guavalane Thank You. I want all the info I can get. Does your friend buy seeds and if so what varieties and where does he buy the seeds. etc. why higher ? How big are these. You are in a great warm long grow region. I am zone 5 and must plan carefully. So I am interested in what comes quickly and what takes a long time. I can probably do with plants to about 105 days as some pumpkins are 105. not sure on the maximum but it probably depends on the temperature. Right now it is cold here. high of the day below or near 50. just to give an idea. But of course all information is eagerly sought. how is the eating quality difference between winter melon and fuzzy gourd. I had a oriental melon gourd that I liked. It was pretty good. it grew sort of like a square long melon. the melon had 4 creases running the length that caused it to have a sort of square cross section. the crease was indented along the length. the melon was nice in soup. It might have been a winter melon but no white on the melon skin and it was ready very early. The skin was tough so it was easy to cook. I could put it into a microwave and after it was cooked the skin would come off in one piece instead of falling apart. I just grab the skin and pull it off. well more or less. worked great. the "melon" was nice and firm. light color. sort of clear when cooked. moisture came out of it. the moisture with the seeds was a little more sweet. but this was for cooking not for raw eating. Does anyone have any idea what it might have been. what kind of oriental melon or gourd. I saved some seed but then the seeds might be crossed with all the other stuff grown there. Mostly I want to know what it is so I can buy some good seed that is properly correct and not some half wild cross.

"As I've said in other postings, any advisor that won't give you the names of at least 3 long-time clients to call and talk to, isn't worth considering." The problems are 1) he cherry picks clients and 2) clients have no clue what they are paying or how they are really doing. They just know they 'like' they advisor and he 'seems' to be doing great. The people I have helped all thought initially that their advisor was their dear friend that was doing wonderful things with their money. They would have given glowing recommendations. I think EF Moody said it well: "And that's the same critical problem with referrals as well- and the reason that they are so effectively used in the business. Literally every salesperson is told/taught to get referrals to friends, neighbors, relatives, co-workers, Martians, whoever, since that is a great lead in. Unfortunately, the person getting the referral believes- or wants to believe- that the agent has already been critically and thoroughly analyzed and must be of the highest caliber and competency. Invariably they do NOTHING themselves to check out whether such knowledge or ability exists- and nothing was done before. Then this happens to the next person and the next, ad infinitum, as the referrals continue. It ends up that no one did any checking on anyone at all and then they later wonder how it all went wrong. They end up buying the wrong product at the wrong risk level at the wrong time- and certainly from the wrong person. They get little or ineffectual service, etc. Now referrals may work with physicians and certain other professionals (sometimes with CPA's or attorneys- but not all the time) since they at least have a degree and other background and training. Even here, people are finally recognizing there are problems. But referrals to agents who have essentially nil background (read further) is illogical. It is for these many reasons that I feel that referrals to brokers, insurance agents, financial planners, attorneys and most other entities is a waste of time unless a comprehensive review of the individual is commenced before any product is purchased or any fee paid. And such review is NOT calling the SEC/NASD or your State offices to see if any formal arbitrations or law suits have been instituted. Only an infinitesimal number of agents have ever been sued. That still says NOTHING about competency. You need to do a LOT more to assure yourself of some reasonable competency." "That seems to set you off in a very strident manner." Because I know what a scam these people are probably in for. Unless they find an honest, knowledgable, hourly fee-ONLY planner. I would totally love to see ignorant investors finding good, honest, low-cost advice. I could then turn my attentions to all my hobbies. The fact is, these people need advisors because they are ignorant and have no confidence. Salesmen will snap them up and manipulate them and hurt them. I see this over and over and over. "But any good CFP who has been in business for 10+ years should be able to show a track record of at least 6-8% after expenses." Should, but they don't. Numbers don't lie. "Yes, it is hard to track all expenses (whether you use an advisor or not), but a rough total can be managed by diligent clients and figuring out the ROI is easy after that." First, why should a client have to hunt down elusive fees? Shouldn't a financial ADVISOR (!!!!) be telling the clients all about the fees? This alone is very telling. And I can't even track down all the fees! Fund turnover is not in the prospectus let alone the expense ratio. Take a look at this: "Mercer Bullard, president, Fund Democracy and assistant professor of law at the University of Mississippi, added: "This study demonstrates conclusively what consumer groups have argued for years: fund expense ratios are misleading. Expense ratios exclude portfolio transaction costs that on average equal 43 percent of the total expense ratio. In some cases, hidden portfolio transaction costs are five or six times the total expense ratio. Congress should act promptly to ensure that America's investors are provided with full disclosure about funds' portfolio transaction costs." Even if you find the turnover, figuring out the cost from there is a bear. Can't you see what a problem this is? "People also need to consider that many CFPs offer their clients purchases at NAV and reduced management fees on funds." From the BCT study: "Do advisors help clients find funds that are lower cost (excluding distribution costs)? After analyzing several trillion dollars worth of transactions, the answer is no." "He changed all his clients over to a fee basis " Yes, the new and improved way to get big fees from clients. This is usually more expensive than loads for the client in the long run. Fee basis means he can get commissions (probably from 12b-1 fees) and a percent of the client's assets. That percent of assets gets subtracted from the client's investments year after year after year after year. Never to compound. And for what? "But I don't make the mistake of thinking that everyone enjoys doing this type of thing;" They don't have to. They can buy a target retirement date fund (very low expense ratio, no load, no percent of asset fee, no 12b-1 fee, index funds, automatically rebalanced) or have a salaried Vanguard planner do it (often at no cost) or hire a fee-ONLY planner by the hour to set up a simple portfolio. I am saving amazing amounts of money and spend less that 8 hours a year on my investments. Had I been better able to dig through the industry BS when I first started, I would have been able to set up a great portfolio in a weekend. "In the end, all we are doing here is trading opinions. " Hard numbers are not opinions. This is not an opinion: "the BCT study found that the raw returns of equally weighted mutual funds (net of all expenses) for 1996 to 2002 were 6.626% for the investors working on their own and were 2.924% for funds provided by advisors." I know that I'm passionate about this. It's because I have looked at enough evidence over the years to reach certainty. And, I have seen so many people that have lost years of retirement to fees they were never told about by their trusted financial ADVISOR. Maybe it's just my opinion, but I think that if someone pays for a service he should get a value from that service - not badly hurt. And the worst is that all those clients initially defended their broker like crazy. It was only after I took them out to Morningstar and showed them reality that they started realizing what was being done to them.

