Even the Bond King Can Be Wrong

By John F. Wasik

No matter what theme you adopt in a market forecast, predictability has always been a bugaboo. Just ask Bill Gross, the legendary manager of the PIMCO Total Return bond fund.

Gross's $244 billion baby saw at least $5 billion in assets flee in 2011, more than $1.4 billion in the fourth quarter alone. Relative to the size of his fund, this is a notable vote of no confidence ().

Investors voted with their money because of Gross's bet against U.S. Treasuries last year. Like many of us, he digested the headlines and became dyspeptic over the Congress defaulting on its debt, sluggish economy, the S&P credit downgrade and euro zone debt woes. Yet what actually happened didn't follow Gross's "new normal" script. Instead we got the "old abnormal" of unpredictability.

While none of those perils can be dismissed - nobody is out of the woods - something odd happened. U.S. debt remained a safe haven and even more money flowed into Treasuries, which became the best-performing bond class and returned 17 percent last year.

In the second half of last year, U.S. Treasury prices climbed, while hot money fled European paper. It wasn't too long ago that the euro was seen as a respectable currency while the buck was being battered. Gold, that ultimate nervous Nellie insurance policy, also went south for a while.

"The 'new normal' thesis at PIMCO was predicated on a low interest rate environment dragging safe bonds down as investors sought higher-yielding opportunities elsewhere," said Jeff Tjornehoj, director of research at Lipper, a Thomson Reuters company. "That was reasonable in 2009, but started to fade in 2010 and was completely undone in 2011 as credit conditions in European banks deteriorated and investors rushed to safety."

So it's time to question whether Bill Gross is on target with his new "paranormal" theory and more importantly, if active managers can consistently predict market movements and protect your wealth.

Is Gross still on track? Here's what he said in his most recent "Investment Outlook" ():

"For 2012, in the face of a delivering zero-bound interest rate world, investors must lower return expectations. 2-5 percent for stocks, bonds and commodities are expected long term returns for global financial markets that have been pushed to the zero bound, a world where substantial real price appreciation is getting close to mathematically improbable."

Of course, Gross has forgotten more about bond trading than I'll ever know, so his long-term record is worth respecting. His cautions are still valid. But actively managing money becomes nettlesome because the future is as slippery as a politician's promise. What's predicted doesn't always transpire; if you make big bets, you can suffer big losses.

The larger question for investors is should you even bother with an active manager making periodic wagers based on theories that may not hold water?

Would you be better off in passive bond-index funds like the Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF or the iShares Barclays Aggregate Bond fund, which I hold as a U.S. broad-market bond proxy in my 401(k) portfolio?

Passive investing usually makes more sense since you avoid the high costs and frequent missteps of active managers. As of the last Lipper research report, Gross's PIMCO Total Return fund finished in the bottom 12 percent of its category, posting a 4.15 percent return. That's compared to a 6 percent average performance for its peers.

That's why a passive strategy still makes sense. The Vanguard fund, for example, samples a fairly static basket of U.S. government-based mortgage bonds, Treasuries, corporates, utilities and a touch of non-U.S. paper. It charges 0.11 percent annually for management. The PIMCO fund has an expense ratio of 1.15 percent annually with a costly 430 percent turnover rate, indicating high trading costs that are passed along to investors.

As for predicting the market going forward? Be cautious and hedge any large position in bonds (European or American), stocks and metals. The only guarantee is that big financial events often follow an abnormal course.

How to Help the Jobless

(Reuters) - Two of my friends lost their jobs in the last month. One had worked for a large computer services company for 31 years. Another was an information technology manager whose position was eliminated in a restructuring. Both men are in their fifties.

Having been laid off more than once, I have a certain protocol I share with friends. I hope it's of value to them; I know it's paid off for me. Here's the plan that has worked for me in the past:

-- The best strategy is to be ready for a potential layoff with several months of cash, no credit card debt and an up-to-date resume. But don't lose heart if you're one of the more than 15 million unemployed and 1 million "discouraged" workers who can't find openings suitable to their skills and have stopped looking. There are strategies to lessen the pain and to improve your chances of finding a new job.

-- Ideally, don't leave your employer without knowing what benefits are available. Many large companies offer a suite of outplacement services to laid-off workers. Always take advantage of them.

