Subscribe for free access: 7 Steps to Understanding the Stock Market
≡ Menu

2008 Stock Market History: Washington Mutual Bankruptcy

When people think of the Great Depression or financial hardships, the picture of lines of people scampering to get their money out of the bank comes to mind. When panic like this strikes, it looks like a scene straight out of a movie. During the Washington Mutual bankruptcy however, this was the reality.

washington mutual bankruptcy

If one thing was certain, it was that the CEO of Washington Mutual was ambitious and had good intentions. While this attitude can be helpful, it doesn’t save someone from ignorance. The world is a harsh place, and you have to learn how it works.

The goal for Washington Mutual was to make them into the Walmart of banking. This meant catering to lower class individuals, and dealing with their inherent increased credit riskiness. For this bank, that meant marketing sketchy products like adjustable rate loans. They even pressured sales reps into overlooking asset or income limitations for borrowers.

Washington Mutual was a company that was angling to be “for the people”. Also known as WaMu, the company tried to be the “cool” bank in the midst of the uptight and traditional banks.

Turns out, they also ran their financials in the same way. The company appeared to defy the traditional rules of leverage and liabilities, until a $16 billion bank run on deposits left them to the whims of the FDIC and hurled shareholders into a nasty bankruptcy.

It’s easy to point the finger at the 9 day, $16 billion bank run for causing WaMu to go bankrupt. But this was a company with over $300 billion in assets. Something else had to have happened.

What gets lost in translation was that the 9 day bank run was prompted by a credit rating downgrade for Washington Mutual. A look into the financial statements helps us determine if their credit downgrade was really justified.

So let’s look at that last annual report before the Washington Mutual bankruptcy. This was filed on February 29, 2008, a full 6 months before the September 26, 2008 bankruptcy (remember that parenthesis indicates a loss, or negative number).

washington mutual value trap indicator

The first thing that really jumps out to me is the high dividend yield. This can both be a sign of a great value play or a sign of a dangerous value trap. [click to continue…]

2008 Stock Market History: Tribune Bankruptcy

The rise of the internet contributed to the downfall of traditional media, especially newspapers. Companies that had been running for over a hundred years were now in danger of losing their shirts. The Tribune bankruptcy was one such instance.

tribune bankruptcy

The way that the Tribune bankruptcy played out is quite a special one. While the business was definitely negatively affected by the internet and “new media”, they were in no means treading on dangerous territory.

That is, until an investor named Sam Zell took the company private on December 20, 2007 with a buyout of $34 a share. Zell thought he could save the company with this bold move, a leveraged buyout that instead crippled the company and put them in bankruptcy a year later.

With burgeoning debts and a crippled business model, Tribune filed for a Chapter 11 bankruptcy on December 8, 2008.

A chapter 11 bankruptcy is slightly different than the chapter 7 bankruptcy that we commonly hear about. The main difference is in how the debts are treated.

Ch. 7 vs. Ch. 11

A Chapter 7 bankruptcy is the more traditional variety when we think of bankruptcy. In it, all of a person’s or company’s assets are sold off and used to pay the debts. The advantage of the Chapter 7 is that oftentimes, some of the debts are forgiven and it becomes a pretty clean break.

The Chapter 11 bankruptcy is different. In this scenario, assets are not sold off and instead the debts are renegotiated. The debtor is given a chance to revise the terms of the loan to make payment. You can easily remember the difference between a chapter 7 and chapter 11 by the following terminology: Ch.7 is a liquidation, and a Ch.11 is a reorganization.

In the bankruptcies we’ve investigated so far, they’ve all been Chapter 11 bankruptcies. This is the most common bankruptcy when you are talking about corporations. Now what made this Ch. 11 bankruptcy so interesting was that it took four years to resolve. Quite a long time.

In the end, the Tribune bankruptcy was an example of a private buyout gone wrong. The good news for shareholders was that they got paid and got out, while Sam Zell took the brunt of the damage from the bankruptcy. To be fair, he was a big reason why it happened in the first place.

What Killed Tribune?

The story that this event paints is actually different from what really happened. What killed Tribune was not the dissolution of the newspaper, while it did have a minor effect. What really put the company down was the insane increase of leverage from 2007 to 2008, and this is what prompted the bankruptcy.

