Thread regarding Chevron Corp. layoffs

• 2svcr "If you are aware of Chevron's discount rate". lol. Of course. it's just a shame that you are not only not privy to that information, but you also are unaware of basic high school level algebra and economics - lmao!

• 2svhz, yup you are correct, the annuity troll who continues to make up false narratives about the annuity being bad keeps on spreading his lies and falsehoods. Jealousy of those more successful than you is a horrible thing. I'm sure he'll reply to this again with name-calling as usual. He can't stand that someone is more successful, wealthy, a better investor, prefers the mathematically superior annuity and more happy than him. Soooo sad for the poor guy.....

• yup, not only are the annuitants getting a better deal now than the people who have to settle for a lump sum buyout which benefits the company, they will be getting an even better deal in the future. Good horizons. I suspect that many will be retiring taking the 100% JS annuity, and living large as the rest of their investments grow better than ever, without having to be drawn from like those who have to settle for the buyout. Good point.

• 2svcr: yup, and the Fed is rumored to be thinking about a rate cut due to current low interest rates. If one is thinking about retirement, there may be a nice window on the horizon.

If you are aware of Chevron's discount rate you can be sure that it is wayyy higher than the piddly interest assumption for the lump sum estimate, given the company a huge advantage when paying the annuity. Chevron loses big time when there is a big spread between t-bills and stocks (or t-bills and CVX internal discount rate) and employees claim the lump sum. But, that's how the rules are written. These low interest rate times are a historic arbitrage opportunity for lumpers.

2stll, Is that what you call that guy, the annuity troll? Is it because they are envious of people with an annuity so much that they make up false comments about it being bad on this thread? I've read some of them and they are all apparently fake from a person bitter and jealous of retirees with generous annuity pensions. It's so obvious. I suppose he's a bitter, envious person who made poor decisions in life so has nothing to add but to be a vindictive troll.

Yet another fake post by the annuity troll. It never stops!

• Sorry, I just checked and am mistaken. I misspoke. Chevron is much better off if they "buy-out" pensioners by offering them a lump sum buy out. The value of an annuity is much greater than the lump sum offered, as easily verified by checking your generous annuity payment against any annuity available on the open market at the time your lump sum is offered. The lump sum will be notably less in value. Chevron loses a bit on the annuity, which is why it is a better deal for the retiree to take their pension as an annuity, particularly the 100% Joint Survivor, which is an exceptional deal since the odds of either spouse of living a long life is exponentially greater .

• 2sbkf: Yet another completely false narrative. Chevron makes significantly more by keeping and investing your lump than it loses handing you your little annuity checks. Are you deliberately misleading others, or is this truly self delusion?

that's all fine but I love myself and my family much more than Chevron, so I gladly chose the annuity and will be receiving it until both me and hubby die, we have longevity in the family, but see your point lol.

• All of you bickering lost lovers just finding each other and learning how awesome the lump sum is, and how much "Stuff" you can buy, bail yourself out of debt, etc. etc. , Chevron thanks you for taking the buy-out. It helps release liability and shore up the pension plan for those who need it and will be taking from it for many many years into the future. You are doing your fellow pensioners a big favor. From them and me - Thank you and God bless your little hearts. You must really love Chevron.

Nice try but bonds have a positive yield while the annuity is negative. No firecalc option will give a better result with the annuity. Keep trolling if it is your only remaining joy in life, a salve to the lay-off wound.

• I agree 2rlss: sorry again. I thought about it and now realize that you probably are wealthy and successful, have a significant nest egg already and plan on taking the annuity and replacing the portion of your portfolio that has bonds or similar, which will not only yield more than the bonds and be guaranteed, but you will also free up a large amount of capital toward the higher risk/gains portion. That portion, being allowed to grow and not be drawn from, like you would with the lump sum only, will dwarf the returns you would get in my example of T-bills or even higher risk conservative investments. That must be why Firecalc generally gives a higher success rate with the annuity. It's me that is dense and I resemble a fence post in a cow pasture. Or rather cow excrement. One of the two. My bad! I stand corrected.