One of my newly laid off friends got help in writing a resume, branding statement and doing interviews. He also got to keep his company-issued laptop. You're also entitled to at least 26 weeks of unemployment compensation, and in some cases as much as 99 weeks (assuming Congress extends long-term benefits by year-end).

-- You'll also need to make decisions about health care and your 401(k) plan. You have a choice of whether to keep your 401(k) with an employer or roll it over into another plan. Take your time in deciding what to do. I generally recommend that people look at the offerings of the largest fund companies (Fidelity, Vanguard, T. Rowe Price) and see if they can get better service, lower expense ratios and more diversification.

If health insurance is not covered in a severance plan, you may be eligible for it through a COBRA extension (link.reuters.com/zyq35s). This is a federal law that says an employer with more than 20 workers must extend their health plan to you if they lay you off. There's a nasty catch, though: You may have to pay for the premiums, although they can't be more than 104 percent of what employees are paying.

Of course, with no income coming in for a while, a large insurance premium could be unaffordable. If so, look at trade or alumni associations that may offer less-expensive group coverage. You'd have to be a member to qualify. A third alternative is to shop for short-term policies online (www.ehealthinsurance.com/).

Price high-deductible health policies first. Although out-of-pocket expenses range from roughly $1,200 for individuals to $11,900 for families (link.reuters.com/car35s), they are designed to cover most catastrophic health events such as heart attack, stroke or cancer. The premiums are much lower than full coverage policies and don't offer "soup to nuts" coverage.

-- Cash reserves are also essential. My friends were diligent savers, but they needed to do cash-flow statements to see how long their cash would hold out. That's a simple matter of adding up all basic expenses such as mortgage/rent, food, property taxes, health insurance and utilities to come up with a monthly "nut" number. These are the core bills when all discretionary items such as restaurant meals, movies/entertainment and cable TV are stripped out.

-- Need quick cash? Don't forget, that in a pinch, you can cash in or borrow against a life insurance policy -- if it carries a cash value -- or go down to one car.

And if you absolutely need the money, you can tap into your retirement plan, although I don't recommend it, because if you do it prior to age 59 ½, you'll pay income tax plus a 10 percent

federal penalty on withdrawals. That money's awfully hard to replace.

-- The nonmonetary part of joblessness is no less important. How well networked are you? Have you updated profiles on social media services such as Linkedin? Have you told friends and associates that you're looking for work? Have you checked college alumni association for job services? Use all social media options.

Often the hardest emotional toll is the long wait before another job is secured. Prior to the 2007 recession, the average wait to reemployment was five weeks, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Today the wait is double that, and potentially longer if your chosen profession or industry is contracting.

New perspectives and brainstorming are essential. Forget about what you did; what can you do? Write down your life skills. What are you best at? What have you accomplished on the job and outside of work? What are your social skills? Do you need additional training? Don't forget skills you may have mastered outside the office volunteering.

The best jobs are often not advertised. Look at business headlines to see if companies are expanding. What kind of people are they seeking? Drill down into the story to see which executive is quoted and pitch them directly.

My recently unemployed friends are optimistic. They have decades of experience, are highly motivated and are well organized. One friend has already been on two interviews, and the other one has spent hours with an outplacement firm refining his resume.

Ultimately, getting a decent job is a numbers game. Job candidates need to make contact with the people who are doing the hiring -- and do it on a daily basis. Resumes are useful, but they may not sell their talents well enough.

---

The author is a Reuters columnist. The opinions expressed are his own.

How to Help the Jobless

(Reuters) - Two of my friends lost their jobs in the last month. One had worked for a large computer services company for 31 years. Another was an information technology manager whose position was eliminated in a restructuring. Both men are in their fifties.

Having been laid off more than once, I have a certain protocol I share with friends. I hope it's of value to them; I know it's paid off for me. Here's the plan that has worked for me in the past:

-- The best strategy is to be ready for a potential layoff with several months of cash, no credit card debt and an up-to-date resume. But don't lose heart if you're one of the more than 15 million unemployed and 1 million "discouraged" workers who can't find openings suitable to their skills and have stopped looking. There are strategies to lessen the pain and to improve your chances of finding a new job.

-- Ideally, don't leave your employer without knowing what benefits are available. Many large companies offer a suite of outplacement services to laid-off workers. Always take advantage of them.