If there was no leveraged buyout, we may very well have never seen a Tribune bankruptcy in the first place. While we’ll never know for sure, we can look at the numbers to confirm this idea.  [click to continue…]

2008 Stock Market History: Circuit City Bankruptcy

When a high profile company collapses, people tend to take notice. Especially when it is a well-known retailer like Circuit City was. There were many contributing factors to the Circuit City bankruptcy, but it’s easy to say it was obvious with hindsight. Or was it?

circuit city bankruptcy

Circuit City enjoyed a chief prosperity during the 80’s and 90’s. Business was booming and naturally, it was expanding. People were buying up everything in the stores, from electronics to appliances… it was starting to be known as the store to buy from before you head off to college.

But the good times didn’t last forever, and eventually it slowed down. The retail empire took a backseat to Best Buy. They stopped selling their profitable appliances. Growth diminished, before it became hard to get customers in the store at all.

The Circuit City Bankruptcy

By the time that the housing crisis meltdown hit and the economy entered into a full blown recession, Circuit City was on life support and couldn’t take it any more. On November 10, 2008, Circuit City filed for bankruptcy.

How could this have happened to such a great store? Of course there’s plenty of speculation, but former CEO Alan Wurtzel thinks that it’s because management didn’t adapt.

He blames executive pride, as well as the inability for radical change due to shareholder backlash, as contributing to the eventual demise. In an store selling technology, is it really a surprise that you need to be on your feet and can’t rely on the past?

These are questions that aren’t as obvious as they seem to be. Surely for Circuit City, these are questions that weren’t pondered enough and you see the consequences of that. But is it really that easy? Sure you can look back as you sit in your chair and say that this one factor was the final straw, but I don’t think it was ever that simple.

Risky Sector

Most people don’t realize that one of the riskiest sectors in the stock market is retail. I’ve written about this before, how the retail industry had the most major bankruptcies out of anyone since 1994.

Although retail is very well known and certain brands easily become household names, it is very hard to stay in business in that industry. There’s so many factors that I can’t give you just one reason, but it’s hard to argue with the facts.

So knowing this fact and then reexamining this story, it shouldn’t be that shocking that a company as well known as Circuit City went under. If you look at the numbers, it’s even less. [click to continue…]

2008 Stock Market History: Lehman Brothers Bankruptcy

Too big to fail. These were the words that echoed into history books and characterized the shocking aftermath behind the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy.

lehman brothers bankruptcy

The premise behind “too big to fail” was simple. There are certain companies on Wall Street that are so massive, so hopelessly intertwined with the everyday economy, that their collapse would mean the destruction of modern lifestyle as we know it.

Lehman Brothers was thought of as one of these kind of companies, with a peak market capitalization of $60 Billion before it went under. In the end though, big banks like Bank of America, Citibank, and AIG got bailouts while Lehman Brothers and their shareholders were left in the cold.

But how did it all start? How did they get to this point of no return?

Subprime Mortgage Crisis

Lehman Brothers was the perfect example of how to ride an investing bubble all the way up and then all the way down. You see, the company had built a substantial portfolio around mortgage backed securities. Not only that, but they were leveraging up to do it. As the housing bubble continued to cruise, Lehman’s profits exploded and catapulted the company from around $20 to over $125 per share.

While everybody remembers about the housing crisis, not many remember that the correction happened in 2005, and it was the resulting subprime mortgage crisis in 2007-2008 that really did in our economy. This subprime mortgage crisis crippled Lehman Brothers’ profitability and forced the closure of their subprime lender BNC Mortgage, before completely finishing them off.

This scandal was unique not only because of the sheer size of the bankruptcy, but because it’s pretty obvious that the major cause was the leveraging.

Sure there were cases of malfeasance where quarterly reports were smudged to look better, and grumblings about the increase of pay and bonuses for top executives during and leading up to the bankruptcy crisis… but the real reason for the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy was plain and simple, debt.

Now it’s easy to say that they had too much debt in hindsight, but I want to prove to you that it should’ve been obvious even to unsuspecting investors. The sheer number of shareholders who were taken aback by this bankruptcy should attest to how ignorant investors really are.

Let’s look at the last annual report filed before bankruptcy, in January of ‘08. Keep in mind that Lehman Brothers filed bankruptcy on September 15, 2008.