Yes I do use soil. I am not a wholesale grower, but I beg to differ regarding the growing of plants in soil. At one time, perennials were field grown, dug up as bare-roots in autumn, and sent out. This is still done for some perennials and many woodies but rowing in containers is the absolute most common method of herbaceous plant raising here in the UK...even many tree nurseries will maintain an inventory of strictly container grown trees...in soil. Might be worth defining what we mean by 'soil'. Yep, many nurseries will use a short term soilless compost, based on coir, peat, bark and so on...but I use a LOAM based mix of sterilsed topsoil with added base fertilser (plus perlite, grit or other aeration and drainage additions)...for both my own ornamental and edible plants...and my cannabis...and many (better) nurseries will also use a loam based potting medium as the structure is more stable, nutrient buffering has better equilibrium. and irrigation levels are easier to maintain...especially if the plant is going to remain in the container for more than 3 months. Incidentally, it is a somewhat bizarre assumption to make regarding cannabis growers..as well as being wrong. Not only in the fore front of conducting rigorous research on experimental (and innovative) growing methods (tomatoes were not exactly in the vanguard here), the sheer accumulation of data regarding breeding for example ( cannabis is an interesting botanical oddity as a dioecious annual ), not just regarding hermaphrodism, selfing but also separating compounds in the plant (again, it has an immensely long and fascinating history as well as complex alkoloids, terpenes and other phyto-active substances. It is fair to say that there has always been a heap more $$$ involved in the cannabis industry (both legal and illegal) than in tomatoes. And more than anything, money now drives research...but not always in a good way.

I use all black out shades, but, I open mine up completely all day. They are only for night time use. Any shade will block out a whole lot of light, if left covering the window during the day. I only have neighbors on the sides, none in front, nor in the back. I really dont have to worry about neighbors looking in here. I dont think I would want any shade even if light filtering covering my windows during the day. If privacy during the day is a big issue, how about using sheer curtains pulled. That gives privacy from neighbors and also allows light to come in and you can look out through them.