week of January and you’re a new listener to the show, well, welcome. We had our record downloads for podcasts so it sounds like we’re reaching a much broader audience. But, if you’re enjoying the show and you listen via iTunes or Stitcher, I’d consider it an honor if you left your honest review on either Stitcher or iTunes, and that’s not just because I like to read them – which I always do – but it really helps broaden the audience. You’d be doing me a favor if you could do that so thank you so much.
Now, before we get started, let me turn down this happy music because we have our all-important disclosure which is only you know your entire financial situation so think of this podcast and my blog and really anything on the internet as helpful hints and education because only those that walk life with you know your situation best. Before you make any decisions, consult your tax advisor or your legal advisor or your financial advisor. That’s just common sense and a fundamental principle of dreaming, planning, and living out your ideal retirement.
Okay. Let’s get started here. Now, first of all, I wanted to let you know how you can watch a replay of the webinar. If you go to rogerwhitney.com/webinar, you’ll be able to watch the entire webinar. It’s going to be available until Sunday, February 8th, 11:59 p.m., so I’ll have it up and available for replay. In the event that you didn’t get to watch it or you started late in planning with Carl and have been working through the worksheets that you’ve gotten, you’ll be able to watch that until Sunday. And then, I still have a few spots left if you’re looking to dial in your retirement plan with me and you’ll get all the details right at the end of that webinar.
Let’s get started here. You had a lot of questions from the webinar so I want to just go through these – one, two, three, four – and answer them as best I can.
Now, let me set this up real quick. The webinar – if you recall – was presenting the analysis of Carl’s ideal retirement and we walked through what his ideal retirement was, what resources he had available between pensions and social security as well as assets. And then, ran a lot of scenarios as to whether those are possible using something called Monte Carlo scenarios which is just simulating a lot of different market experiences from extremely great ones to really, really bad ones to try to have more color in guiding Carl to the answer that he’s looking for.
And then, once we did that, we helped Carl prioritize his goals in the event that he couldn’t reach his ideal retirement which we all sort of knew that he wouldn’t be able to and he even pressed to come up with this ideal retirement and we talked about why that’s so important. And then, we went through the analysis of a good negotiated retirement plan that fit what Carl and Jane cared about most, and a number of you had a lot of questions.
The first two are from a listener – Ken. Now, Ken said, “Well, I didn’t see any provision made for an emergency fund. Isn’t that something that’s pretty important?” You’re right, Ken. We didn’t spell the emergency fund out in his balance sheet or in the retirement plan. In his current allocation, he already had significant cash. I think he had over almost a half a million dollars in cash. And so, for simplicity’s sake, because we were trying to focus on what the key points of the entire dream plan live process was we really didn’t break it out but, in practice, we would break that out.
Now, how does that work in retirement? To give you an example, if Carl was at retirement or a year or two before retirement, this is typically how I counsel clients to manage those emergency funds when they’re getting ready to draw money from their assets. You’re always going to have your normal emergency fund of anywhere from three months to a year’s lifestyle budget just simply because life happens and you have to have that buffer in your life to deal with those situations. But, when you’re at or near retirement, you really – in my opinion anyway – want to ramp up that liquidity or that emergency bucket.
If you’re taking out $100,000 a year from your assets, just as an example, I would typically counsel that you have one and a half times that amount as cash over and above your normal emergency “just in case something bad happens” fund. The reason for that is that is where we’ll create a pay check for an individual to where we’ll send them a monthly pay check from that cash reserve bucket of one and a half year of cash reserves. And then, on top of that, we’ll have any extra money that might be coming out over the next twelve months.
As an example, if they’re taking out $100,000 a year in retirement and they know they’re going to buy a $30,000 car in six months, we’ll add that $30,000 above the one and a half year’s cash reserve bucket. Now, that seems like a lot of cash and it is, but it does a couple of really important things. One, it gives the family or the individual or the couple a lot of flexibility in how they make financial decisions in that, if markets are bad or life is really hitting them hard at the moment, they know that they’re going to have roughly one and a half to two years of living expenses taken care of and that emotionally goes a long way to dealing with markets or with bad situations that come up in life and lots of different things. Emotionally, it’s a great anchor or foundation to hold onto.
Strategically, you have little conversations to refill that bucket systematically by rebalancing in your rebalancing policy or opportunitistically when you take gains on things to refill that bucket, or even if you’re going through really bad markets, maybe let it deplete a little bit so you don’t have to grab money from your long-term assets, and that’s I think the second benefit – I don’t know how many I went through now. It allows you to allow your long-term investments to truly be long-term whereas, if you don’t have that big cash reserve, a lot of times, people will be a little bit too conservative because they don’t want to have any volatility because they know they’re going to need that money really quickly.