LEHMQ Value Trap Indicator

There was a 2 for 1 stock split in 2005, which means that the company had a very stable track record of growing revenue, earnings, EPS, and dividend. Even their net cash was increasing at a long term trend, but all of this growth came at a price.

When a company is growing at this kind of a torrid pace, you have to look at their debt levels and see if they are sustainable. [click to continue…]

2002 Stock Market History: Worldcom Bankruptcy

The years following the dot com boom were clouded with accounting scandals and bankruptcies. Shortly after the infamous Enron bankruptcy, in which a leading energy company was exposed for cooking the books, the world was rocked again by the biggest bankruptcy seen to that point, the Worldcom bankruptcy.

worldcom bankruptcy

Worldcom was the nation’s second largest long distance carrier, behind AT&T. Like the Enron case, the former CEO quit just months before the bankruptcy disaster, yet his involvement in the fraud proved to follow him anyway with a 25 year federal sentence.

A failed acquisition attempt of phone company competitor Sprint preceded this groundbreaking event. Regulators had determined that this deal would violate monopoly laws, and blocked the transaction. Just three years later, the Worldcom bankruptcy became the biggest bankruptcy in U.S. history with $104 billion in prefiled assets.

For this company, the writing was on the wall and former CEO Bernard Ebbers knew it. Unbeknownst to the general public, Worldcom was clearly struggling in a declining telecommunications industry and shrinking profits.

The Sprint deal was a last ditch effort to save the health of a declining stock price, but when the deal fell through Ebbers faced a dilemma. He was trading options on company stock to fund other businesses, and because the price was declining, he was being forced into covering margin calls.

With the danger of his selling company stock leading to even worse stock declines, Ebbers convinced the board to loan him hundreds of millions of dollars to cover the margin calls. Not only did this lead to the infamous black stain on Worldcom, but it also didn’t work, as the stock continued to free fall all the way into bankruptcy.

Worldcom Fraud

The fraudulent behavior didn’t stop there. As Worldcom faced bigger and bigger losses, top executives formulated some tricky accounting engineering to fix their problems.

These executives propped up revenue numbers by creating a completely fabricated entry called “corporate unallocated revenue accounts”. It didn’t stop there. Instead of accurately recording “line costs” as expenses, Worldcom placed these in capital expenditures.

These two devious mistakes over inflated assets by over $10 billion and completely betrayed the investors brave enough to still support the company. Unfortunately, the bankruptcy news completely blindsided those investors.

To make matters more confusing, take a look at this. In 2001, Worldcom split its stock into two different groups. The ticker that used to be $WCOM split off into Worldcom Group stock ($WCOM) and MCI group stock ($MCIT). The MCI group stock, also known as a tracking stock, was an attempt to make Worldcom look better by separating its losses from the income statement.

While this temporary fix may have pacified troubled investors, with the tracking stock even paying a dividend to lure in more victims, the tracking stock was eventually closed down and converted back into $WCOM shares.

This recapitalization move again made things tricky for investors at that time. Because now, in the 2002 annual report, they were able to separate earnings into the $MCIT loser and $WCOM.

Here’s what the earnings looked like without the $MCIT dragging them down.

worldcom annual report

And with the corresponding Value Trap Indicator values (remember < 250: Strong Buy; > 800: Strong Sell): [click to continue…]

2001 Stock Market History: Enron Bankruptcy

The Enron bankruptcy was among the most surprising and shocking events that the investing world has ever seen. Never before had a company once been held in such high regard, respected and even honored among the top companies in the Fortune 500 and across the world. This tragedy forever shook the confidence of the individual investor about Wall Street and the general integrity of mankind.

If you weren’t paying attention back then, you might not now realize the magnitude of what really happened. Not only was Enron a highly diversified company, dipping its toes in natural gas, electricity, paper and pulp, and communications, but it was also an undisputed leader in the energy space. For investors at the time, everything seemed smooth. They paid a dividend at around 0.5% – 1%, they boasted steady and growing earnings, and even had a mostly average P/E ratio in the beginning of 1999, at around 30. Everything seemed to be going according to plan.

