【龔成問答信箱】(Q22061-Q22080)
Q22061:
龔sir, 本人52歲,早年對股票市場沒有深入認識,便跟朋友一起買入股票,97年全部變晒蟹貨,朋友話同佢鬥長命,所以全部都沒有放出,
但有些已100合1,變為單位數股票,想放出也蝕手續費。
最近這兩個月開始睇你Facebook, 覺得應該要整合一下手上的股票,不應採取放任不管態度,要選擇一些適合自己年齡的投資組合。想問以下股票是否應全部放出?
0604(深圳控股)
0622(威華達控股)
0697(首程控股)
0759(CEC國際控股)
0887(英皇鐘錶)
0910(中國三迪)
1168(百仕達)
1339(中國人民保險)
1387(中國地利)
1466(錢唐控股)
8173(萬亞企業)
8178(中國訊息)
8311(圓美光電)
手上還有以下賺的股票,是否應繼續持有?
0354(中軟國際)
0700(騰訊)
1810(小米集團)IPO
2158(醫渡科技)IPO
6618(京東健康)IPO
睇左你facebook後,上月買入以下股票。
2382(舜宇光學)月供$2000
2800(盈富基金)月供$2000
6823(香港電訊)2000股
月入3萬,扣除開支後可儲蓄$5000,.流動資金$1,200,000. 應怎樣運用現有資金,來選擇適合的投資組合。
龔成老師︰
我地投資一隻股票,就如投資一間企業。如果你係無質素架股票,不論而一刻係賺定蝕,你都應該要沽出。
唔好諗住同佢鬥長命,因為無質素架股票,可以越跌越深,去到一個低賤的你估唔到的水平。所以要果斷,無質素就要沽出,將資金收回,用於有價值的股票身上,才是正確做法。
另外,你唔好再單係聽朋友講,或者聽消息就去買貨。
我地買入一隻股票,一定要知道佢質素、行業前景、財務狀況等,才去投資。如果你連間公司點賺錢、行內有乜優勢、點解未來有發展和增長潛力,都答唔倒自已,咁就要停一停,唔好投資住。
以你52歲計,現時月供的股票都無問題。至於,你現有持股方面。中國人民保險(1339)有質素,你可以長線持有。
深圳控股(0604)、首程控股(0697)都可持有,但質素較一般,不宜持有太多。
中國軟件國際(0354)、騰訊(0700)、小米(1810)、醫渡科技(2158)、京東健康(6618)係有質素的潛力股,由於佢地風險較高,以你年紀不宜持有太多,最多只可佔組合2成。
其餘股票,質素較弱,甚至係無投資價值,建議最好沽出,換至其他優質股較好。
未來時來,你可以用以下股票作目標,當中以平穏增長股為主力。但隨著年齡增加,慢慢增加收息股的比例。到退休時,你收息股比例,應提升至100%。
現時大市只係合理水平,現金佔比重大約3-5成。你可以睇翻自已現金和股票比重,決定是否再投入更多資金入市。若然係再入市,緊記係分注慢慢入,唔好一次入晒,以減低買貴貨機會。
------------------------------------------------
Q22062:
老師, 8367 倩碧是麻孫樂控股公司,上月見價位低殘,買一百萬股都是十一萬左右。 之後減磅兩次,仍有六十餘萬,繼續揸擔心一天瀉九成。 可以點處理?
龔成老師︰
倩碧控股(8367)集團於香港以「麻酸樂╱嫲孫樂」、「峇峇娘惹」及「泰巷」三個自營品牌經營。另外,有提供特許經營商經營,供中式麵食、泰國菜式,日本菜式及馬來西亞菜式。
此規模唔算大,營業額唔算多,而且有按年下跌的情況。過去企業多年虧損,2021年表面上係轉虧為盈。但實際上,只係公平值變動(一些會計數字,而非實際收入)會造成。
實際上,佢過去4年都係維持虧損狀況(包括2021年)。睇唔倒有乜明顯因素,支持佢近期大升。
遇到這些情況,我地就要好小心。而且企業本身無明顯投資價值,建議盡快沽出較好。
------------------------------------------------
Q22063:
龔成老師,你好呀!之前問過你有關投資股票嘅問題,因為等佢價格高啲先放,所以現在冇變動過。仍然係以下咁:
#1 2500股 $53.5
#2 1000股 $71.5
#941 1500股 $42.5
#291 10000股 $67
#3690 500股 $278
#909 8000股 $53.5
現在問題是我嘅租約差唔多滿,有現金和以上股票200萬左右。請問我應唔應該賣晒啲股票,用我190萬左右嘅錢去做down-payment 買樓,做6成按揭呢?
因為供樓同我現在租金一樣。我想買嘅係一個272呎嘅元朗開放式單位自己住,供樓連管理費會是$12000內。請問我嘅投資方向啱嗎?
因為份工剛剛做,要到出年才有稅單可以做8到9成按揭,又怕出年更貴,應該怎麼樣更好呢? 麻煩老師解答,萬分感謝!
龔成老師︰
現時貸款息率唔高,其實盡借長線只會貶值的現金。之後,再將空出來的資金做投資增值,咁會較好。
至於明年樓價會點,無人知。但從長線投資角度考慮,你用低成數按揭,長線可以投資資金會縮細,在現時市況,對你係不利。
現時持有股票,都係有質素,長線持有就可以。
明源雲(0909)和美團(3690)不確定性較高,不宜持有太多。
另外,你非常集中係華潤啤酒(0291),佔組合近一半。記住,個別企業和行業,不要佔組合15%和30%以上,否則會有過度集中性風險。
因此,你要沽出停份,去平衡風險。
------------------------------------------------
Q22064:
龔SIR你好~~我係上年PM問你供股既建議,供左大概九個月,一開始你叫我拎5K月供真係好心痛,後來我減少開支再諗辦法做副業,真係比我做到月供5K!!!
見到有正數增長真係好開心(大概8%)!! 呢一年努力抗疫唔出街,總共儲左10零萬(拎左8萬左右投資),自己做副業賺左萬零蚊,
雖然好少錢,拎去入左一手IBOND打算賺少少,錢搵錢呢個感覺真係好好。
加上好好運咁逆市升職,加左家用比父母,佢地又開心左~我覺得自己好適合做月供,個心好定,唔洗成日望住個市影響心情!可以用多D時間專注正副職/讀書。
本來手上有5萬左右現金,不過拎左去大學交學費, 再學埋電單車, 比我用晒了…而家無錢入市啦, 只可以月供, 不過D錢投資自己身上我覺得值得既!
未來打算加大個月供計劃!每個月總共可以儲1萬至1萬3~
而家調整緊個計劃,想問下你既意見~
1. 我應該繼續用5K月供,定加到6K?
2. 月供2800 價位約$27, 我可唔可以停左等到價位回落先再供?用筆錢供其他股票?
3. 如果已經有1810, 1211, 9988, 2158, 6618呢幾隻股票係手, 我應唔應該供3067?
9988而家月供緊, 其他暫時無供. 1810, 1211等價位低先再供. (暫時主力供823, 9988, 1177, 2638, 2800)
4. 最近考左電單車牌, 打算買車送外賣/送貨之類.(期望每月賺多$3-5K, 因為我係女仔, 第一比人話危險, 二黎比人笑我無出息, 但我唔理旁人既眼光, 我要賺錢呀!!!!)
a. 假設我手上有四萬現金:
i. 直接全數買車
ii. 兩萬蚊去分注月供股票, 留兩萬係手, 用信月卡分期12個月供車, 利息大約0.15-0.18% . 如果供股票想揀2638, 打算派息可以cover信用卡大部份既利息.
5. 思想上唔夠進取, 唔敢100%拎晒去買潛力股, 所以揀月供2638, 咁樣係咪好蝕底呀?
多謝老師花時間睇我既問題!!