The second question Ken had was, “What provision is made to pay for taxes on his 401(k) plan when required minimum distributions are required since most of his wealth is in tax-deferred assets? Are the taxes built into the model? Do you have a tool to calculate the withdrawals based on tax tables or something?” Great question.
Well, one, the taxes are built into the model so the models that I use assume a certain tax bracket based on the incomes coming out and that’s baked into the projections over the life span of the plan. And then, the withdrawal order is typically reliable income then your retirement cash reserves, and then your taxable assets then your tax-free assets then tax-deferred assets, and then so on. I guess the answer is yes, Ken. The plan in its calculations using the Monte Carlo scenario bakes into it the income taxes that are going to have to be paid even when you’re getting required minimum distributions.
Now, our next question – or really a comment – comes from Randy and this has to do with the estate plan which we didn’t talk a lot about other than throughout the month in the “Can Carl Retire?” and he asks, he says, you know, Quicken or WillMaker Plus that will give you a will and a health care directive and durable powers of attorney and things like that. He says his wife prefers those over the cost of dealing with an attorney and he I guess wanted my opinion on that.
Here’s how I think about that: I think, for most simple estates, I’m a fan of a lot of these do-it-yourself services like LegalZoom and I’m not really familiar with Quicken’s product. Now, I’m not an attorney and I don’t draft documents but it’s better than nothing is how I look at it and, given that the vast majority of people have nothing, if you can get it done simply and you at least have those very basic estate planning documents, that’s great.
Nowadays, unless there are substantial assets, underage kids or illiquid assets or other complexities, a lot of these may work just fine, and I’m sure attorneys would disagree with me on that. I do think an attorney is extremely important when you do have some specific issues that you’re trying to address, and that’s the hard part in really evaluating this because you don’t know where the gotchas are until the gotchas gotcha, right? That’s one value that an attorney can really bring to it.
Now, I had a couple of questions from Joe and Ken about the pension and whether it makes sense to take a lump sum on a pension or to take the payout that the company or the pension plan offers, and I answered that question very, very shortly at the end of it. I said something like, you know, almost all the time in my experience, it makes sense to take the pension payout rather than the lump sum option. Now, obviously, it’s a lot more nuanced than that. I’ll tell you, that was a really stressful day and it was the end of the webinar so, if I answered that a little bit flippingly, I didn’t mean to. It really does depend on the situation. Most of the time, when I run the calculations, it seems to end up that way that it makes more sense to take the annual distributions from the company rather than take the money.
Now, there are some drawbacks and advantages to both but both Joe and Ken wanted to know, well, how do you figure that out? How do you figure out whether you do take that or not. Here is how I approach that issue: First off, I run a normal planning scenario like we ran with Carl in the webinar. And then, what I would do is I would create an alternate scenario and take out the pension amount, the pension option that Carl had in that instance, and plug in what he is offered to receive as a lump sum payout from the pension plan and I would run them side by side if he took the full pension or if he took the cash at his age. And then, that will give you a good clue as to what makes more sense from a life planning perspective.
Now, there are some other considerations there. One, taking the money gives you some benefits, right? If you die, you have money left over for your family because you actually have an asset whereas, with the pension, if it’s life only, it goes away, or in the instance of what we modeled with Carl, his wife would receive fifty percent if he would happen to die early so that’s a big risk in taking the pension. Hey, it goes away and there’s really not a lot of assets.
In his situation, if Carl were to die early, half of that pension would go away for the entire life of Jane so that could be a real negative and there would be no asset on the balance sheet that could go to kids or could go to other types of things because, once you lock in that pension and start taking your pay check, you’re locked in. Those are some of the negatives of taking the pension.
Some of the positives of taking the pension are you have a set amount guaranteed for the rest of your life and you know what’s going to be guaranteed for your wife. The company – assuming they’re financially solvent – are going to be taking all of that risk to make those payments to you so you obviously want to be comfortable with the pension plan that the company provides and that does seem to be a big issue nowadays with people worried about underfunded pensions and those types of things are easy to analyze in terms of getting a read.
Now, you can’t predict the future of which ones will ultimately implode or not but typically they don’t and it’s easy to get a good read on where your company sits in terms of their pension fund because that may definitely influence your decision as to whether to take the pension or not so it’s going to be a combination of “Do you want to have the cash and be able to manage it yourself because you feel competent in yourself or your advisor and you want to have that asset?” or “Do you want the guarantees or the transfer of risk on those payments to the pension plan itself?”