Just how well respected was Enron? Well, Fortune magazine had heralded the company as “America’s Most Innovative Company” for six years in a row. Behind the scenes, top executives were cooking the books and hiding company losses to avoid suspicion. But even though the Enron bankruptcy is widely known as the accounting scandal that caught everyone off guard, I’d like to argue that a prudent investor would never have bought stock in the company in the first place.

enron bankruptcy

The way that Enron cooked the books was through a method called “mark-to-mark” accounting. What this would entail, according to “The Fall of a Wall Street Darling” by Investopedia, was the immediate credit of an expected asset’s profits. For example, the company would build an asset, like a power plant, and then would count earnings on that asset before they even materialized. After that Enron would transfer the asset to an off-the-books corporation, so that when the actual loss was accounted for, it wouldn’t affect Enron’s bottom line.

Now of course this is highly deceitful and unpredictable. There was no way for the average investor to be able to research and find out this was going on. But there were some other warning signs going on in the financial statements, ones that you’d only find out if you look past the superficial earnings and income numbers.

Take a look at their last annual report before bankruptcy, the one filed in 2001 (I took the liberty of filling out a spreadsheet for you with just the important numbers).

bankruptcies

Again, on the surface everything checks out. You see growing revenue. Growing earnings, EPS, even a stock split. You see everything trending in the right direction… up. Total assets, shareholder equity, and of course share price.

But let’s look further. The reason why a tool like the Value Trap Indicator works so well is that it takes seemingly meaningless data and transforms it into something useful. We are able to understand if a particular ratio is extremely high or low because the Value Trap Indicator computes this automatically. Because the Value Trap Indicator is centered on a ratio’s desired average, and because many of the categories deal with the difference to the average as raised to the second power, extremes in ratios are quickly identified and flagged. You can’t hide from it, not even Enron.

So if we extend down the spreadsheet to look at other ratios, we see an interesting anomaly. Remember, most of the ratios look great. Even though the P/B, P/E, and P/C get pretty high at some points, they don’t get high enough to really cause us to worry. The red flags pop up, as they usually do, with the debt to equity ratio. Look at its progression below. [click to continue…]

The Rule of 72 Formula to Wealth

So you want to get rich? There’s few ways that the average person can become rich. One way is to win the lotto. Another, more practical and realistic way, is to learn the rule of 72 formula and how it can bring you wealth.

Don’t take my word for it. Albert Einstein, one of the greatest minds of our time, often talked about compounding interest as the 8th wonder of the world. Compounding interest is the fuel that makes the rule of 72 formula work.

rule of 72 formula

What’s the big deal about compounding interest? For the uninitiated, let me explain the magical power behind it.

If you look at the world around you, really everything works on the principle of compounding. All compounding boils down to is growth upon growth. It’s also known as exponential growth, and it’s what makes big things.

A popular law that depends on exponential growth is Moore’s law, for you science geeks out there. The law states that the number of transistors on a silicon chip doubles every 2 years. For you non-nerds, that means that technology gets exponentially better every 2 years. Which is exactly how we were able to invent the PC and then put that same computing power in a cell phone just a decade later.

But it doesn’t just apply to technology. Exponential growth is how viruses spread. A single germ cell infects another, and then those two infect two more. Before you know it, everyone in my house is sick and I always get the worst of it.

When you accelerate in a car, it takes a ton of force from the engine. However, as you gain speed, it becomes easier and easier to gain more speed. It compounds.

Or look at a tree. Notice how the branches spread out from other branches, and same with the roots. A baby tree that was planted years ago continues to grow over the decades, by growing on its growth.

The most wide known example of compounding interest is how it is just like pushing a snowball down a hill. The initial effort is difficult, but as the snowball gains mass it picks up more and more snow until it is so big it rolls on its own.

You can have this phenomenon happen with your money.

Compounding Interest Example

The power of compounding interest is astonishing. Consider this example that clearly shows how anyone with an average income can become a millionaire over time.

Take the median income in the United States, $50,000 a year. If a person with the median income were to save 10% over 40 years, or $5,000 a year ($416.67 a month), they would end up with $200,000. Not too shabby, but not exactly filthy rich.

Take that same person, and assume instead of saving that money, they invested that money and earned an average of 10% a year. At the end of the 40 year period, that person would have a ridiculous $2,434,280!

Do you see why compounding interest is powerful? [click to continue…]

IRA vs. 401k Solution

Another great email from a reader. This one has to do with the common investor’s dilemma: IRA vs. 401k.

“Thank you for this great ebook! I have been looking for something like this. Very generous of you to make something like this in the first place and make it available to all.