• 2rlss: sorry but it is you that are resembling a post. The lump invested while you slowly withdraw annuity- equivalent amounts will generate gains that you will not enjoy by taking the annuity. In the most conservative case (e.g., 2.25% from Tbills, the gold standard of “safe” investment) the gains will add ten years to the longevity to annuity-equivalent withdrawals. With more aggressive investments there is a high probability the money will last much longer. Are you people really this dense?

If you are essentially going to put the lump sum under your mattress out of fear or panic at stock behavior, take the annuity because it will serve you better if you live beyond age 80 or so. If you have any wits at all about investing, take the lump and invest it normally and it will last as long as you want it to and a bare minimum of 30 years, inflation indexed. So, if you are under 50 may you want the annuity. If over, the lump will work out better 99% of the time.

@2rgbu, Yes, it’s as simple as I explained. It’s you who is as dumb as a fence post. The annuity pays out a guaranteed monthly amount from Month One until the day you die. To compare the lump sum as apples to apples, you must also take distributions from your lump sum investments. Your distributions must equal the amount the annuity would be paying. Now, to truly gauge which one of your pension options pays out the most, the determining factor is your ACTUAL date of death. But, as I previously articulated, since nobody knows when they’ll die, the pension calculation used your statistical mortality. It’s very simple— if you believe you’ll outlive your assumed year of death, take the annuity, as it will actually provide a larger total payout.

Most retirees who wisely choose the guaranteed annuity are handily beating the return of T-bills, government bonds, treasuries and all of these non-guaranteed investment vehicles hands down at no extra cost. In addition, none of the investments that you put anything in, Lump for withdrawals, pension annuity, 401k, pre-tax, post-tax, at any period, are immune to the effects of inflation, including Social security, which is Cola'd, so that's pretty much a moot point for comparison purposes. It's sad that some seem to be beating the same dead horse to no avail.
A typical strategy for retirees receiving the guaranteed pension annuity is to rebalance their asset allocation away from the lower performing bonds, since the annuity takes their place and is guaranteed. Their allocation stays the same, except the low-risk (in this case virtually no-risk) portion beats any previously held bond fund or similar out of the water and their growth/higher risk portion is amply increased by the rebalancing - addition of the fixed income. Win-win again for the annuity.

• 2rrgk: Not really that simple, because the Lump will make money if invested (even T bills and AAA corporate bonds, as safe an investment as you can find, will generate 2-3% a year). In my case the annuity payments would take 17.5 years to pay out the lump sum, but during that time the lump invested at 3% returns would grow such that moneys withdrawn at the annuity rate would last almost 35 years. To be clear, those gains in the lump value are calculated under the load of continuing withdrawals at the annuity rate. The bad news is that the REAL value of the annuity-equivalent payments would have dropped by more than half during that time. Obviously the more risk one can accept in lump investments, the better the projected returns (to some reasonable maximum limit). At normal market risk levels for a retiree (diversified 50% stock and 50% bonds), the probable return would be closer to 8%, which would be enough to not only maintain the full value of the lump but also increase withdrawal rates over time to adjust for inflation. If you choose the annuity the payout will be a fixed amount for life, so is not adjusted to offset inflation.

The determining factor of whether the annuity or lump sum will last longest is your mortality age. Nobody knows actually has an idea of when they’ll die unless you already have a sickness when you retire. If you’re healthy, refer to your mortality age. The Society of Actuaries publishes this statistic. If you think you will outlive your statistical mortality age, then choose the annuity, for it will payout more money over your lifetime than the lump sum will last. That’s really how simple it is.

If you do not like reality, just make up your own “facts”....watch Fox News much? All the smart people select an annuity, all the financial calculations show the annuity always does better than investing the lump, and the market is just too dangerous (the annuity having no risk, because inflation is impossible). You live you reality popcorn, and I will live mine, and we will see the results down the line. Good luck.