龔成老師︰
現時你理財方向,都正確,要保持住。同時,你努力學習,去提升自己投資知識。
1) 如果每月係可以穏定儲到$12000,你就應將月供加大至$6000
2) 唔建議,首先,我地只會係去到好貴架水平,才會考慮減供款或停供。但現價計,盈富(2800)只在合理水平,不需要調整供款。
另外,你投資經驗不多,我唔建議你咁快自行決定調整供款策略。因為如果你調整時機不對,會大大影響長線平均價格效果,令長線回報受影響。
除非你對定平貴,係好有信心。否則一直不理價格,去長線月供,反而對你係最有利。
3) 港燈(2638)係收息股,增長力不高。你現時29歲,應以增值為主,故此股不適合你作為月供目標。
至於安碩恒生科技(3067),你去月供係可以。只要你科技股(9988, 1810, 3067),唔好佔超過組合3成。同時間,潛力股(1810, 1211, 9988, 2158, 6618, 3067, 1177)唔好高於組合4-5成,咁就可以。
小米(1810)現價略貴,但月供還是可以。而比亞迪(1211)現價係貴,月供最好等回到$17X才考慮。
4) 其實工作,都無性別之分。你唔洗太理別人眼光,做正確的事,永遠都是對的。
以利息率計,用分期買車,再去投資收息股,係會較理想。但你要明白,股票始終會有價格波動,有機會賺息蝕價,你要明這個風險。
另外,你都要了解清楚,這個是否真正總年息,會否有其他潛在費用,才去做決定。
5) 我地投資,除左年紀係考慮因素外,投資經驗和風險承受能力,都係一個考慮。所以,無話絕對的對與錯,重點係是否適合你。
以你年紀,港燈(2638)的確會係較保守。但要去到100%潛力股,你個組合風險,又會出現過高情況。
你可以用一半平穏增長股,一半潛力股作組合,這樣組合平衡性會較好。
平穏增長股︰盈富(2800)、金沙(1928)、恆基(0012)、平安(2318)、中銀(2388)、港鐵(0066)、長建(1038)、粵海(0270)、領展(0823)、希慎(0014)、太古地產(1972)
或潛力股︰比亞迪(1211)、中生(1177)、福壽園(1448)、小米(1810)、安碩恒生科技(3067)、港交所(0388)、阿里(9988)、騰訊(0700)、GX中國電車基金(2845)、三星FANG ETF(2814)。
------------------------------------------------
Q22065:
龔Sir,感謝你在股票班最後一堂的個人分享,聽到我眼濕濕。實在太有共鳴,亦自愧不如。
我嘅成長環境同老師你有啲似,都係成長於公屋家庭,居住環境擠逼,由於長期缺乏私人空間,非常渴望擁有自己居住的房屋單位,
但礙於香港樓價高企,個人經濟能力有限,一直處於半放棄(人生)狀態。
自愧不如的是比老師你行慢好多好多步。老師在十多歲嘅時候已經定下目標,立定決心,付出超乎常人嘅努力,28歲嘅時候賺到第一個100萬,反觀現時27歲嘅自己才剛剛起步。
不智嘅我都曾經怪責父母嘅不努力,甚至抱怨不想被生下來,傷害了彼此。
現在明白父母給予自己最寶貴的禮物是生命,財務知識可以自己學,錢應該自己搵,人生掌握在自己手中,將來由自己親手構建。
當人立志成為優質股、潛力股、倍升股,定必增長迅速,回報驚人。深願能夠運用所學,日後向老師你匯報成果。
龔成老師︰
你現在才27歲,現在努力去做好財富增值,未算遲。這是你最大的本錢,只是你這刻努力,一定能完成到目標!
其實,好多外在的客觀環境,唔到我地去改變。但我地可以改變自己,調整自己的心態。
你唔好覺得不如我,我都只係一個普通人,我做到的事,你都可以做得到,只要你相信自己。
上完課程後,你就當係一個新起點。努力去為自己人生定好計劃,比心機學好理財,相信很多你過往覺得的「不可能」,都會慢慢變成為看得見的「無限可能」。
同學,加油!
------------------------------------------------
Q22066:
老師,上年開始FOLLOW你的PAGE,亦很同意要買優質企業的看法。我亦已閱讀了你的4-5本書籍,亦閱讀了格雷厄姆、彼得林區、巴菲特的一些書籍。
透過購買優質股,我曾經浮收益超過6位數,我非常感謝!
然而,今年分析了968 後,認為該股是優質,故分注入了3手,分別是15、13及12,然而卻不斷下跌,收益不斷減少,令我反思是否應該斬倉...亦令我覺得不應該持續望住股票...希望將來可以好似老師甘可以令利財產增值。謝謝老師
老師,均價13.8入了3手968 信義光能,請問是否應止蝕?
老師,一直都想入完美醫療,但見佢業績持續向好,股價亦不斷上升。想問下老師,此隻股是否仍然5蚊左右才是合理區頂?
龔成老師:
其實,你保持用「價值投資法」就得,但要留意,這是長期性的,你中短期會有好多考驗。
信義光能(0968)是有質素的股,但你犯了幾個錯。
第一,你在貴的價位買入。
第二,你每次買入價相差太近,起碼要有10%以上,如果股價較波動的類別,要差15%。
第三,你應該等回去合理區先分注加注。
第四,你唔應該因為「股價下跌,就認為企業質素轉差」。
這股可以守的,但就要耐心點,如果你持貨不過多,無問題。
完美醫療(1830)長遠有發展,本身有一定的質素。
睇翻之前的疫情,佢身處的行業受影響,但佢的現金流及財務數據都唔算差,這點可以想象到,當正常的經營環境,佢的生意一定唔錯。
加上佢的野心愈來愈大,本身有一定的技術,同時不斷將香港的業務模式複製到其他海外地區,我見佢加強了發展其他地方,因此發展不差。
這股有長線投資價值。
業績前計佢$4是合理區頂,業績後股價升左好多,雖然我之前好大機會會調高佢合理價值,不過,現價都有少少貴。
所以,如果無貨,你可考慮回少少,先小注,然後等跌多d先正式分注投資。
------------------------------------------------
Q22067:
Coinbase我係咪應該放手?
龔成老師︰
Coinbase Global Inc(COIN)雖然有獨特性,但真正的長期價值有多少,根本好難估。
佢係加密經濟技術供應商,佢從平臺上的交易中產生大量交易費用的凈收入,以區域來講,佢大部分收入來自美國,其次是世界其他地區。
要分析佢的價值,就要睇翻虛擬貨幣長遠發展。以本質來說,虛擬貨幣是人為創造出來的,絕對不是「資產」,有沒有真正的價值,如何定義真正的價值,未知,亦令COIN的價值,變成未知數。
長遠的價值,取決於「有多少人用」,如果長遠好多人用,的確可能有高價值。但如果無人用虛擬貨幣,這公司都無價值。
因為分析長遠是否好多人用,是非常困難,因此,當中存有相當的風險,當然,潛力同樣都大。
若你只係好少注,同時又睇好虛擬貨幣長遠發展,你可以守。若佢佔你組合較多,最好沽出部份,去平衡風險。
------------------------------------------------
Q22068:
您好,龔sir.,我想問您對Pre IPO有了解嗎?
我朋友佢話私募基金的回報高過股票,她提及到她將20萬本金放在系一個私募基金的項目裡,三到四個月連埋本金已賺40萬,她問我有冇興趣?
因為我的投資都是放系股票,對於Pre IPO相關資訊真是不太了解,而且回報率禁高,會不會有很大風險呢?
因為我聽她講就好似好低風險,但我始終都不太相信。按常理,高回報就高風險,但她提及的IPO好似有點有悖常理,所以想請教一下您,謝謝!
龔成老師︰
Pre IPO就係指企業在上市前(即IPO前),進行的集資。
由於正式上市申請,係需要一段時間,有些企業就會用這個方法,去提前得到一些資金,用作上市前支援營運之用。
而Pre IPO基金多數會在上市時,就沽出這些股票獲利。由於上市前,一般估值較低,故潛在升幅會較大。一般這類股票基金,投資時間都唔長,可能講緊只係1,2年時間。
但你有留意我FB,我經常都會話,唔太建議投資IPO。因為可以參考數據好少,好難進行一個合理估值。而且好多時,企業真正表現,要1,2年先會睇得到,故投資風險會較大。
Pre IPO是未正式發表上市的企業,其可參考資訊,就更加少。甚至連佢最終能否上市,都會係一個問號。
我唔係話這類基金,全無投資價值。但你要明白當中潛在風險唔細,是否值得投資,你要自己衡量。
當然,我不是話這類項目不值得投資,只是「有風險,有回報」的類別,你要明白這點。
就算你最終決定投資,你都要控制注碼。永遠我地都要係「先知風險,後想回報」。
------------------------------------------------
Q22069:
老師你好!我跟咗你嘅投資方法三年,而家手上有超過一半係潛力股。我有限住自己每個月至少要供幾多錢,但有時手上嘅股票價格又偏貴唔想再入住,久而久之就越買越多隻股票,而家已經有14隻。
除咗股票數量太多之外,有時咁啱果個月得某一隻股票係合理價我就會買晒佢,好似而家9988已經佔我嘅投資18%。
我知道老師講過單一股票唔好超過15%,但而家佢係喺我手上已有嘅股票中價格最合理嘅。我唔想再增加股票嘅數量,但又無理由買其他貴貨。
龔成老師:
如果你出現愈買愈多的情況,反映你買入前,無經過仔細思考、研究,小心作決定,我在股票班,會派一份6頁紙的「企業評估表」
要求學員,每次買股票之前,都要填好先買,目的是希望令佢地,確保買入的都是有質素的股,以及睇得好準先會買。
阿里(9988)這刻,你只有不要再增持,到之後你有資金,慢慢配置到其他股票,阿里的%自然會減少。這動作不用急,長遠進行就得。
------------------------------------------------
Q22070:
老師你好,我兩三個月前開始見到你FB, 見到你教投資,有看你回答大家嘅問題,睇咗你嘅80後百萬富翁,而家睇緊股票勝經,
我47歲,有幫爸爸和女兒投資,持有以下股票。另外1063唔識點處理,結果而家價值得返$300幾,而家見到6808又跌到$5個幾,應該繼續長遠持有還是換出?
請你指導吓,謝謝老師!