One of my newly laid off friends got help in writing a resume, branding statement and doing interviews. He also got to keep his company-issued laptop. You're also entitled to at least 26 weeks of unemployment compensation, and in some cases as much as 99 weeks (assuming Congress extends long-term benefits by year-end).

-- You'll also need to make decisions about health care and your 401(k) plan. You have a choice of whether to keep your 401(k) with an employer or roll it over into another plan. Take your time in deciding what to do. I generally recommend that people look at the offerings of the largest fund companies (Fidelity, Vanguard, T. Rowe Price) and see if they can get better service, lower expense ratios and more diversification.

If health insurance is not covered in a severance plan, you may be eligible for it through a COBRA extension (link.reuters.com/zyq35s). This is a federal law that says an employer with more than 20 workers must extend their health plan to you if they lay you off. There's a nasty catch, though: You may have to pay for the premiums, although they can't be more than 104 percent of what employees are paying.

Of course, with no income coming in for a while, a large insurance premium could be unaffordable. If so, look at trade or alumni associations that may offer less-expensive group coverage. You'd have to be a member to qualify. A third alternative is to shop for short-term policies online (www.ehealthinsurance.com/).

Price high-deductible health policies first. Although out-of-pocket expenses range from roughly $1,200 for individuals to $11,900 for families (link.reuters.com/car35s), they are designed to cover most catastrophic health events such as heart attack, stroke or cancer. The premiums are much lower than full coverage policies and don't offer "soup to nuts" coverage.

-- Cash reserves are also essential. My friends were diligent savers, but they needed to do cash-flow statements to see how long their cash would hold out. That's a simple matter of adding up all basic expenses such as mortgage/rent, food, property taxes, health insurance and utilities to come up with a monthly "nut" number. These are the core bills when all discretionary items such as restaurant meals, movies/entertainment and cable TV are stripped out.

-- Need quick cash? Don't forget, that in a pinch, you can cash in or borrow against a life insurance policy -- if it carries a cash value -- or go down to one car.

And if you absolutely need the money, you can tap into your retirement plan, although I don't recommend it, because if you do it prior to age 59 ½, you'll pay income tax plus a 10 percent

federal penalty on withdrawals. That money's awfully hard to replace.

-- The nonmonetary part of joblessness is no less important. How well networked are you? Have you updated profiles on social media services such as Linkedin? Have you told friends and associates that you're looking for work? Have you checked college alumni association for job services? Use all social media options.

Often the hardest emotional toll is the long wait before another job is secured. Prior to the 2007 recession, the average wait to reemployment was five weeks, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Today the wait is double that, and potentially longer if your chosen profession or industry is contracting.

New perspectives and brainstorming are essential. Forget about what you did; what can you do? Write down your life skills. What are you best at? What have you accomplished on the job and outside of work? What are your social skills? Do you need additional training? Don't forget skills you may have mastered outside the office volunteering.

The best jobs are often not advertised. Look at business headlines to see if companies are expanding. What kind of people are they seeking? Drill down into the story to see which executive is quoted and pitch them directly.

My recently unemployed friends are optimistic. They have decades of experience, are highly motivated and are well organized. One friend has already been on two interviews, and the other one has spent hours with an outplacement firm refining his resume.

Ultimately, getting a decent job is a numbers game. Job candidates need to make contact with the people who are doing the hiring -- and do it on a daily basis. Resumes are useful, but they may not sell their talents well enough.

---

The author is a Reuters columnist. The opinions expressed are his own.

How to Nail Zombie Funds

By John Wasik

(REUTERS) - Do you have zombie index funds within your portfolio?

Instead of eating up your brains, they devour your nest egg with high expenses and walking dead performance. They may be lurking within your 401(k)-type plan or individual retirement account.

I like index funds because they generally can track nearly any kind of asset class. As such, they are the white bread of investing and should cost about the same from fund to fund. The cheaper the better. Why pay Nieman-Marcus prices for the same thing you can get at Costco or Sam's Club for less?

You can vanquish these funds without overtly violent acts, but first you have to identify them. Unfortunately, mandated fee disclosure is still pending, so you have to take the initiative.

So how do you identify a zombie fund? First you need a reliable benchmark for comparison purposes. The easiest way is to look at the index that the fund is supposed to be tracking.