2rjzp, And I am curious about the obviously false talking points favoring the lump sum, as are you. It has been explained on this thread time and time again that the choices are "actuarially equivalent", the choices are set up so that the company/bankers do not lose money either way. They are not in the business of losing money. It's a personal decision which depends on your particular circumstance. Did you perhaps choose and or planning on choosing the lump sum? Most successful people on here with experience in investing who have reached their target goal chose the annuity to diversify. I am no where near retirement so it doesn't make a rats @ss of difference to me what they say on a thread for layoffs.

Yes, there is indeed an emotionally unstable troll who posts incessantly on this thread. Thanks for pointing that out. He chose the lump sum and is bitter with regret. He is hell-bent on convincing everyone including himself that the lump sum is the best decision and calls everyone who prefers the annuity foolish and all sorts of names, and insults. He is the most fake, insulting and disingenuous on this site. He constantly spews hatred and vitriol. He indeed posts as many "personas", then accuses others of same, which is his only pathetic comeback. It's incredibly obvious due to his speech patterns, post similarities, easily identifiable fake personas, and paranoid insistence that everyone with a differing opinion from his is all the same poster or two. He can't conceive that there are so many wise, successful, wealthy, STEM college educated people who disagree with him - lol. Many retirees with time on their hands must post and, for many reasons find interest in this thread/site and chose the annuity. He will always jump in and claim that it's the same poster coming back since it proves his ill-conceived, non-mathematically supported rhetoric dead wrong. It would be laughable if it wasn't so sad and pathetic. It's also obvious from the readers ratings who is the troll and what the readers prefer. Nice Try, troll.

I’m not yet retired but one could speculate that an emotionally unstable employee who was laid off, took the annuity, then realized too late what he had done could be lashing out here. Trolling is his only happiness as he waits for the next check to appear. He is angry at Chevron, angry at anyone not laid off, and furious at anyone who got the lump sum.

• 2rxyi: You are truly strange...posting the same nonsense again, and again and again. Are you really so lonely that all you have left is trolling a lay-off site (sad) or is there some other motivation that is more opaque.

Yes, the annuity wins under all stock market scenario's. That's the results that I get too when I run my retirement calculator. The lump sum fails and always results in a higher probability of failure in Firecalc. Same as everyone else who runs it who has reported here truthfully. I wonder what the guy posting here incessantly thinks that he is proving by lying about the lump sum being better? Why would anyone do that? Is he trying to justify his poor decision? I guess we'll never know.

To all of you who choose the lump sum buy-out to help reduce Chevron's liability status - Thanks and Chevron says "Thanks" from the bottom of their hearts!. You truly are team players.
Thanks an God bdless you.

I am also curious as to the reason for these obviously false posts making up positive points for the annuity over investing the lump. Difficult to define a motivation. Someone who thinks their annuity stability depends on others joining the system? Some sort of Russian financed demoralizing. Maybe it is just pure trolling, but there must be better forms of entertainment. Very strange no matter what the inspiration.

“under all stock market scenarios”...what are you smoking. Please explain your reasons for continuing to post this obvious nonsense.

The annuity wins over the lump sum under all stock market scenarios, good, bad, feast, famine, stocks up, market down, makes no difference. The lump sum crashes and burns in multiple scenarios and the retirement calculators prove it. There is no secret to this. Keep up your mindless drivel though, if it makes you happy.

2rmtm, You win the award for the most entertaining fictitious, misleading yet carefully crafted BS post to date. Why stop at a Phd? LMMFAO! How long did it take for you to blow your pathetic lump sum on beer and c-gare–es. Bubba? LMAO - too funny, keep 'em coming, don't stop while you're behind!
PS - Don't just "one-up" the last poster by reusing some of his/her terms. It's a dead giveaway. , Not that anyone would believe your drivel in any case.