本人持人
1. 9988 阿里爸爸 200股 $245.80
2. 9618 京東 500股 $397.40
3. 3690 美團 400股 $389.80
4. 0909 明源雲 2000股 $54 + 1000股 $45.80
5. 2013 微盟 4000股 $26.05
6. 2318 中國平安 2000股 $97.15 + 500股 $89.10
7. 1211 比亞廸股份 500股 $150.80 + 500股 $147.30
8. 6808 高鑫零售 3000股 $10.20
9. 3738 阜博集團 1000股 $32
10. 1398 工商 19000股 $5.73
11. 1063 新確科技 60000股 $1.38
爸爸80歲
1. 2888 渣打 300股 $105 + 300股 $77.80
2. 0003 中華煤氣 2000股 $14.88 + 100股 送嘅
3. 2318 中國平安 1000股 $95.70 + 500股 $91.30
用女兒利是錢幫佢投資
1. 2800 盈富 500股 $25.88
2. 3067 安碩恒生科技 200股 $17.83
龔成老師︰
我地投資增值會運用「先增值,後現金流」作方法,初期投資較有潛力的股票,令財富較快增值,當增值到一定金額後,可開始將財富分配至平穩增值型股票,然後到已累積了相當財富後,才漸漸轉成收息型股票,為自已創造穏定現金流。
由於你地3個人的人生階段不同,所以投資方法和目標,都會有分別。
先講你女兒,佢年輕,可以增長為主。你現時這個組合,已經係可以。
若你想增長力較高,可以多儲安碩恒生科技(3067)。但此股波動性會較大,要睇翻你自已風險承受能力。
至於你父親,由於已經係退休人士,重點唔會再係增值部份,應以收息股為主。透過股息的現金流,去支援佢退休生活上支出。
渣打集團(2888)質素只是一般,建議換碼。而煤氣(0003)和平安(2318)都有質素,可持有。
未來若你加大你父親投資,應集中收息股。以下都係有質素的收息股,你可以從中參考一下。
目標是5%、6%的股息率的收息股,例如港燈(2638)、深高速(0548)、香港電訊(6823)、工行(1398)、恆生(0011)、置富(0778)、陽光(0435)。收息基金(3110),都可以。
另外,有些更有超過8%的高息股,但股價就略有風險,你可以小注考慮,例如佐丹奴國際(0709)、中石化(0386)、互太紡織(1382)等(記住,股價略波動,不能太過大注)。
至於你本人組合,以你47歲計,增長係需要,但要慢慢轉得保守點。
高鑫零售(6808)質素較中等,不宜持有太多。
新確科技(1063)主要於香港從事電話及相關產品之設計及銷售等業務。
這股規模細,加上多年出現虧損,暫時睇唔倒有投資價值,建議你沽出。
中國平安(2318)、工行(1398)有質素,可持有。
較大問題,係潛力股類股票(9988, 9618, 3690, 0909, 2013, 1211, 3738)你持有太多。以你年紀,最多只可以佔4成,而且要慢慢開始下調至2成。
現有持股,可以唔洗沽。但將來,你投資上應較集中平穏增長股部份,令組合風險水平,慢慢回復平衡。
現時大市只在合理區,資金唔好盡用。最好留有部份,等大跌市出現時,可以用來掃貨。
------------------------------------------------
Q22071:
老師最近睇緊千萬富翁, 內容話到如果依家工作發展前景有限 就要轉工轉職位 尋求突破。
關於哩點 我想問下 如果我覺得我依家工作唔會有好大突破
但係我本身工作經驗唔多同時又岩岩得到哩份工冇耐, 咁嘅情況下要繼續留待 或者 搵機會轉工會好d?
龔成老師:
你要以5年、10年,作為思考的單位,現時的工作,對你長遠有無用?
如果無用,就要轉,轉是大方向,但是否這刻轉,或一年後轉,就要睇你自己的情況。
如果你本身工作經驗唔多,就可以先在現時工作,做1年先,等你有工作經驗先轉。又或者,你繼續翻現時工作,同時,尋找自己想發展的工作,如果找到,就辭工。
總之,你要思考你的大方向。然後就要想想,現時選擇那些工,最有機會完成到你的大方向。
------------------------------------------------
Q22072:
你好,我見恆安國際1044 數據都不差,現價入是否值得長線渣?
Pe 純利 股東資金回報都好
唯早前亦回購了數次
龔成老師:
對,恆安國際(1044)的財務數據不差的,不過,企業的發展與增長力就不強,佢主要業務為在中國生產,分銷及銷售個人衛生用品,零食產品及護膚產品。
恆安擁有多個品牌,如「心相印」、「安而康」、「品諾」、「安爾樂」等,而業務大致可分為紙巾產品、衛生巾產品、一次性紙尿褲產品、零食產品。
恆安具有品牌,又處於增長中的市場,前景不俗,故此企業為不錯的優質股。不過,市場競可能令毛利略為受壓,但相信隨著此企業發展更多較高毛利產品,影響不算大。
長遠來說,恆安仍有一定的前景,故有投資價值的。成本上升,令佢略有風險。整體而言,有長線投資價值,現時大約在合理區中間。
------------------------------------------------
Q22073:
龔成老師,請問5M可以買什麼樓來放租?可以考慮那些區域?6年後退休,現在應否做按揭?謝謝!
龔成老師︰
其實無話特定乜野樓會較好,藍籌屋苑會加分,尺寸最好近300呎,符合一個家庭基本需要。
你要睇翻該物業的質素,呎價,預期租金回報率,特別是利用「呎價,預期租金回報率」去比較同區同類單位,以確定該物業的平貴水平。
另外,你再要審視其升值潛力,未來地區上、交通上、生活等等的配套發展,才去下一個結論,咁會較好。
現時息口低,承做按揭,再用多出資金去投資,相信會較好。
但由於你已近退休之年,按揭未必批倒好長年期,故壓力測試上,可能要求會因此而高左。在選擇物業時,你要考慮埋這因素,具體你要問清楚地產經網、銀行,了解清楚先。
------------------------------------------------
Q22074:
老師你好,我黎緊有計劃生完2胎就辭職,因為無人湊BB。你會建議我現階段應該點樣投資?
(先生份糧 + 被動收入可以支撐大部分家庭開支) 我之前買既增長股依家都係負數居多,現階段我應該考慮買返d內銀/ 公用股 收息嗎?
或係我應該買3067/2845 呢類etf嗎? (手上大約有10萬可投資)
龔成老師︰
我地投資,係應先處理好防守部份(日常生活),才去進攻(財富增值)。
由於你會做全職媽咪,家庭收入會少了一部份,故首要任務,是要先做到收支平穏。因此,現時支援緊你日常基本開支的收息股,我建議你就唔好變動。
若收支平衡上,依然有一定缺口,你可以將部份平穏增長股,轉移至收息股,去增加家庭現金流。
若已經大致收支平衡到的話,你那些平穏增長股,照持有就可以,讓其繼續為你財富增值。除非佢質素係有問題,否則唔好太在意中短期波動,一直長線持有就可以。
至於3067/2845這類較有增長力的潛力股,到你家庭收支平衡之餘,每月都可以空出一定資金,才作考慮。
至於你手上10萬,我建議你留在身邊,作為應急錢,會較為理想。
------------------------------------------------
Q22075:
你好老師,萬分感謝你的回覆和提供詳細的資訊及分析!
不好意思,這麼遲回覆你,因技術性問題今日先開通富途牛牛戶口。
交代小小我的個人資料,我現43歲,自住物業沒有按揭(已供完),有物業放租(但租金全數比按揭,按揭還有8年),現60萬現金,
另20萬要6年後先可取出(兒子出世時買的小狀元儲蓄保險),現每月可儲HKD13000,現計劃分階段投入20萬作投資股票。
如我選擇五隻平穩增長股作為我開始、首次投資股票,我會以"分注"形式,以下每隻股票先買一手,然後留意價位再每手每手入?
1)盈富(2800)
2)金沙(1928)
3)中銀(2388)
4)港鐵(0066)
5)粵海(0270)
這樣可行嗎?以上這5隻股長揸的話最少多少年較好?這5隻股現在入貨是合理區嗎?
另想問中國鐵塔00788你點睇?
謝謝老師!麻煩晒你!感謝
龔成老師︰
你現時已持有2個物業,成個組合係物業類比重好高。未來時間,應集中投入股市,令組合更平衡。
以你年紀,都有一定增值需要,你現時這個組合係可以。如果你想再進取少少,可以加入少少潛力股。
潛力股︰安碩恒生科技(3067)、比亞迪(1211)、阿里(9988)、騰訊(0700)、港交所(0388)、舜宇光學(2382)、小米(1810)、中生製藥(1177)、福壽園(1448)、GX中國電車基金(2845)、三星FANG ETF(2814)。
但你要留意翻,部份潛力股已有輕微過熱情況。只有安碩恒生科技(3067)、GX中國電車基金(2845)、 騰訊(0700)、阿里(9988)、中生製藥(1177)、福壽園(1448)勉強算在合理區頂部,可分注入貨,其餘要等等。
至於你目標的5隻平穏增長股,都在合理區,現價可以先入一注。每再回10-15%,就再加注,直至資金用完。
另外,每月儲起的$13000,都可以做月供股票。每月先用一半儲蓄做月供,另一半就儲起,等大跌市機會。
中國鐵塔(0788)不是無質素的。始終中國的3大電訊巨頭,都是佢的主要客戶,以及大股東,當5G發展,佢一定會受惠,因此前景仍然正面。
佢現時的收入都增長,盈利都保持向上,但增長比之前略減,加上股本回報率不高,是這股較弱的地方。若分析佢市盈率,會見到現時仍然處較高水平,反映佢雖然股價回落左唔少,但仍然未到平。
這股算是合理價。長遠仍算有發展力,可長線。不過,潛力度比過往略減。
這股都適合你年紀,現價可以分注入貨。
------------------------------------------------
Q22076:
你好,老師,有個方法想問你可唔可行,小弟有一層自住樓,已供完,銀行估值600萬,現想加按360萬,分10年還,連本金利息400萬
我計劃:
買1隻穩陣收息股100萬(做膽),買10隻穩陣不同行業優質股做腳20萬x10隻,淨番60萬一半定下期一半慢慢還款,用曬之後將1隻腳賣走,用來還款,用曬再賣,用曬再賣咁
(當然首選揀隻賺的腳賣啦)10年後,淨反個膽100萬
這方法可行嗎?可以叫做無本生利嗎?