But the way you want to analyze it outside of those qualitative issues is simply to run the scenarios with the pension in there and then run the scenarios with the buyout offer or the lump sum offer that the company is offering. Then you can see which one gives you the most comfort or confidence level that you’re actually positioned to achieve your goal. Once you see those, if they’re apples to apples or pretty close, then you start to go to those qualitative things in terms of do you want the asset on your balance, do you want to take on the risk to manage those, and those other issues.
Now, a follow-up question to that – from I forget if it was Joe or Ken – was, “Well, with Carl, how much would he need in a lump sum to replace that pension benefit in the scenario that we ran?” What I did was, now, I didn’t know Carl’s lump sum option that he was offered but I ran, okay, how much would it have to be to make them apples to apples in terms of that confidence level? It came out between $1.2 and $1.5 million as a lump sum, and that actually seems a little bit low but I think there’s a couple of reasons for that. One is the $1.3 million would have decades of growth because Carl’s retiring so young – in his mid-early 50s. Second is we had his spending declining at 75 and that really helps change what that terminal value is whereas his pension would never adjust upward. It would just be flat. I think those three reasons are one reason why it comes in low but I think you just need to run those two scenarios when you’re trying to evaluate that decision.
Now, our last question comes from Dave and he said, “Good pasta!” – excuse, not good pasta – “Good podcast!” Thank you, Dave. “Interesting information about Carl’s situation. I’m wondering whether your estimated returns for Carl are too aggressive. Where the estimated returns were eight-plus percent that you were showing, were they after tax returns? It seems, while the portfolio would be a nice blend, that the return estimates were higher than I’d been estimating in my personal returns.” Dave, that is an excellent point and that’s a question that comes around a lot. Let me explain where those returns came from.
In Carl’s model, we modeled a… we’ll call it a balanced portfolio. It had an allocation of four percent of cash, 35 percent of bonds or fixed income, and 61 percent to stocks – and that would be a mix of international, small cap, and the rest. The capital market assumptions or the return assumptions come from the actual data of the indices used from thee period of 1970 to 2013.
One question that comes around a lot is, “Well, why do you only go back to 1970?” You know, you see these charts of the S&P 500 that go back to 1926. Well, the reason it goes back to 1970 is really that’s where a lot of the data started for a lot of other assets like a lot of fixed income assets, international assets, small cap assets. Most of those indices don’t have reliable data – at least widely reliable data – going back past 1970. That’s the reason that it only goes back to 1970.
In that mix that I gave you, the total return in the portfolio that was used with Carl had an average return of 8.89 percent and that does seem high. It even seems high to me to be honest, Dave. But those are the actual numbers from the indices for that time period so it’s the best data we have.
Now, the real return that was used which is after inflation was 4.67 percent because, from 1970 to 2013, inflation averaged 4.22 percent so that’s a pretty aggressive inflation number – at least most people would say that even though that was the average since 1970. The real return – and a real return is basically the return minus inflation – was just under five percent.
Now, that portfolio had a one year worst return of -21.11 percent so that was the worst return for that allocation since that period and it had a standard deviation of 10.49. Now, we’re getting into statistics here and all standard deviation does is tell you how volatile the portfolio moves around that average over time. It’s a measure of volatility or moving up and down.
Now, the tool that I use has a projected model. I use the historical model in Carl’s plan but it has a projected model which is a model that tweaks those capital market assumptions based on an expert’s views of what they think can happen in the future and that is a very complex model to come up with how they tweak those capital market assumptions based on economic cycles, where interest rates are at, and a whole number of other things.
I don’t use that one typically because, as unreliable as past data is, man’s ability to predict the future of an economic cycle or even what the weather is going to be next week is pretty poor so I tend not to use the projected model even though these are extremely smart people with a lot of data and I have no doubt that it can be reliable to a point. I just like to use the pure data.
As much data as I have, I try not to think of influencing the data. But, if you were to use the projected capital market assumptions in Carl’s model, it would have shown a modeled return of 5.79 percent so that’s a lot lower than the historical number of 8.89 and it would have had a real return after inflation of 3.29 percent relative to the historical model which was 4.67 percent, that’s because, in the projected, they were projecting inflation at 2.5 percent – a lot lower than what’s happened over the last 43 years or so. And then, a standard deviation, a lot higher.
Now, I ran – just for kicks, Dave – both of them side by side. I ran Carl’s negotiated retirement with the historical number which came out with an 84 percent confidence ratio currently and then I ran it with the projected numbers and that moved it to a 79 percent confidence ratio so it decreased it by about six percent or so, but still would have guided Carl to yes being able to do it. I guess you could call those more conservative assumptions but the capital market assumptions and the numbers you put into these models are always very suspect because you’re dealing with only what’s happened and there’s so many things that can come into play there.