I am new to the world of investing and I wanted to run an idea past you. I assume you are extremely busy, but you don’t have to respond if you don’t have the time.

I read a book called “The White Coat Investor” which really launched my interest in investing. From there I really started considering investing in the “Savings” concept of putting aside a set amount of my paycheck for something like a traditional IRA, 401k or Roth IRA.

I watched a video from Robert Kiyosaki online (I had read his book awhile ago), and in his video he had kinda poked at this idea of “savings” and implied it was a poor man’s way of thinking. It kinda resonated with me.

I just graduated from dental school with a massive debt of 450k and I’m applying for residency, which would if I were to get in would take 6 years to complete. Now while the specialty I am considering is an extremely high paying profession, Robert Kiyosaki’s idea really penetrated with me: regular people work for money, but rich people have money work for them.

It made me realize that it didn’t matter to me what my income would or would not eventually be, but the fact that for the rest of my life I would have to actively work for an income bothers me, not because of the work itself, but because, God forbid, if something were to happen to my health or another hindering obstacle were to come in the way, then what?

More importantly, financial literacy is not taught in medical or dental school and I think it is a shame for someone not to know much about it.

With that said, I’m not interested in a financial adviser either. I want to learn. I want to become an investor. A white coat investor. So as you can tell, your ebook was an amazing find for me. I heard about you through the Money Tree Podcast interview. I’m glad I stumbled upon it.

Now to my question. I want to be an Intelligent Investor (I’ve ordered that book too from amazon, it’s on its way.) I know I have an amazing amount to learn, but I have an idea I wanted to run past you.

For the next whatever number of years I need to plan my budget to not only include my living expenses, but repaying my student loans as well. With that said I wanted to do the following:

Take 10% of every paycheck and use it for investments (to practice the dollar cost averaging idea and build my portfolio.) 5% I wanted to put into an IRA of some type or perhaps my work’s 401k. And another 5% into savings for heck of just plain practicing the habit of conserving (while it might not ultimately serve me well as investing might.)

The question is, do you think I should invest in an IRA like a 401k? I’ve been doing some research and some critics are calling it a horrible idea pointing out to the many who lost their retirement savings because of the market crash and also because of the mediocre investing options these plans supposedly offer.

Are these critics right or is it the fault of the investor for not diversifying their assets and knowing how to work the market?”

Ah, the classic IRA vs. 401k dilemma. There’s a couple of things to consider.

But first, understand that I am not a financial planner. I’m just a regular guy who happens to have a little more experience with investing than you do, the average beginner.

Secondly, everyone’s situation is different, and so everyone’s personal answer is going to be different. Pretty much every single company’s 401k plan is unique and different than most every other company, so make sure you are diligent and research the differences.

IRA vs. 401k

Now that we put that out of the way, here’s what you need to know about the IRA vs. 401k. With the IRA, you have complete control of your investments. You can buy any stock, bond, or even a piece of real estate with your IRA.

The 401k is not as flexible. With most company provided 401k plans out there, you have a limited choice of funds to choose from. Obviously this is detrimental and unappealing, especially to the do-it-yourself investor.

This one difference is a big one. What if you are a decent stock picker, and could’ve easily outperformed the subpar mutual funds a 401k would offer? Or what if you are a prudent investor in low-cost index funds, but only high fee loaded funds are available to choose from?

Those limitations of the 401k can make a big difference in your returns, and this is why the IRA is almost always preferred. HOWEVER, there’s an important caveat to this.

What the 401k can offer people that an IRA can’t is a company match. The company match is essentially free money. What the company usually does is “match” the amount of money you contribute to your 401k (up to a certain percentage), and the money (after vesting) will be added to your 401k balance to then grow some more. You can think of a 401k company match as giving you a 100% return on your money, so it’s definitely worth doing.

Now we see why people get confused on the IRA vs. 401k. Sure, flexibility of the IRA is nice, but the difference in returns that you can get from outperformance will probably only be a couple of percentage points. Compare that to a company match 401k where you are getting a 100% gain on a full match.

How do you pick? [click to continue…]

Return on Investment Formula (ROI) & Ex. Average Returns

Learn the simple return on investment formula and know what to expect with average return numbers for different asset classes, including stocks, bonds, and real estate.

return on investment formula

Before we dive right in to the return on investment formula, you should know why it’s important and how investors use it to make decisions. Basically, return on investment (or ROI) tells you how much money you have made. This is called your return.