10年叫做無本賺100萬
謝謝老師解答
龔成老師︰
現時息率低,透過借貨去投資,從而賺取息差,係可以。
但有兩大風險,你一定要明白。
第一,借貸創造,表面上無本生利,但實質有風險的,你負債增加,風險會增加。
另外,如果你投資的股票不幸股價下跌,你就會出現「賺息蝕價」,對你不利。
同時間,如果日後加息,又或你收息股的派息減少,都會令你得到的息差回報收窄,你的回報會減少。
所有借貸投資,都不是無本生利,而是背後承受了一定的風險,我不是叫你不能做,而是做進行前,一定要明白當中風險,不要視為穩賺項目。
第二個風險,就是你個配置,有問題。
首先,任何股票、任何行業,我們都不應太過集中,因為一個行業就算更有優勢,也有機會面對行業週期及突發風險,太集中會對你整個財富組合不利。
因此,你要建立一個平衡的投資組合,當中有不同的類別、不同的行業,這是最好的平衡風險方法。相同行業不可佔組合多於30%,而單一企業不要高過15%。
你膽拖這種模式,個膽一定會超過這個標準,令你出現過度集中性風險。
另外,定期本身回報不高,很大機會回報低於你本身借貨利息。變相,你已有一部份貸款,係無效率地運用,拖低了整個組合回報。
若你想用個定期,去平衡個組合風險。我建議你直接不借定期個部份資金,反而仲有利。
餘下資金,我建議你投資一些「平穩增值股」+「收息股」。
平穩增值股,例如盈富(2800)、金沙(1928)、長建(1038)、中銀(2388)、港鐵(0066)、恆基(0012)、平安(2318)、粵海(0270)、領展(0823)。
同時,可以建立一個收息股的組合,目標是5%、6%的股息率的收息股,例如港燈(2638)、深高速(0548)、香港電訊(6823)、工行(1398)、恆生(0011)、置富(0778)、陽光(0435)。收息基金(3110),都可以。
另外,有些更有超過8%的高息股,但股價就略有風險,你可以小注考慮,例如佐丹奴國際(0709)、中石化(0386)、互太紡織(1382)等(記住,股價略波動,不能太過大注)。
若你想組合增長力高一些,可以較集中「平穩增值股」。相反你想平穏少少,可以集中係「收息股」。
但成個計劃,你要明白一點。你係投資緊股票,就算最穏陣架收息股,都會有波動,有機會出現賺息蝕價情況,故你計劃係唔會100%穏賺。
而且,現時大市只在合理區,唔算係好平,這個風險就會更高。
現時大市只是合理區,你借款得來資金,可以先投入一半,用"分注"形式,慢慢買貨。餘下一半就等大市出現一定程度的下跌,才大力度掃貨,然後長線投資。
投資增值,其實唔洗諗到好複雜。只要你用我上述計劃,並長線持有這些優質股,其實已經很大機會,得到一個唔錯回報。
------------------------------------------------
Q22077:
你好 老師,又想麻煩你提點下我。
手頭只有各一手而已
-小米
-3067
-6618
我有10萬
1/ 應該繼續集中月供現有嘅小米,3067 ?
2/6618應該keep定放?其實擺起度都無所謂作長線?
3/ 依家手頭嘅好偏埋一邊 或應入手其他類別 (福壽園/金沙/銀娛/中電/地鐵/領展/比亞迪電子/700)
4/ 新能源股 可以建議邊啲我去study多啲?
再次感謝
龔成老師︰
1) 你現時3X歲,雖然投資上可以進取少少,但都不建議全部買晒潛力股。
佢地雖然有增長潛力,同時風險都較高,不宜持有過多。
以你年紀,潛力股可佔約5成,餘下應用以下平穏增長股。若你投資經驗較淺,潛力股比重,要再調至3成以下。到你學到一定投資知識,才慢慢調高。
未來時間,你就要加大翻平穏增長股部份,令組合更平衡。以下平穏增長股,現價都在合理水平,可以分注入貨。
平穏增長股:盈富(2800)、金沙(1928)、恆基(0012)、港鐵(0066)、平安(2318)、粵海(0270)、領展(0823)、希慎(0014)、太古地產(1972)、長建(1038)
月供你可以小注潛力股,較大注係平穏增長股,就可以做到平衡效果。
2) 京東健康(6618)有質素,這股可長線。
其業務主要提供線上線下的醫藥出售和健康管理服務,業務布局包括醫藥電商、互聯網醫療、智慧醫療解決方案、健康服務等4個大板塊。
京東健康旗下京東大藥房,更是內地線上線下收入規模最大的零售藥房。其互聯網醫院,日接診量超過10萬次。
質素上,京東健康是有的。但由於估值難,不確定性大。但由於你只係小注,照持有就可以,但暫時唔好加注了。
3) 係偏向左潛力股,故應加大平穏增長股,去平衡翻個組合。
4) 信義光學(0968)和福萊特玻璃(6865)你可以研究下,但現價都在略貴水平,回多1成左右,值博率會較高。
------------------------------------------------
Q22078:
老師你好,我係投資新手,20歲。我看好未來奢侈品會有更大的市場,所以想投資相關股票,但香港相關股份較少。
我留意到美國有一隻LV ADR股票,LV集團覆蓋性廣,有品牌價值,全球通關後預期業績也會有增長,股價也每年穩步上升中,想問可以以分注買入的方法每月購入嗎?
除奢侈品股,我也看好未來醫美板塊,科技板塊和新能源板塊的發展,想問大方向正確嗎?我應該如何開始部署這些板塊的資產呢?有什麼股份老師比較推介?
謝謝,希望老師能抽空解答
龔成老師︰
LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton SE(LVMUY)是一家法國的奢侈品集團,業務涉及六個領域:葡萄酒及烈酒、時裝及皮具、香水及化妝品、鐘錶及珠寶、精品零售及其他業務。
企業有一定品牌,都有投資價值。但畢竟業務以消費類奢侈品為主,較受經濟大環境,盈利會較波動。
這股票都有投資價值,但現價唔平,最多只宜好小注。利用月供儲貨,會較好。
至於你所講的板塊(醫藥業會係重點,醫美都有市場,但無醫藥類咁高潛力),都係有潛力,同時會係未來大方向之一。
以下都是一些我較睇好的相關行業潛力股,你可以參考下。
潛力股︰安碩恒生科技(3067)、信義光能(0968)、阿里(9988)、騰訊(0700)、舜宇光學(2382)、小米(1810)、中生製藥(1177)、GX中國電車基金(2845)、三星FANG ETF(2814)。
你現時無投資知識和經驗,對企業估值,點去定平貴未必會太了解。所以你先利用月供模式,去做增值,可以減低買貴貨風險,對你而言會較理想。
你每月大約用一半儲蓄月供,另一半就儲起,等大跌市機會。
另外,潛力股雖然有增長潛力,同時風險都較高,不宜持有過多。
以你20歲年紀,潛力股可佔約5成,餘下應用以下平穏增長股。但由於你投資經驗較淺,潛力股比重,先用3成以下這個指標。到你學到一定投資知識,才慢慢調高。
餘下投資比重,你就配置在平穏增長股上,會令你組合更平衡。
------------------------------------------------
Q22079:
你好啊,龔成老師,我今年27歲,月入兩萬,每個月儲$5000,無月供股票。現時手頭上持有呢三隻股票:
1)中國移動0941 $47.9:1000
2)龍光集團3380 $11.7:2000
3)香港寬頻1310 $9.3:1000
因為我以前係短炒輸過錢,所以我現在就吾想再走回頭路。就想試下建個收息倉,慢慢打造被動收入。
但我見龔成老師通常都叫學員「先增值、後收息」咁我現在呢個想法是否太慢或者吾適合現在的我?求老師賜教
龔成老師︰
短炒係一個不正確投資方法,就算全球投資最賺錢的巴菲特,都唔會做短炒。
其實投資股票,就係等同投資一間企業,只要係有質素,你長線持有比時間佢自行增值,咁已經會有唔錯的回報。
我經常都會叫讀者和股票班同學,用「先增值,後現金流」作方法,去做投資增值。
意思係,初期投資較有潛力的股票,令財富較快增值,當增值到一定金額後,可開始將財富分配至平穩增值型股票,然後到已累積了相當財富後,才漸漸轉成收息型股票,為自已創造穏定現金流。
你27歲,就應以增值為主。中國移動(0941)和香港寬頻(1310)係收息股,增長力欠奉,不適合你。但由於持股不多,你可保留,但不要再加注。
龍光集團(3380)適合你,都有增長力,但負債佢比較多,風險會略高。現貨可持有,但暫時不要加注。
你現時這個組合,增長力太低。未來時間,我建議你用「平穏增長股」 + 「潛力股」作組合,去創造一個增值平台。
現在你每月先用5成儲蓄,即$2500做月供。其餘先儲起,用一邊月供一邊儲蓄的策略。
月供方面,你可以選擇投資在平穏增長股或潛力股。
至於餘下的現金,就等機會,當大市出現一定程度的下跌,就可以動用現金去投資,在平宜價加大力度掃貨,然後長線投資。
另外,你現在還很年青,應盡力去做去財富累積部份。我建議你每月最好可以空出一半薪金,去做月供,咁會較理想。
------------------------------------------------
Q22080:
龔成老師您好,本人之前高位買了中國財險(2328), 一路坐艇, 暫時賬面蝕了幾萬蚊。請問你覺得這股票前景如何,應繼續持還是換另一只股票。
本人心水完美醫療(1830)。求指導
龔成老師︰
中國財險(2328)主要於國內為各界客戶提供多種財險產品,包括機動車輛保險、企業財產保險和家庭財產保險。
過往的生意與盈利都不差,不過就無乜增長動力,質素算是中等。這股都可長線,不過就重收息,唔好對股價有太大期望。
若佢只係佔你組合不多,你可以持有。但若較多,你可以沽少少,去平衡翻個風險。
完美醫療(1830)長遠有發展,本身有一定的質素。
睇翻之前的疫情,佢身處的行業受影響,但佢的現金流及財務數據都唔算差,這點可以想象到,當正常的經營環境,佢的生意一定唔錯。
加上佢的野心愈來愈大,本身有一定的技術,同時不斷將香港的業務模式複製到其他海外地區,我見佢加強了發展其他地方,因此發展不差。
這股有長線投資價值。
之前公佈業績理想,但業績後股價升左好多,雖然我在業績後調高左佢企業估值,加上管理層加大了企業發展的力度,前景正面,但現價點都都有少少貴。
所以,如果無貨,可考慮回少少,先小注,然後等跌多d先正式分注投資。如果本身有貨,就長線持有,但這刻就不要心急加注。
----------------------------------------------
若你有問題想向本人發問,可在龔成的fb專頁中(www.facebook.com/80shing)inbox龔成,但要注意如無特別聲明,有可能將問答放上網,當然,會將發問者的身份,以及有關個人資料的部分刪去。
另外,我所給予的各種意見,只是供大家參考,當中無任何銷售及推介,不涉及任何利益,其實大家應該要有獨立分析的能力,我只是給予一些方向及純參考模式。
由於提問人數眾多,見諒無法即日回覆,如果是普通的提問,預起碼要7天以上才能回覆,若然是較複雜的提問,起碼要10天才能回覆,希望各位能諒解。
同時也有13部Youtube影片,追蹤數超過12萬的網紅Fizo Omar,也在其Youtube影片中提到,Jom layan #projek4X4abe joe. abe joe decide jual kete lama n angkat kete baru Mitsubishi Triton Ahtlete yg baru ni.kira abe joe owner pertama register...
