4 ms·

So, this is the second front page post by the same user this morning. One takes a direct shot at vanguard (“tax dialysis”), and the next an indirect shot (“they

So, this is the second front page post by the same user this morning. One takes a direct shot at vanguard (“tax dialysis”), and the next an indirect shot (“they don’t use your votes right - but we do! Invest with us!”). The user only has four posts in their entire history, and three are on the same topic and posted in the last 24 hours. This ... looks off to me.

Radle 8y ago
It's quite obvious what happened there, but it's not necessary bad.
- wslh 8y ago
  Please explain...
  - 542458 8y ago
    A user has a bone to pick/an incentive to make this point, which normally leads to bad submissions. However, in this case it is a legitimate issue to be discussed.
    - arkades 8y ago
      I actually assumed the account was compromised. The account managed to not really post anything in the preceding five years, and then went on an astroturfing spree in a single twenty four hour period. You’re probably right, though.
WiSaGaN 8y ago
Vanguard just cut fees days ago: https://www.etf.com/sections/daily-etf-watch/21-vanguard-etfs-get-fee-cuts?nopaging=1 https://www.etf.com/sections/daily-etf-watch/21-vanguard-etf...
maest 8y ago
I actually believe the Vanguard story puts that fund in a positive light - they actively work to shield their investors from taxes, in a legal way. Sounds like a great deal for the customers.
awinder 8y ago
Pretty obviously market-testing some ideas on how to structure a tweaked index fund with higher management fees (references in the closing to charging 25 basis points and the "platform" which has no other details available)
batty_alex 8y ago
It's probably not malicious. They may just be skeptical of Vanguard and want to spur discussion on what they think is important. Trying to bring up topics they find are worth discussing.
- volkl48 8y ago
  No/little activity for 4 years and then 3 posts on the same topic in 24 hours is more than a little suspicious, though.
nabla9 8y ago
This is "sponsored content" except it's on the HN front page. It's a marketing material as a blog post. We can't know if the original upvotes are from PR firms or if are organic.

Radle 8y ago

It's quite obvious what happened there, but it's not necessary bad.

wslh 8y ago
Please explain...
- 542458 8y ago
  A user has a bone to pick/an incentive to make this point, which normally leads to bad submissions. However, in this case it is a legitimate issue to be discussed.
  - arkades 8y ago
    I actually assumed the account was compromised. The account managed to not really post anything in the preceding five years, and then went on an astroturfing spree in a single twenty four hour period. You’re probably right, though.

WiSaGaN 8y ago

Vanguard just cut fees days ago: https://www.etf.com/sections/daily-etf-watch/21-vanguard-etfs-get-fee-cuts?nopaging=1 https://www.etf.com/sections/daily-etf-watch/21-vanguard-etf...

maest 8y ago

I actually believe the Vanguard story puts that fund in a positive light - they actively work to shield their investors from taxes, in a legal way. Sounds like a great deal for the customers.

awinder 8y ago

Pretty obviously market-testing some ideas on how to structure a tweaked index fund with higher management fees (references in the closing to charging 25 basis points and the "platform" which has no other details available)

batty_alex 8y ago

It's probably not malicious. They may just be skeptical of Vanguard and want to spur discussion on what they think is important. Trying to bring up topics they find are worth discussing.

volkl48 8y ago
No/little activity for 4 years and then 3 posts on the same topic in 24 hours is more than a little suspicious, though.

nabla9 8y ago

This is "sponsored content" except it's on the HN front page. It's a marketing material as a blog post. We can't know if the original upvotes are from PR firms or if are organic.