I have an advanced mathematics background and multiple STEM college degrees (BS, MS, PhD) and can say without qualification that investing the lump has a very very high probability of doing significantly better than the annuity. Full stop, end of story. The only reason to take the annuity is because you can not trust yourself to be responsible with money. If that is the case, and pension is all you have beyond soc security, then taking the annuity is a very good idea. If that is not the case, then taking the annuity is a remarkably bad idea! All that said, do not trust any advice given here. Find a fiduciary financial advisor for at least a one time fee-based consultation!

“Actually, mathematically the numbers favor the annuity over the lump sum”... this is simply wrong, and, more to the point, you know it is wrong, so what is your angle here? You can not point to a single retirement calculator that supports what you say with reference to specific numbers. I guess you made a big mistake and now want others to follow, but why? I hope that you know The stability of the Chevron pension system does not depend on new recruits, but rather is made safe only by continuing corporate profits. Given that, why not just give it a rest and stop making these false statements?

The only scenario favoring the annuity would be the worst stock market performance in the 150 history of the market. Possible? Yes. How I will be risking my retirement money? Never.

The lump sum buyout offered is a lower value than the market value of an equivalent annuity, which is why the annuity is the best choice and the one preferred by college graduates. There's a reason why some people refer to the lump sum as a "no-brainer". That's because without using their heads and doing the math, just wanting some quick cash, some may not think it through and foolishly pick the lower value lump sum.

The annuity is a huge money loser, it is simply there so Chevron doesn't force people to play the stock market who are not up to it. Unfortunately in the current low interest rate environment, the company offers a massive lump sum as an alternative. It's a no brainer.

Actually, mathematically the numbers favor the annuity over the ump sum in all scenarios and on every calculator it has been tested on time and time again. Trinity study based, Monte Carlo simulation, you name it. If you have no financial or advanced mathematics background, or are not a STEM college graduate as many on this site who chose the annuity and have illustrated and volunteered their time with posts, then don't be ashamed and no need to look further. The annuity is the superior choice, hands down. Don't be embarrassed that you are wrong or that you are ignorant of financial assessments and time-based risk analyses or that you unwisely chose the lump sum. We're not judging here, just trying to help.

• 2qpts: there is a fundamental difference between bonds (bond funds) and an annuity. One accepts lower returns from a bond fund because these moneys are doing “something” in reserve, while waiting to be used to buy low when the market crashes. The annuity funds and return amount is locked in for life... that’s it... no upside.

Mathematically, the numbers clearly favor the lump sum in any scenario, as described in great detail in this thread. If math is not your thing and/or stock variances keep you up a night, the annuity is the only other choice.

Bonds, by the way, can rise in value and probably will long term since interest rates are near historic lows. The annuity will lose value every year, guaranteed. Bonds are a dream by comparison.

Yes that is correct, thanks for pointing that out. I get about 6% effective rate of return for my 100% Joint and Survivor Annuity over it's lifetime when we sat down with our advisor and crunched the numbers. I suppose that everyone numbers are a little different depending on time in, PSG and age taking your pension. There's nothing really to disagree about here. Those are just the facts. What's the big deal? No reason to argue anonymously about something that doesn't affect you. I am very happy with both the annuity and lump sum values which were quoted and could go either way, but I think the annuity is mathematically a better deal, as pointed out.

2qpro, By your flawed logic against the annuity, that would mean that any investment which returns below a magical set amount that you came up with. guaranteed or not, it's besides the point, is what you consider a "bad investment". So anyone with anything invested outside of your crystal ball magic ROI, say 5 or 6% or whatever in this case, is a "bad investment". That would include bonds and bond funds. as well as many other mutual funds and ETFs that do not perform up to your magical crystal ball standard and discredits basically anyone's diversified portfolio. That's precious, popcorn girl, is that your name? Don't quit your day job, precious, you'll need it for a while, LMAO!