down payment 在 Engadget Facebook 的最佳貼文
The agency tracked down the payment through the Bitcoin public ledger.
down payment 在 江魔的魔界(Kong Keen Yung 江健勇) Facebook 的最讚貼文
這是前些日子爆出已經被加拿大法院接理對藏傳佛教噶舉派法王的訟訴。(加拿大法院鏈接在此:https://www.bccourts.ca/jdb-txt/sc/21/09/2021BCSC0939cor1.htm?fbclid=IwAR2FLZlzmUIGTBaTuKPVchEqqngcE3Qy6G_C0TWNWVKa2ksbIYkVJVMQ8f8)
這位法王的桃色事件,我是幾年前才聽到。但,藏傳佛教的高層有這些性醜聞,我已經聽了幾十年。我以前的一位前女友也被一些堪布藉故上她的家摟抱過,也有一些活佛跟她表白。(這不只是她,其他地方我也聽過不少)
這是一個藏傳佛教裡面系統式的問題。
很多時候發生這種事情,信徒和教主往往都是說女方得不到寵而報仇,或者說她們也精神病,或者說她們撒謊。
我不排除有這種可能性,但,多過一位,甚至多位出來指證的時候,我是傾向於相信『沒有那麼巧這麼多有精神病的女人要撒謊來報仇』。
大寶法王的桃色事件,最先吹哨的是一位台灣的在家信徒,第二位是香港的女出家人,現在加拿大又多一位公開舉報上法庭。
對大寶法王信徒來說,這一次的比較麻煩,因為是有孩子的。(關於有孩子的,我早在法王的桃色事件曝光時,就有聽聞)
如果法庭勒令要驗證DNA,這對法王和他的信徒來說,會很尷尬和矛盾,因為做或不做,都死。
你若問我,我覺得『人數是有力量的』,同時我也覺得之後有更多的人站出來,是不出奇的。
我也藉此呼籲各方佛教徒,如果你們真的愛佛教,先別說批判,但如鴕鳥般不討論這些爭議,你是間接害了佛教。
(下面是我從加拿大法院鏈接拷貝下來的內容,當中有很多細節。)
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND
ANALYSIS
A. The Spousal Support Claim in this Case
B. The Test to Amend Pleadings
C. Pleadings in Family Law Cases
D. The Legal Concept of a Marriage-Like Relationship
E. Is There a Reasonable Claim of a Marriage-Like Relationship?
F. Delay / Prejudice
CONCLUSION
INTRODUCTION
[1] The claimant applies to amend her notice of family claim to seek spousal support. At issue is whether the claimant’s allegations give rise to a reasonable claim she lived with the respondent in a marriage-like relationship, so as to give rise to a potential entitlement to spousal support under the Family Law Act, S.B.C. 2011, c. 25 (“FLA”).
[2] The facts alleged by the claimant do not fit within a traditional concept of marriage. The claimant does not allege that she and the respondent ever lived together. Indeed, she has only met the respondent in person four times: twice very briefly in a public setting; a third time in private, when she alleges the respondent sexually assaulted her; and a fourth and final occasion, when she informed the respondent she was pregnant with his child.
[3] The claimant’s case is that what began as a non-consensual sexual encounter evolved into a loving and affectionate relationship. That relationship occurred almost entirely over private text messages. The parties rarely spoke on the telephone, and never saw one another during the relationship, even over video. The claimant says they could not be together because the respondent is forbidden by his station and religious beliefs from intimate relationships or marriage. Nonetheless, she alleges, they formed a marriage-like relationship that lasted from January 2018 to January 2019.
[4] The respondent denies any romantic relationship with the claimant. While he acknowledges providing emotional and financial support to the claimant, he says it was for the benefit of the child the claimant told him was his daughter.
[5] The claimant’s proposed amendment raises a novel question: can a secret relationship that began on-line and never moved into the physical world be like a marriage? In my view, that question should be answered by a trial judge after hearing all of the evidence. The alleged facts give rise to a reasonable claim the claimant lived with the respondent in a marriage-like relationship. Accordingly, I grant the claimant leave to amend her notice of family claim.
BACKGROUND
[6] It should be emphasized that this is an application to amend pleadings only. The allegations by the claimant are presumed to be true for the purposes of this application. Those allegations have not been tested in a court of law.
[7] The respondent, Ogyen Trinley Dorje, is a high lama of the Karma Kagyu School of Tibetan Buddhism. He has been recognized and enthroned as His Holiness, the 17th Gyalwang Karmapa. Without meaning any disrespect, I will refer to him as Mr. Dorje in these reasons for judgment.
[8] Mr. Dorje leads a monastic and nomadic lifestyle. His true home is Tibet, but he currently resides in India. He receives followers from around the world at the Gyuto Monetary in India. He also travels the world teaching Tibetan Buddhist Dharma and hosting pujas, ceremonies at which Buddhists express their gratitude and devotion to the Buddha.
[9] The claimant, Vikki Hui Xin Han, is a former nun of Tibetan Buddhism. Ms. Han first encountered Mr. Dorje briefly at a large puja in 2014. The experience of the puja convinced Ms. Han she wanted to become a Buddhist nun. She met briefly with Mr. Dorje, in accordance with Kagyu traditions, to obtain his approval to become a nun.
[10] In October 2016, Ms. Han began a three-year, three-month meditation retreat at a monastery in New York State. Her objective was to learn the practices and teachings of the Kagyu Lineage. Mr. Dorje was present at the retreat twice during the time Ms. Han was at the monastery.
[11] Ms. Han alleges that on October 14, 2017, Mr. Dorje sexually assaulted her in her room at the monastery. She alleges that she became pregnant from the assault.
[12] After she learned that she was pregnant, Ms. Han requested a private audience with Mr. Dorje. In November 2017, in the presence of his bodyguards, Ms. Han informed Mr. Dorje she was pregnant with his child. Mr. Dorje initially denied responsibility; however, he provided Ms. Han with his email address and a cellphone number, and, according to Ms. Han, said he would “prepare some money” for her.
[13] Ms. Han abandoned her plan to become a nun, left the retreat and returned to Canada. She never saw Mr. Dorje again.
[14] After Ms. Han returned to Canada, she and Mr. Dorje began a regular communication over an instant messaging app called Line. They also exchanged emails and occasionally spoke on the telephone.
[15] The parties appear to have expressed care and affection for one another in these communications. I say “appear to” because it is difficult to fully understand the meaning and intentions of another person from brief text messages, especially those originally written in a different language. The parties wrote in a private shorthand, sharing jokes, emojis, cartoon portraits and “hugs” or “kisses”. Ms. Han was the more expressive of the two, writing more frequently and in longer messages. Mr. Dorje generally participated in response to questions or prompting from Ms. Han, sometimes in single word messages.
[16] Ms. Han deposes that she believed Mr. Dorje was in love with her and that, by January 2018, she and Mr. Dorje were living in a “conjugal relationship”.
[17] During their communications, Ms. Han expressed concern that her child would be “illegitimate”. She appears to have asked Mr. Dorje to marry her, and he appears to have responded that he was “not ready”.
[18] Throughout 2018, Mr. Dorje transferred funds in various denominations to Ms. Han through various third parties. Ms. Han deposes that these funds were:
a) $50,000 CDN to deliver the child and for postpartum care she was to receive at a facility in Seattle;
b) $300,000 CDN for the first year of the child’s life;
c) $20,000 USD for a wedding ring, because Ms. Han wrote “Even if we cannot get married, you must buy me a wedding ring”;
d) $400,000 USD to purchase a home for the mother and child.
[19] On June 19, 2018, Ms. Han gave birth to a daughter in Richmond, B.C.