A good proxy for the U.S. bond market, for example, is the Barclays Capital Aggregate Bond Index. It's a basket of listed bonds. If a fund tracks the index return within 0.20 percentage points or less, then that's pretty good and not expensive.

A low-cost bond index fund would look like the Fidelity Spartan Intermediate Term Bond Index investor class fund, with a 0.20 percent expense ratio. You'd need at least $10,000 to get into this fund, though.

You want to pay a manager more to get less return on bonds? The ING US Bond Index portfolio charges a hefty 0.95 percent annually, meaning it will lag the index by nearly a full percentage point every year.

What about garden-variety stock index funds? Suppose you were stuck in a fund like the Principal Large Cap S&P 500 Index fund (C Shares). The managers charge you 1.3 percent annually to hold a basket of the largest U.S. stocks. You could reap huge savings by replacing it with the Fidelity Spartan S&P 500 Index Advantage fund, with an expense ratio of 0.07 percent.

Here's where "less is more" refers to more than architecture. The Principal fund lagged the S&P index by roughly a percentage point over the past year through October 28.

The Fidelity index fund, in contrast, slightly beat the index over the same period. By lowering your expense ratio, you got back that percentage point you would've lost in the more expensive fund.

Over time, the numbers add up. Let's say you had $100,000 in the Principal fund earning 5 percent over 30 years. At the end of that period, you'd have lost more than $140,000 to fees and foregone earnings. The Fidelity fund would have only cost you about $9,000. So one decision can save you roughly $131,000. Run your own numbers on the free SEC Mutual Fund Expense Analyzer (see here). It will take about two minutes.

If you have a zombie fund in your portfolio, run away from it and consider offerings in the DFA, Fidelity, iShares, Schwab, TIAA-CREF or Vanguard groups.

Have a nest-egg eater in your 401(k)? Suggest alternatives to your employer or plan administrator. By law, they must provide the most prudent, low-cost choices. You can sue them if they've loaded your plan with zombies. Several employee groups have done so in recent years -- and won (see www.uselaws.com/news/3/108).

Managing the Message

What the Occupy Wall Street crowd should be saying when they talk about their plight

By John F. Wasik (Reuters)

• 
• 
  

Are the thousands who have taken to the streets in the “Occupy Wall Street” (OWS) protests a bunch of anarchistic slackers or do they have a point?

If they’re protesting their personal financial situations or prospects for the American Dream, they have plenty to howl about, but the “99 percent” crowds could use some message management.

When I recently visited the Chicago OWS spin-off in front of the Federal Reserve Bank, they were decrying everything from predator drones to corporations in general. There were fewer than 100 people there, although their theme was similar to the New York demonstrations.

Instead of yelling at people ensconced behind financial district edifices, though, protesters could be making some more constructive demands. I’d like to humbly offer a few suggestions:

• Demand that big banks give ordinary citizens the same rates they receive from the Federal Reserve on loans. Borrowers can’t re-negotiate their college loans the way a big corporation or bank can, because they have access to interest rates that are nearly zero. Moreover, students can’t consolidate high-rate private loans with lower-rate federal borrowing, so the plums of high finance are out of their reach. Those who graduated from college may be staring down decades of paying off debt — an average of nearly $23,000 per student; those with professional degrees are wincing at six-figure burdens.
• Demand that Congress permit regular folks to discharge student debt in bankruptcy. It’s somewhat of a consolation that graduates can get lower payments based on sparse income or employment if they have federal loans, but they still have to repay those loans. If they file for bankruptcy, they can’t discharge those debts, which are like albatrosses. Not so with the megabanks, who not only received a multi-trillion-dollar bailout, but got the U.S. Treasury and Federal Reserve to buy their bad debt and toxic securities. There’s a solid reason why the delinquency rate for student loans is almost as high as credit cards.
• Demand that Congress pass a stimulus plan to create infrastructure, education, research and clean energy jobs instead of investing in two wars that three-quarters of the American electorate thinks are senseless. If the job market were robust, none of these protesters would have to worry. Like previous generations, they could work, pay off their debts and buy things like appliances, furniture and homes. They could afford to have children and provide them decent educations. That was the American Dream. The younger generation is not getting the job opportunities their parents or grandparents had. They are faced with average 15 percent unemployment. It’s much higher for minorities. Even if they can get a job, wages are depressed due to the recession and many are underemployed, working several jobs or are part-timers.
• Instead of targeting financial districts, focus on specific congressmen and senators blocking financial/bankruptcy reform and job creation.

