Kenya Orchards or Kakuzi.

But on a serious note, suppose you make those seemingly small gains of 15% per trade and you do this repeatedly like 3 times a year, that will be around 52% compounded gains a year.

Over the 6 years period that is a whooping 12 times your original investment. But for this to happen you have to be a pro, a real master of the game.

Let me give an example:in 2003 the KEBS sacco was selling some land hapo mlolongo 280k for an eigth...a transaction done on Monday for the same land was done @ 4.1m...1365% gain...going forward 2027 will the land have gained that much?another 1365% gain I believe not...If I had the same 4.1m I wouldnt have bought land I would have gone for stocks....

Open your minds here! You are trading shares courtesy of a few brave pple who decided to set up that business. Suppose Mwangi(and other Equity bank founders) had decided many years ago to invest in a few companies shares.perhaps their returns upto to date cud ave been stellar. however their choice to invest and grow a bizness as we have seen have mind boggling implications to our econ in terms of employment,support to agric and other linkages to various sectors of our economy. It is crazy to even imagine comparing shares trading to owning a RE biz (or any other biz for that matter)! One is as a result of the other.

Very true. A share is a piece of a business!

What are the statistics of percentage of fake titles out there versus the percentage of companies on the NSE that have gone bankrupt?

Your choice of investment should be dependent on two things
1. How much you know about the investment.
2. In case you have good knowledge in both, then you will be in a position to compare the two and choose the best option at any given time.

Therefore, for a guy working in NSE or a wazua veteran, stocksmaster et al, investing in stocks would seem the best option if they have limited knowledge in real estate. On the other hand, Mwalimu Marty, A4Architect et al, would choose real estate any day. So knowledge should be your investment compass, and if you are lucky to be knowledgeable in both, then you can make even more money by continuously choosing the best deals in both types of investments.

Are you sure????Links coming soon to disapprove you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

As an economics student, Adam Smith's theory of absolute advantage comes into play. According to his theory, individuals have fixed resources (in our case money). However, each individual ought to pursue the investment which he is likely to yield the most gain, which is contingent on his level of knowledge, experience and access to critical information. An architect for instance has an absolute advantage in the development of real estate, and so does a stock broker in the trading of shares. Therefore, if any investment was to be made by both parties, the theory supports that the architect would go for real estate while the stock broker would buy stocks. But what about a person who is in neither the real estate business or the stocks business, but who is interested in investing? Assuming that his knowledge of the two investments is equal, the theory of comparative advantage by David Ricardo would apply. The theory holds that, an individual could still invest even if he has no absolute advantage in the two investments. Such an individual would mainly consider the opportunity costs of investing in either of the two. For instance, if he invests in stocks, how much income will he forego in the form of real estate income? And if he invests in real estate, how much is he likely to forego in stock market returns? He would then choose the investment where the opportunity costs are lowest for him. Both theories are used in international trade but have been modified to solve this investor's dilemma. #My 2 Zimbabwe bucks#

Thanks man. I am humbled

Kindly explain the highlighted part. What is the procedure? By how much do they discount the shares while valuing them, because I cant accept the security to be valued at more than 20% below market prices