[20] On September 17, 2018, Mr. Dorje wrote, ”Taking care of her and you are my duty for life”.
[21] Ms. Han’s expectation was that the parties would live together in the future. She says they planned to live together. Those plans evolved over time. Initially they involved purchasing a property in Toronto, so that Mr. Dorje could visit when he was in New York. They also discussed purchasing property in Calgary or renting a home in Vancouver for that purpose. Ms. Han eventually purchased a condominium in Richmond using funds provided by Mr. Dorje.
[22] Ms. Han deposes that the parties made plans for Mr. Dorje to visit her and meet the child in Richmond. In October 2018, however, Mr. Dorje wrote that he needed to “disappear” to Europe. He wrote:
I will definitely find a way to meet her
And you
Remember to take care of yourself if something happens
[23] The final plan the parties discussed, according to Ms. Han, was that Mr. Dorje would sponsor Ms. Han and the child to immigrate to the United States and live at the Kagyu retreat centre in New York State.
[24] In January 2019, Ms. Han lost contact with Mr. Dorje.
[25] Ms. Han commenced this family law case on July 17, 2019, seeking child support, a declaration of parentage and a parentage test. She did not seek spousal support.
[26] Ms. Han first proposed a claim for spousal support in October 2020 after a change in her counsel. Following an exchange of correspondence concerning an application for leave to amend the notice of family claim, Ms. Han’s counsel wrote that Ms. Han would not be advancing a spousal support claim. On March 16, 2020, counsel reversed course, and advised that Ms. Han had instructed him to proceed with the application.
[27] When this application came on before me, the trial was set to commence on June 7, 2021. The parties were still in the process of discoveries and obtaining translations for hundreds of pages of documents in Chinese characters.
[28] At a trial management conference on May 6, 2021, noting the parties were not ready to proceed, Madam Justice Walkem adjourned the trial to April 11, 2022.
ANALYSIS
A. The Spousal Support Claim in this Case
[29] To claim spousal support in this case, Ms. Han must plead that she lived with Mr. Dorje in a marriage-like relationship. This is because only “spouses” are entitled to spousal support, and s. 3 of the Family Law Act defines a spouse as a person who is married or has lived with another person in a marriage-like relationship:
3 (1) A person is a spouse for the purposes of this Act if the person
(a) is married to another person, or
(b) has lived with another person in a marriage-like relationship, and
(i) has done so for a continuous period of at least 2 years, or
(ii) except in Parts 5 [Property Division] and 6 [Pension Division], has a child with the other person.
[30] Because she alleges she has a child with Mr. Dorje, Ms. Han need not allege that the relationship endured for a continuous period of two years to claim spousal support; but she must allege that she lived in a marriage-like relationship with him at some point in time. Accordingly, she must amend the notice of family claim.
B. The Test to Amend Pleadings
[31] Given that the notice of trial has been served, Ms. Han requires leave of the court to amend the notice of family claim: Supreme Court Family Rule 8-1(1)(b)(i).
[32] A person seeking to amend a notice of family claim must show that there is a reasonable cause of action. This is a low threshold. What the applicant needs to establish is that, if the facts pleaded are proven at trial, they would support a reasonable claim. The applicant’s allegations of fact are assumed to be true for the purposes of this analysis. Cantelon v. Wall, 2015 BCSC 813, at para. 7-8.
[33] The applicant’s delay, the reasons for the delay, and the prejudice to the responding party are also relevant factors. The ultimate consideration is whether it would be just and convenient to allow the amendment. Cantelon, at para. 6, citing Teal Cedar Products Ltd. v. Dale Intermediaries Ltd. et al (1986), 19 B.C.L.R. (3d) 282.
C. Pleadings in Family Law Cases
[34] Supreme Court Family Rules 3-1(1) and 4-1(1) require that a claim to spousal support be pleaded in a notice of family claim in Form F3. Section 2 of Form F3, “Spousal relationship history”, requires a spousal support claimant to check the boxes that apply to them, according to whether they are or have been married or are or have been in a marriage-like relationship. Where a claimant alleges a marriage-like relationship, Form F3 requires that they provide the date on which they began to live together with the respondent in a marriage-like relationship and, where applicable, the date on which they separated. Form F3 does not require a statement of the factual basis for the claim of spousal support.
[35] In this case, Ms. Han seeks to amend the notice of family claim to allege that she and Mr. Dorje began to live in a marriage-like relationship in or around January 2018, and separated in or around January 2019.
[36] An allegation that a person lived with a claimant in a marriage-like relationship is a conclusion of law, not an allegation of fact. Unlike the rules governing pleadings in civil actions, however, the Supreme Court Family Rules do not expressly require family law claimants to plead the material facts in support of conclusions of law.
[37] In other words, there is no express requirement in the Supreme Court Family Rules that Ms. Han plead the facts on which she relies for the allegation she and Mr. Dorje lived in a marriage-like relationship.
[38] Rule 4-6 authorizes a party to demand particulars, and then apply to the court for an order for further and better particulars, of a matter stated in a pleading. However, unless and until she is granted leave and files the proposed amended notice of family claim, Ms. Han’s allegation of a marriage-like relationship is not a matter stated in a pleading.
[39] Ms. Han filed an affidavit in support of her application to amend the notice of family claim. Normally, evidence would not be required or admissible on an application to amend a pleading. However, in the unusual circumstances of this case, the parties agreed I may look to Ms. Han’s affidavit and exhibits for the facts she pleads in support of the allegation of a marriage-like relationship.
[40] Because this is an application to amend - and Ms. Han’s allegations of fact are presumed to be true - I have not considered Mr. Dorje’s responding affidavit.
[41] Relying on affidavit evidence for an application to amend pleadings is less than ideal. It tends to merge and confuse the material facts with the evidence that would be relied on to prove those facts. In a number of places in her affidavit, for example, Ms. Han describes her feelings, impressions and understandings. A person’s hopes and intentions are not normally material facts unless they are mutual or reasonably held. The facts on which Ms. Han alleges she and Mr. Dorje formed a marriage-like relationship are more important for the present purposes than her belief they entered into a conjugal union.
[42] Somewhat unusually, in this case, almost all of the parties’ relevant communications were in writing. This makes it somewhat easier to separate the facts from the evidence; however, as stated above, it is difficult to understand the intentions and actions of a person from brief text messages.
[43] In my view, it would be a good practice for applicants who seek to amend their pleadings in family law cases to provide opposing counsel and the court with a schedule of the material facts on which they rely for the proposed amendment.
D. The Legal Concept of a Marriage-Like Relationship
[44] As Mr. Justice Myers observed in Mother 1 v. Solus Trust Company, 2019 BCSC 200, the concept of a marriage-like relationship is elastic and difficult to define. This elasticity is illustrated by the following passage from Yakiwchuk v. Oaks, 2003 SKQB 124, quoted by Myers J. at para. 133 of Mother 1:
[10] Spousal relationships are many and varied. Individuals in spousal relationships, whether they are married or not, structure their relationships differently. In some relationships there is a complete blending of finances and property - in others, spouses keep their property and finances totally separate and in still others one spouse may totally control those aspects of the relationship with the other spouse having little or no knowledge or input. For some couples, sexual relations are very important - for others, that aspect may take a back seat to companionship. Some spouses do not share the same bed. There may be a variety of reasons for this such as health or personal choice. Some people are affectionate and demonstrative. They show their feelings for their “spouse” by holding hands, touching and kissing in public. Other individuals are not demonstrative and do not engage in public displays of affection. Some “spouses” do everything together - others do nothing together. Some “spouses” vacation together and some spend their holidays apart. Some “spouses” have children - others do not. It is this variation in the way human beings structure their relationships that make the determination of when a “spousal relationship” exists difficult to determine. With married couples, the relationship is easy to establish. The marriage ceremony is a public declaration of their commitment and intent. Relationships outside marriage are much more difficult to ascertain. Rarely is there any type of “public” declaration of intent. Often people begin cohabiting with little forethought or planning. Their motivation is often nothing more than wanting to “be together”. Some individuals have chosen to enter relationships outside marriage because they did not want the legal obligations imposed by that status. Some individuals have simply given no thought as to how their relationship would operate. Often the date when the cohabitation actually began is blurred because people “ease into” situations, spending more and more time together. Agreements between people verifying when their relationship began and how it will operate often do not exist.
[45] In Mother 1, Mr. Justice Myers referred to a list of 22 factors grouped into seven categories, from Maldowich v. Penttinen, (1980), 17 R.F.L. (2d) 376 (Ont. Dist. Ct.), that have frequently been cited in this and other courts for the purpose of determining whether a relationship was marriage-like, at para. 134 of Mother 1:
1. Shelter:
(a) Did the parties live under the same roof?
(b) What were the sleeping arrangements?
(c) Did anyone else occupy or share the available accommodation?
2. Sexual and Personal Behaviour:
(a) Did the parties have sexual relations? If not, why not?
(b) Did they maintain an attitude of fidelity to each other?
(c) What were their feelings toward each other?
(d) Did they communicate on a personal level?
(e) Did they eat their meals together?
(f) What, if anything, did they do to assist each other with problems or during illness?
(g) Did they buy gifts for each other on special occasions?
3. Services:
What was the conduct and habit of the parties in relation to:
(a) preparation of meals;
(b) washing and mending clothes;
(c) shopping;
(d) household maintenance; and
(e) any other domestic services?
4. Social:
(a) Did they participate together or separately in neighbourhood and community activities?
(b) What was the relationship and conduct of each of them toward members of their respective families and how did such families behave towards the parties?