Unless more people get in the face of politicians, one thing is certain: it will be continue to be a raw deal for the middle class. Now is the time for the protesters to take their demonstrations out of financial districts and into the offices of their elected representatives. All of this reminds me of when Ralph Waldo Emerson visited Henry David Thoreau in jail, who was imprisoned for not paying a poll tax. Emerson asked his friend why he was there. “Why are you not here?” Thoreau replied. Maybe we’re not quite on the streets today in spirit, but most of us were there some time ago in personal financial solidarity — whether we choose to admit it or not.

Cutting Your Property Taxes

By John F. Wasik (Reuters)

The author is a columnist for Reuters.com and author of The Audacity of Help: Obama's Economic Plan and the Remaking of America. The opinions expressed are his own.

By John Wasik

(Reuters) - For years, the mantra of American homeownership was to count on home appreciation. Every year like clockwork the value went up and houses were a growing source of wealth.

Now, more than three years after the housing market imploded, the tune is different. It may make sense for you to prove that your home's value has dropped so you can file for reduced property taxes.

This is the time of the year when local assessors send out notices of your home's assessed value. Note, however, that this is not your real market value. It's a base value that's used to calculate your property taxes. If you want to reduce your real estate taxes, start with paring your assessed value.

You have a reasonably good chance of winning a challenge to your assessed valuation. It's estimated that some 60 percent of residential properties are over-assessed, although only a handful of home owners appeal, according to the National Taxpayers Union.

As someone who's volunteered with a local nonprofit in Northeastern Illinois on property tax issues, I know it's worth fighting assessments every year. Sometimes I win, sometimes I lose. If you feel that your assessment is too high, there are many ways to challenge it, but it takes some homework and diligence.

You can always start by checking the property record of your home, which is on file with the assessor. Does it have the correct number of bathrooms and bedrooms? Is the total living space correct? Does it list a finished basement in error? You can fix any incorrect data by either allowing the assessor to inspect your home or by submitting an approved builder's drawing or survey.

Although you can dispute the assessed market value of your home with your assessor, it's not an easy task since you may need at least three comparable homes in your neighborhood with lower values.

If you can't reach an agreement with your assessor, then you'll have to file appeals with your county and state property-tax appeal boards. Your documentation should be filed on time and you may be scheduled for a short hearing.

You can, of course, hire a consultant or lawyer to do the appeal for you, but they will charge a flat fee or take a percentage of your tax savings.

When going through this process, you may feel like it's an uphill battle. It's much easier for assessors to neglect reducing assessed values -- even though home prices have plummeted 30 percent or more in many metropolitan areas since the housing meltdown began. They're in the business of pooling money for the taxing bodies, not providing current market values.

Yet to get an idea on how much housing values have dropped, you need to consult some recent numbers from Realtor.com , the main web site from the National Association of Realtors, the trade association.

Here's a sampling of some markets that showed the largest year-over-year declines in median list prices, that is, what buyers were asking for homes:

*Chicago: -14.9 percent

*Las Vegas : -11.19 percent

*Atlanta: -11.17 percent

*Los Angeles/Long Beach: -10.99 percent

*Detroit: -10.39 percent

*Tampa/Clearwater: -10.26 percent

Of course, these markets have declined much more than these percentages show since the real-estate market peaked in 2006-2007. So you may be able to reap some genuine savings in your property-tax bill.

For the purposes of your assessment, you can generally only focus on the last year. Your mission is to show how similar properties in your immediate area have declined along with your home.

Assessors aren't interested in national, statewide or even county housing prices, though. Stick to your neighborhood and get a professional appraisal for assessed valuation. And if there's something that has reduced the value of your property - a recent storm, neighborhood deterioration, etc. - you should present your case with pictures.

Even if you get a reduction in your assessed value, you may not see a huge decline in your property taxes, if at all. In most places, taxing bodies can still raise their tax rates or multipliers. When multiplied by your assessed value (minus any exemptions or credits), the rates will determine your tax bill. Unless subject to a tax cap, even in a sour property market taxes can still rise.