Those were the main questions I got from the webinar. If you have more questions, email them to me! I’ll answer them directly to you or maybe do another show if we get a lot of questions.
Now, I want to give you some things to consider. We went through this month of planning with Carl and we walked through each of the steps of dreaming an ideal retirement and really pushing to think big which is hard for a lot of people. And then, organizing your financial assets and what income resources you’re going to have. If I send you the plan, you’ll see the timeline of cash flows going from Carl’s current age of 51 to when he passes away at 90 and when Jane passes away at 92. We’re looking at what? A 41-year timeline.
My first thing for you to consider is don’t get caught up in the long-term details of this plan or really any other plan that you do because, let’s face it, this is a 41-year time horizon we’re looking at in Carl’s situation – and probably in your situation, too. What’s going to happen over the next 41 years? Well, Carl and Jane, what they care about, how they define an ideal retirement is going to change dramatically along the way as they age. Trying to figure it all right now is suspect because they’re not going to care about this stuff more than likely in five years. They’re going to have renegotiated a whole new retirement ideal and prioritization.
First off, their life is going to change. Their life circumstances are going to change, how they actually spend once they enter this phase of retirement is going to change and that can be based on really good things or really bad things, what the markets are going to return are totally unknowable so those are going to be drastically different than we can probably even imagine, and what inflation rates are are going to change dramatically.
My first counsel is don’t get so caught up in all of the little bitty details of how RMDs are going to work when they’re 70. I mean, you want to plan for them and you want to have some reasonable assumptions, but you don’t want to miss the big picture by focusing on trying to pin down a number that’s thirty years out into the future.
The second thing I want you to consider is the key isn’t “where is the economy right now?” or “where are the markets going next year?” or what interest rates are going to do or finding that right product or that right investment that’s just going to make it all work. The key is accepting that you can’t figure any of that out and you have to embrace the uncertainty – in Carl’s case – of the 41 years of their future. Most people can never get out of wanting to figure out what’s going to zig and zag or figuring out what’s going to happen with the markets or getting that right investment and that right product where they can check the box and say they’re fine. It just doesn’t work that way. Things sell well that way but that’s not really how it works.
You really need to focus on embracing the uncertainty of it all as you walk this journey into this next phase of life. The reason I tell you you have to embrace that uncertainty because, until you embrace that uncertainty and acknowledge it, you might be chasing ghosts because you’re going to be constantly looking for those signs of the future whereas, if you accept the uncertainty, now you can get down to the real work which is making sure you have the right little conversations that matter and focusing on managing your life as all of these uncertainties play out – not just the uncertainties of the markets and interest rates and things like that but all of the uncertainties we talked about with Carl and Jane as well about what’s happening in their life. If you have a real systematic process where you have lots of little conversations along the way, then you can make all those adjustments as your life unfolds.
Let me hit on that just for a second. Imagine for a second that Carl and Jane were 51 and today was the year that we’re assuming Jane would have passed away at 92. That would have put them at age 51, 41 years ago or 1974. Imagine if you were Carl and Jane and it’s 1974 and you’re looking at retiring and you have the same financial situation that Carl and Jane have right now. Let’s think about what your mindset might be.
What happened in 1974? You had the OPEC embargo just end. The OPEC embargo had just ended. Nixon was impeached and resigns the office of the presidency. India becomes a nuclear power. The USSR performs nuclear tests. Patty Hearst is kidnapped. You have a world that has gone crazy! The president of the United States has just been impeached and resigned. India is a nuclear power. You have Russia testing nuclear bombs. You’re not feeling real optimistic about the world, I would imagine, if you’re Carl and Jane in 1974.
Well, what about the markets and the economy? Well, the S&P 500 in 1974 was down 26.5 percent. The year before, 1973, it was down almost 15 percent so you’re definitely not feeling optimistic about the markets. Inflation, what was inflation running? It wasn’t running the 4.22 number that we assumed for Carl. It was at 11 percent. Inflation was at 11 percent. The treasury, the ten-year treasury was at 7.5 percent.
If you were Carl and Jane and you were 51 in 1974, what would your outlook be for market returns or inflation or where the US economy was going to be or interest rates? It was probably pretty dismal and that’s important to keep in mind when we’re sitting here in 2015 with not really that bad of an economy. Yes, it has its problems. Yes, we have ISIS and we have Al Qaeda and we have oil prices going down and we have China on the rise and all these other things. But is it really pale in comparison to 1974? Now, I don’t know what the future is going to hold.