5. Societal:
What was the attitude and conduct of the community toward each of them and as a couple?
6. Support (economic):
(a) What were the financial arrangements between the parties regarding the provision of or contribution toward the necessaries of life (food, clothing, shelter, recreation, etc.)?
(b) What were the arrangements concerning the acquisition and ownership of property?
(c) Was there any special financial arrangement between them which both agreed would be determinant of their overall relationship?
7. Children:
What was the attitude and conduct of the parties concerning children?
[46] In Austin v. Goerz, 2007 BCCA 586, the Court of Appeal cautioned against a “checklist approach”; rather, a court should "holistically" examine all the relevant factors. Cases like Molodowich provide helpful indicators of the sorts of behaviour that society associates with a marital relationship, the Court of Appeal said; however, “the presence or absence of any particular factor cannot be determinative of whether a relationship is marriage-like” (para. 58).
[47] In Weber v. Leclerc, 2015 BCCA 492, the Court of Appeal again affirmed that there is no checklist of characteristics that will be found in all marriages and then concluded with respect to evidence of intentions:
[23] The parties’ intentions – particularly the expectation that the relationship will be of lengthy, indeterminate duration – may be of importance in determining whether a relationship is “marriage-like”. While the court will consider the evidence expressly describing the parties’ intentions during the relationship, it will also test that evidence by considering whether the objective evidence is consonant with those intentions.
[24] The question of whether a relationship is “marriage-like” will also typically depend on more than just their intentions. Objective evidence of the parties’ lifestyle and interactions will also provide direct guidance on the question of whether the relationship was “marriage-like”.
[48] Significantly for this case, the courts have looked to mutual intent in order to find a marriage-like relationship. See, for example, L.E. v. D.J., 2011 BCSC 671 and Buell v. Unger, 2011 BCSC 35; Davey Estate v. Gruyaert, 2005 CarswellBC 3456 at 13 and 35.
[49] In Mother 1, Myers J. concluded his analysis of the law with the following learned comment:
[143] Having canvassed the law relating to the nature of a marriage-like relationship, I will digress to point out the problematic nature of the concept. It may be apparent from the above that determining whether a marriage-like relationship exists sometimes seems like sand running through one's fingers. Simply put, a marriage-like relationship is akin to a marriage without the formality of a marriage. But as the cases mentioned above have noted, people treat their marriages differently and have different conceptions of what marriage entails.
[50] In short, the determination of whether the parties in this case lived in a marriage-like relationship is a fact-specific inquiry that a trial judge would need to make on a “holistic” basis, having regard to all of the evidence. While the trial judge may consider the various factors listed in the authorities, those factors would not be treated as a checklist and no single factor or category of factors would be treated as being decisive.
E. Is There a Reasonable Claim of a Marriage-Like Relationship?
[51] In this case, many of the Molodowich factors are missing:
a) The parties never lived under the same roof. They never slept together. They were never in the same place at the same time during the relationship. The last time they saw each other in person was in November 2017, before the relationship began.
b) The parties never had consensual sex. They did not hug, kiss or hold hands. With the exception of the alleged sexual assault, they never touched one another physically.
c) The parties expressed care and affection for one another, but they rarely shared personal information or interest in their lives outside of their direct topic of communication. They did not write about their families, their friends, their religious beliefs or their work.
d) They expressed concern and support for one another when the other felt unwell or experienced health issues, but they did not provide any care or assistance during illness or other problems.
e) They did not assist one another with domestic chores.
f) They did not share their relationship with their peers or their community. There is no allegation, for example, that Mr. Dorje told his fellow monks or any of his followers about the relationship. There is no allegation that Ms. Han told her friends or any co-workers. Indeed, there is no allegation that anyone, with the exception of Ms. Han’s mother, knew about the relationship. Although Mr. Dorje gave Ms. Han’s mother a gift, he never met the mother and he never spoke to her.
g) They did not intend to have a child together. The child was conceived as a result of a sexual assault. While Mr. Dorje expressed interest in “meeting” the child, he never followed up. He currently has no relationship with the child. There is no allegation he has sought access or parenting arrangements.
[52] The only Molodowich factor of any real relevance in this case is economic support. Mr. Dorje provided the funds with which Ms. Han purchased a condominium. Mr. Dorje initially wrote that he wanted to buy a property with the money, but, he wrote, “It’s the same thing if you buy [it]”.
[53] Mr. Dorje also provided a significant amount of money for Ms. Han’s postpartum care and the child’s first year of life.
[54] This financial support may have been primarily for the benefit of the child. Even the condominium, Ms. Han wrote, was primarily for the benefit of the child.
[55] However, in my view, a trial judge may attach a broader significance to the financial support from Mr. Dorje than child support alone. A trial judge may find that the money Mr. Dorje provided to Ms. Han at her request was an expression of his commitment to her in circumstances in which he could not commit physically. The money and the gifts may be seen by the trial judge to have been a form of down payment by Mr. Dorje on a promise of continued emotional and financial support for Ms. Han, or, in Mr. Dorje’s own words, “Taking care of her and you are my duty for life” (emphasis added).
[56] On the other hand, I find it difficult to attach any particular significance to the fact that Mr. Dorje agreed to provide funds for Ms. Han to purchase a wedding ring. It appears to me that Ms. Han demanded that Mr. Dorje buy her a wedding ring, not that the ring had any mutual meaning to the parties as a marriage symbol. But it is relevant, in my view, that Mr. Dorje provided $20,000 USD to Ms. Han for something she wanted that was of no benefit to the child.
[57] Further, Ms. Han alleges that the parties intended to live together. At a minimum, a trial judge may find that the discussions about where Ms. Han and the child would live reflected a mutual intention of the parties to see one another and spend time together when they could.
[58] Mr. Dorje argues that an intention to live together at some point in the future is not sufficient to show that an existing relationship was marriage-like. He argues that the question of whether the relationship was marriage-like requires more than just intentions, citing Weber, supra.
[59] In my view, the documentary evidence referred to above provides some objective evidence in this case that the parties progressed beyond mere intentions. As stated, the parties appear to have expressed genuine care and affection for one another. They appear to have discussed marriage, trust, honesty, finances, mutual obligations and acquiring family property. These are not matters one would expect Mr. Dorje to discuss with a friend or a follower, or even with the mother of his child, without a marriage-like element of the relationship.
[60] A trial judge may find on the facts alleged by Ms. Han that the parties loved one another and would have lived together, but were unable to do so because of Mr. Dorje’s religious duties and nomadic lifestyle.
[61] The question I raised in the introduction to these reasons is whether a relationship that began on-line and never moved into the physical world can be marriage-like.
[62] Notably, the definition of a spouse in the Family Law Act does not require that the parties live together, only that they live with another person in a marriage-like relationship.
[63] In Connor Estate, 2017 BCSC 978, Mr. Justice Kent found that a couple that maintained two entirely separate households and never lived under the same roof formed a marriage-like relationship. (Connor Estate was decided under the intestacy provisions of the Wills, Estates and Succession Act, S.B.C. 2009, c. 13 ("WESA"), but courts have relied on cases decided under WESA and the FLA interchangeably for their definitions of a spouse.) Mr. Justice Kent found:
[50] The evidence is overwhelming and I find as a fact that Mr. Chambers and Ms. Connor loved and cared deeply about each other, and that they had a loving and intimate relationship for over 20 years that was far more than mere friendship or even so-called "friendship with benefits". I accept Mr. Chambers' evidence that he would have liked to share a home with Ms. Connor after the separation from his wife, but was unable to do so because of Ms. Connor's hoarding illness. The evidence amply supports, and I find as a fact, that Mr. Chambers and Ms. Connor loved each other, were faithful to each other, communicated with each other almost every day when they were not together, considered themselves to be (and presented themselves to be) "husband and wife" and were accepted by all who knew them as a couple.
[64] Connor Estate may be distinguishable from this case because Mr. Chambers and Ms. Connor were physically intimate for over 20 years, and presented themselves to the world as a married couple.
[65] Other decisions in which a marriage-like relationship has been found to exist despite the parties not living together have involved circumstances in which the couple lived under the same roof at previous points in the relationship, and the issue was whether they continued to be spouses after they took up separate residences: in Thompson v. Floyd, 2001 BCCA 78, the parties had lived together for a period of at least 11 years; in Roach v. Dutra, 2010 BCCA 264, the parties had lived together for approximately three years.
[66] However, as Mr. Justice Kent noted in Connor Estate:
[48] … [W]hile much guidance might be found in this case law, the simple fact is that no two cases are identical (and indeed they usually vary widely) and it is the assessment of evidence as a whole in this particular case which matters.
[67] Mr. Justice Kent concluded:
[53] Like human beings themselves, marriage-like relationships can come in many and various shapes. In this particular case, I have no doubt that such a relationship existed …
[68] As stated, Ms. Han’s claim is novel. It may even be weak. Almost all of the traditional factors are missing. The fact that Ms. Han and Mr. Dorje never lived under the same roof, never shared a bed and never even spent time together in person will militate against a finding they lived with one another in a marriage-like relationship. However, the traditional factors are not a mandatory check-list that confines the “elastic” concept of a marriage-like relationship. And if the COVID pandemic has taught us nothing else, it is that real relationships can form, blossom and end in virtual worlds.
[69] In my view, the merits of Ms. Han’s claim should be decided on the evidence. Subject to an overriding prejudice to Mr. Dorje, she should have leave to amend the notice of family claim. However, she should also provide meaningful particulars of the alleged marriage-like relationship.
F. Delay / Prejudice
[70] Ms. Han filed her notice of family claim on July 17, 2019. She brought this application to amend approximately one year and nine months after she filed the pleading, just over two months before the original trial date.