Since they are suffering from reduced tax revenue due to the housing recession, most public services are going to do whatever they can to ensure that they receive as much money from taxpayers as possible.

The good news is that, unless you employ outside help, it will cost you nothing to fight.

There's a strange benefit in arguing that your home is worth less than the year before. While it may be a blow to your ego, it's a fight worth waging that can make a difference in your tax bills in the future.

Some Sanity in Scary Times

Balancing your portfolio in a bonkers market

By John F. Wasik

• 
  
• 
• inShare

Balance is a rare bird these days. Jobs, housing, stocks, European debt: All seem to be in a spasmodic tailspin.

There is some consolation that a balanced portfolio can help smooth out the jagged curves of a bipolar market economy. But balance is rarely what we think it is, and it needs constant monitoring.

When most investment advisers tout a balanced portfolio, it typically means one thing: About 60 percent would be invested in a U.S. all-stock fund and the remainder in bonds.

A good proxy for the stock component would be the index exchange-traded fund SPDR S&P 500 fund. U.S. bonds could be ably represented by the SPDR Barclays Aggregate Bond ETF. Both funds are low cost, diversified ways of owning the lion’s share of each market. Here’s how the returns break out, according to Craig Israelsen, professor of finance at Brigham Young University, who analyzed the underlying indexes:

A balanced portfolio is roughly half as risky as an all-stock mix. If you looked at August’s returns, you would have only lost 2.75 percent in the 60/40 portfolio, compared to a 5.5 percent loss in the all-stock portfolio or a 1.37 percent gain in the much safer all-bond portfolio. No surprises there because bonds are safe havens when investors flee stocks as they did during last month’s volatility — and may continue to do so in a broad-based pullback.

Let’s look back even deeper into the past decade, which included two recessions, 9/11, the 2008 meltdown and the dot-com blow-out of 2001. Bonds are again the best performers as a buffer against stocks — returning 5.5 percent vs. 2.59 percent for 100 percent stocks. Between those two extremes was the balanced portfolio, with a 4.1 percent return through August 31.

In an even more volatile period — going back only five years to include the 2008 meltdown, recession and recovery — bonds again came out on top with a 6.26 percent return, compared to 0.74 percent return for all stocks and 3.3 percent for the balanced mix.

It’s hard to argue against being all in stocks or bonds at the right moments. In good times, stocks are the place to be as you’re rewarded with dividends and capital appreciation based on corporate earnings expectations. When the skies darken, though, bonds are decent hideouts due to their steady payments and appreciation when interest rates decline. Yet how do you time the market? That’s what makes the balanced approach a solid middle ground that lowers both stock and bond-market risk simultaneously.

Long-term, the middle route makes a huge difference. From 1926 through 2010, according to a recent T. Rowe Price study, a balanced portfolio delivered returns above 10 percent almost as frequently as an all-stock portfolio — with 40 percent less volatility.

That means in a dreadful year for stocks, the balanced portfolio would only lose 28 percent, compared to 43 percent for the 100 percent stocks mix.

The balanced approach is a compelling argument for mutual funds that automatically do the 60/40 allocation and for target-date or lifestyle choices within 401(k)-type plans that do the same thing only with specific years targeted for retirement withdrawals. Every major mutual-fund firm offers them as does Folio Investing.

You could also build a balanced portfolio on your own by buying the two SPDR funds I mentioned above. Buy them through a deep-discount broker or find their equivalents commission-free through Fidelity Investments, Charles Schwab or the Vanguard Group.

Want to take the balanced approach one-step further? Consider an ultra-balanced approach with at least 12 separate funds representing seven asset classes, such as the ones found in the 7-12 portfolio. Over the past five years, the passive version of 7-12 has returned 4.8 percent, compared with 3.87 percent for the Vanguard Balanced Index and 0.71 for the Vanguard 500 Index fund, according to Israelsen, who designed the portfolio.

Israelsen has expanded the definition of balanced portfolios by including inflation-protected bonds, cash, natural resources/commodities, global real estate, emerging markets and all sizes of companies. This model reduces risk through diversification and includes tangible assets such as commodities and real estate.

What’s important in a balanced approach for moderate to conservative investors is that more global asset classes get you away from the all-U.S. stocks and bonds orthodoxy. This diversity not only gives you room to breath, you’ll never fly too close to the sun.