My only point I’m trying to make here is don’t get too pessimistic just like we should never get too optimistic. If Carl and Jane were 51 years old 41 years ago in retiring, their plan probably would have worked out just fine even though, on the surface, looking around you at the world, it probably looked pretty dismal. It’s really important to keep perspective and not try to extrapolate whatever you’re feeling – whether it’s fear or optimistic – out into the future.
The key is having that system of having the right little conversations. That’s the last thing I want to leave you with in wrapping this up and telling you some things to consider:
1.) Don’t get caught up in the long-term details of the plan.
2.) Don’t fret about where you are right now in figuring out what’s going to happen in the future.
The last key thing I want you to consider is how to maintain the flexibility so you can manage this process of managing uncertainty as your life unfolds. You can do it in a lot of different ways. One is having an emergency fund and having cash reserves are huge because they give you time and take away the pressure of a lot of decisions.
Number two is you don’t want to lock yourself into too many things, and that could be into products that have long back-end charges or are illiquid in nature that you can’t get out of. You don’t want to lock yourself into a lot of things for the most part or payments on things that you have. I see RVs all the time where you lock yourself into payments or you lock yourself into debts. You want to stay nimble as you’re entering this period of your life because that gives you the maximum flexibility.
And then, you want to focus on earning something early on even if you’re entering retirement. Carl and I talked about that a little bit but having some earnings or the ability to earn money – especially in that first five to ten years of your retirement – is essential because that can really save you if you get the bad luck of the draw of bad markets or bad life circumstance early on.
And then, lastly, you want to make sure that you have the right little conversations so you can make little adjustments along the way as your life unfolds. I’ll go back to that example of an airplane, right? If you’re flying from New York to Dallas, you’re going to chart a course and that’s going to be this long-term course just like a long-term financial plan and it’s going to look really pretty on a map. All the numbers and the coordinates will be calculated to whatever degree. But then, as soon as that plane takes off, it’s always off of course. Now, I’m not a pilot but that’s what they tell me. Your plane is always, always off of course.
The last thing you want to do is you want to make sure you have the right little conversations in the right intervals so, if you start to veer off-course, you can course-correct based on wind, based on weather, you know, equate that to based on life circumstances or based on the markets, and that’s how you manage the retirement. It’s not through predicting the future or buying the right product. It’s through having those little conversations so you can course-correct as you chart your course in your retirement life.
What do you do? Two times where you want to talk about what you care about. You want to do step one and focus on what is it that we care about and want to have happen in our lives. At least two times a year, you want to check in on the cash flow and make sure you’re managing that well. Two times a year, you want to review your net worth statement and you want to see how all of those things come together to make sure that you’re not starting to veer off-course on any one of those And then, once you get into a rhythm of having those little conversations.
Now, when life really strikes – and that could be 2008, it could be a terrorist attack, it could be winning the lottery – when life strikes, you have everything organized and a system in place where you can very quickly analyze the situation with the right framework of what we care about, what our cash flow is, and what we have and really make the smartest decision that’s for you with the information that you have. That’s the beauty of the process.
Those are the things I want to leave you with at the end of this whole “Can Carl Retire?” series that we’ve had in January.
Now, I want to switch gears real quickly and this is really important. I need your help on this. I want to know, what do you want next? What do you want next from this show and my blog? Do you want another real-life planning scenario with a different fact set? That seemed to have resonated with a lot of people and I can definitely pursue that if that’s something that you want. Do you want me to host webinars to talk about market risk and portfolio trade-offs and show you how to manage some of that randomness? Do you want a webinar just on a pension or lump sum? Or about social security maximization and different strategies for that? Do you want a webinar on goal planning on how to really dream up that ideal retirement and make that all together?
The reason I do this Retirement Answer Man blog is so I can serve my clients better and I can serve and touch people and help them dream big for their life and put together a plan so they can manage and make the best choices for themselves. I’m looking to you to tell me what you want next. Give me an idea of the kind of resources that I can create or content that I can create for you.
All you have to do is really simple: you can shoot me an email at firstname.lastname@example.org or you go to rogerwhitney.com/retirementanswers. Either of those methods, you can let me know the kind of resources and the questions that are burning in you that you want to get answered that you don’t feel you’re getting answers to and I’ll do my best to try to create that content for you.
Again, I want to thank everybody for all the great feedback and the questions and the comments I’ve gotten from everybody. It means so much to me that this is resonating with you.
Until next week, this is Roger Whitney, the Retirement Answer Man.