[71] Ms. Han’s delay was made all that more remarkable by her change in position from January 19, 2021, when she confirmed, through counsel, that she was not seeking spousal support in this case.
[72] Ms. Han gave notice of her intention to proceed with this application to Mr. Dorje on March 16, 2021. By the time the application was heard, the parties had conducted examinations for discovery without covering the issues that would arise from a claim of spousal support.
[73] Also, in April, Ms. Han produced additional documents, primarily text messages, that may be relevant to her claim of spousal support, but were undecipherable to counsel for Mr. Dorje, who does not read Mandarin.
[74] This application proceeded largely on documents selected and translated by counsel for Ms. Han. I was informed that Mandarin translations of the full materials would take 150 days.
[75] Understandably in the circumstances, Mr. Dorje argued that an amendment two months before trial would be neither just nor convenient. He argued that he would be prejudiced by an adjournment so as to allow Ms. Han to advance a late claim of spousal support.
[76] The circumstances changed on May 6, 2021, when Madam Justice Walkem adjourned the trial to July 2022 and reset it for 25 days. Madam Justice Walkem noted that most of the witnesses live internationally and require translators. She also noted that paternity may be in issue, and Mr. Dorje may amend his pleadings to raise that issue. It seems clear that, altogether apart from the potential spousal support claim, the parties were not ready to proceed to trial on June 7, 2021.
[77] In my view, any remaining prejudice to Mr. Dorje is outweighed by the importance of having all of the issues between the parties decided on their merits.
[78] Ms. Han’s delay and changes of position on spousal support may be a matter to de addressed in a future order of costs; but they are not grounds on which to deny her leave to amend the notice of family claim.
CONCLUSION
[79] Ms. Han is granted leave to amend her notice of family claim in the form attached as Appendix A to the notice of application to include a claim for spousal support.
[80] Within 21 days, or such other deadline as the parties may agree, Ms. Han must provide particulars of the marriage-like relationship alleged in the amended notice of family claim.
[81] Ms. Han is entitled to costs of this application in the cause of the spousal support claim.
“Master Elwood”
down payment 在 Fizo Omar Youtube 的最佳解答
Jom layan #projek4X4abe joe. abe joe decide jual kete lama n angkat kete baru Mitsubishi Triton Ahtlete yg baru ni.kira abe joe owner pertama register kat Malaysia kete ni.
.
So korang nak tahu ok tak kete ni? worth it tak? ape yg best? ape yg tak best? semua abe joe ade share dalam vlog series #projek4X4abe joe ni.
.
Btw antara sbb abe joe amik kete ni, features dia dah mcm kete conti dah n 0 % interest beb utk down payment 50% dan kalau 10% DP pun, hanya 1.8% interest for 9 years..itu memang giler weh..xpernah dibuat orang.
.
So kira good deal lah… n bila dah test memang PADU…
.
jom layan episod2 yg sebelum ni.
.
vlog 1 - abe joe jual ford ranger
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JXvqyd_se0
.
vlog 2 - terjah showroom , abe joe owner pertama di Malaysia
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E67xAtUvDWk&t=149s
.
vlog 3 - test drive n terus confirm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyxKxWlqAkQ&t=79s
.
vlog 4 - suprise hantar kete depan rumah
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y98SCvFW0QM
.
vlog 5 - abe joe test power kete ni. minyak jimat weh!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cbk29dAVE2s
.
#TRITONATHLETE
#OFFROAD
#PROJEK4X4ABEJOE
#MITSUBISHI
down payment 在 Fizo Omar Youtube 的最佳解答
Dia tunai janji weyyy!!!
.
Seperti yg dijanjikan, owner pertama new triton athlete di Malaysia milik abe joe!
.
Siap hantar pakai towing truck ke depan rumah lagi.lu memang mantul la bro hanif.
.
Igt lagi masa beli 1st car abe joe, perodua kancil 2nd hand, 16 tahun lepas,mama lah orng pertama naik kete tu dan sampailah skng.ape2 kete yg abe joe beli, make sure mama orng pertama yg akn naik kete tu.
.
Tak salah pun kalau kita nak dahulukan mak kita, apa yg abe joe ade skng ni pun adalah dari berkat doa seorang ibu, antara doa yg tidak akan ditolak.rezeki abe joe masih ada mama yg sentiasa berdoa n mendapat satu demi satu kejayaan hri ini.
.
Ok hari ni bru terima kereta ni, lepas ni tgk plak ape abe joe akn buat kat si #oyen ni.
Jom layan #projek4X4abe joe. abe joe decide jual kete lama n angkat kete baru Mitsubishi Triton Ahtlete yg baru ni.kira abe joe owner pertama register kat Malaysia kete ni.
.
So korang nak tahu ok tak kete ni? worth it tak? ape yg best? ape yg tak best? semua abe joe ade share dalam vlog series #projek4X4abe joe ni.
.
Btw antara sbb abe joe amik kete ni, features dia dah mcm kete conti dah n 0 % interest beb utk down payment 50% dan kalau 10% DP pun, hanya 1.8% interest for 9 years..itu memang giler weh..xpernah dibuat orang.
.
So kira good deal lah… n bila dah test memang PADU…
.
jom layan episod2 yg sebelum ni.
.
vlog 1 - abe joe jual ford ranger
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JXvqyd_se0
.
vlog 2 - terjah showroom , abe joe owner pertama di Malaysia
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E67xAtUvDWk&t=149s
.
vlog 3 - test drive n terus confirm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyxKxWlqAkQ&t=79s
.
vlog 4 - suprise hantar kete depan rumah
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y98SCvFW0QM
.
vlog 5 - abe joe test power kete ni. minyak jimat weh!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cbk29dAVE2s
.
#TRITONATHLETE
#OFFROAD
#PROJEK4X4ABEJOE
#MITSUBISHI
down payment 在 Hak Me Youtube 的最佳解答
#傾偈 #黑咪 #lifeupdate
‼️MyTheresa為慶祝農曆新年而家做緊好正既優惠,買得多慳得多呀! 快啲望下面啦?
優惠詳情:-
適用地區: 香港
??買滿HK$6,000減HK$1,000: CNY21
??買滿HK$10,000減HK$2,000: LNY21
優惠時間至: 12.02.2021 (00:01 CET)
適用地區: 中國, 澳門, 台灣, 南韓, 美國
??買滿€/$600減€/$100: LNY100
??買滿€/$1,000減€/$200: LNY200
優惠時間至: 12.02.2021 (00:01 CET)
?當然我又揀咗啲單品同大家分享??
⭐️ Balmain Wool Blazer https://bit.ly/3raRkYN (cutting超靚,著上身好顯瘦)
⭐️ Loewe Cotton Sweatshirt https://bit.ly/3oF7GXQ (pale pink嘅衛衣好多時後都著到)
⭐️ Y/Project x Canada Goose Down Jacket https://bit.ly/3ahFsNB (想揾件有啲特別既羽絨,呢件個cutting好有型又唔會覺得好悶)
⭐️ Balmain B-army Canvas Shopper https://bit.ly/3achKCq (一萬樓下既細tote,少機會撞款又裝到野)
⭐️ Balenciaga XS Leather Tote https://bit.ly/3clGyus (都係一萬樓下既細tote,但係皮款,都係實用低調既選擇)
⭐️ Loewe Puzzle Medium https://bit.ly/3snJtbB (my favourite, 趁有得減好入手,仲要係同我個袋一樣既經典色)
⭐️ Loewe Small Gate https://bit.ly/3r2co3u (另一個我覺得唔錯顏色又靚既Loewe手袋)
⭐️ Valentino Leather Pumps https://bit.ly/2NO6gh0 (唯一一款我覺得好著又靚既Valentino鞋,仲要金色夠晒pop)
?? 女裝: https://bit.ly/3qZxHCA
?? 男裝: https://bit.ly/3aisiA4
?? 童裝: https://bit.ly/3r9ObIF
Follow Me:-
? My Instagram: @iamhakme
? Blog: www.hakmebeauty.com
? MeWe: https://mewe.com/p/iamhakme
? My Facebook: www.facebook.com/hakmebeauty
Follow Hakme Beauty:-
?黑咪店地址: https://www.hakmebeauty.com/store-locations/
?黑咪店路線圖: http://bit.ly/2W3pUZr
?黑咪店Online: https://shop.hakmebeauty.com
?黑咪店Instagram: @hakmebeauty
?黑咪店MeWe: https://mewe.com/p/hakmebeauty
?黑咪店Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com/hakmebeautyltd/
*************************************************************
Disclaimer: This video is created and edited by my editor. All the content are my own thoughts. As always, all opinions are based on my experience and honesty. Products are either purchased by me or for those which are sent by PR are marked with an “*”. For any collaboration with brands which involves monetary payment, “Ad” will be in the video so that you are aware of the collaboration. Some of the links used above might be affiliate links and please be aware that I will earn a % of commission if you decide to buy through the affiliate links.
down payment 在 "advance payment" 和"down payment" 的差別在哪裡? 的相關結果
"Down payment" means you pay part of the price before you get it, and then you pay the rest afterwards. 查看翻譯. ... <看更多>
down payment 在 Down Payment Definition - Investopedia 的相關結果
A down payment is a sum of money that a buyer pays in the early stages of purchasing an expensive good or service. The down payment represents a portion of ... ... <看更多>
down payment 在 down payment中文(繁體)翻譯:劍橋詞典 的相關結果
down payment 翻譯:(分期付款的)首期,首付款。了解更多。 ... <看更多>