The return on investment formula itself is important because it is a ratio, or a percentage, and because of this we can use it to compare investments.

For example, pretend we wanted to compare an investment Warren Buffett made with one that Joe Schmo made. Because Buffett has access to billions of dollars, his result could look better than reality just because he started out with a ton of money.

If Buffett bought $5 million worth of stock in a company but ended up with only $1 million, obviously he didn’t make a good investment. Whereas if Schmo turned a $100,000 investment into $150,000, he did really well. A ratio like return on investment shows us that Schmo’s return of 50% was better than Buffett’s return of -80%, even though Buffett had more money at the end.

ROI is also important because it can help investors make important decisions. Obviously everybody has different financial goals. When you know what kind of returns to expect, you can make smart allocation decisions, like what percentage of income to invest with and in which asset classes.

Especially in the investment industry, ROI is used as a measuring stick and a way to evaluate performance from fund managers and other financial professionals. One thing you should consider is that a high ROI is usually correlated with higher risk. Bear that in mind.

The Return on Investment Formula

Now on to the formula. To calculate ROI, use this formula:
[(Current Value – Value at Cost) / (Value at Cost)] x 100

You should apply the return on investment formula on any investing you do.

If you bought some stocks, as an example, then the price you bought the stocks at is your “value at cost”. The current value would be the price the stock is at now, or the price you sold the stock at. Another way to look at the return on investment formula is like this:
[(Net Profit) / (Investment)] x 100

Keep in mind that you won’t always make a profit on your investments, and so the net profit could actually be a net loss. You can apply ROI on past transactions, or you can apply ROI to calculate current return as a hypothetical (i.e. if you were to sell today). [click to continue…]

Saving and Investing: What’s the Point?

One of the roadblocks for people who could be successful with the stock market is that they don’t see the point of saving and investing.

Maybe you can think of somebody you know who believes this way. Have them read this. To the person reading: Give me this chance to win you over. If I can’t, then you are justified in never having to think about saving and investing again.

investing system

I don’t necessarily have more life experience than the next guy. But I’ve made some simple observations in my short life span. Humans always desire. We always want food, always want sex, and always want to spend money. It’s what makes us human.

Think you are above these basic human desires? Think again. Remember that time when you were a child. Money was magical back then. I remember thinking that if I only had $100, I would be happy to buy as many boxes of baseball cards as my heart desired.

Interestingly, now I am an adult and CAN buy tons of boxes of baseball cards. The allure of baseball cards just isn’t there for me anymore, so much so that I can’t remember the last time I bought some.

When I was in college, I remember that I would be happy just to have a “real” job. With a full time job, and full time income, I’d finally have enough money to be happy. Interestingly again, I got that full time income but that fantasy world of unending happiness has been elusive.

I guess I can say that as my income has increased, so has my taste. No matter what consumer item has seduced me into longing-ness, I’ve gone through the same predictable cycle. Want → desire → strive for → achieve and own → get bored → find new want → repeat.

American consumerism at its finest.

That’s not the point of this post. If you know me you know I’m the last guy to sing Kumbaya and share feelings. The point is that we have desires. Food, sex, spending money. The difference is that most people spend all their money, and then blame the world when they don’t get rich.

The Secret Wealth Formula

Anybody can get rich. The secret formula is quite simple. Want to lose weight? Eat less than you burn. Want to get rich? Spend less than you make.

Ah, but here’s where all the excuses come piling up. They are infiltrating your mind and short circuiting your reason. But, but, BUT… Shut up and listen.

The reason why most people don’t become rich is because they don’t have the patience for it. Same reason most people get fat. They don’t live right, and don’t stick to it.

Don’t believe me? Did you know that over 80% of millionaires are first generation? That means they grew up dirt poor like you did. The difference is, they lived their lives intentionally to get rich.

Mrs. CC started with nothing more than a college scholarship. With her never making more than $60,000 a year in her life, she is now a millionaire. Her secret? Saving and investing. A great book called The Millionaire Next Door has countless examples of people who became millionaires by doing just that.

Your next roadblock is already on the horizon. I can see it. You might hear a motivational story, but you aren’t convinced it could happen to you. Try me. Let me show you HOW. [click to continue…]