MARKETS

We Voted for the $2,050 Bet That Killed Our Investment Club

Our five-friend investment club ran three years on boring index ETFs and one charter rule we ignored in eleven seconds. A $2,050 biotech loss ended it. The money was survivable. The ignored rule was not.

Petunia Vaszily
Staff Writer
July 26, 2026 · 6 min read

Wednesday, Mar 12, 2025, 8:40 pm, the back room of the Anchor Pub, one flickering wall sconce, five chairs and only four of us in em, and a brokerage statement being passed around on top of the peanut bowls. Priya slid it across to me face down, which was somehow worse. When I turned it over, the line at the bottom said the club's biotech position was worth $2,950 against $5,000 of cost, and the room went quiet in the specific way a room goes quiet when everyone already knows a number by heart. $2,050 gone. Dev was not there. That absence told us how the vote at the next meeting would go, and it went exactly that way.

The club had $17,410 left, five friends' money pooled at $100 a month each since February 2022, and the absurd thing is that we were up on the whole experiment. Began with a charter, an EIN, a brokerage account, and a mutual sense that investing alone was lonely and investing together would make us smarter. On the last count, before the biotech, our annualized return was 7.9 percent against alot of dinner and one honestly excellent quarterly spreadsheet.

The money was never the wound. We had a rule written on page 3 of our own charter, nine words long, designed to prevent exactly this trade, and four of five friends voted to step over it in eleven seconds of enthusiasm cuz the fifth had printed a phase-three readout calendar. You can split $17,410 five ways and walk away whole. You cannot split the fact that we did that.

five friends, one charter, $100 each

February 2022, my dining room, five of us and a laptop, founding the thing properly because Priya insisted and Priya is invariably right two years before the rest of us. Me, Priya, Dev, Marcus, and Elena, a hundred dollars a month each, autopulled on the fifth, into a brokerage account registered to the partnership with an EIN we still have. The charter ran to six pages and Priya typed it while we argued about the name, which took longer than the rules. Rule one on page 3, under the heading Purchasing Discipline, said: funds and stocks above $1 billion market cap only. Nine words. Every one of us signed page 7 with a pen from my kitchen drawer.

three years of boring funds

For thirty-four months we did the dullest investing imaginable and it worked beautifully. A total-market index ETF as the spine, a dividend fund Elena lobbied for, a Treasury fund Marcus wanted after 2022 scarred him, small rebalances voted on quarterly with real debate about basis points. Our meetings were the second Wednesday of every month at the Anchor, orders shared, positions reviewed against the charter, and one memorable November argument about whether to add international exposure that ended in a yes and a round of beers. Returns, as I said, 7.9 percent annualized. The spreadsheet Priya maintained was, no exaggeration, the most professional object any of us produced that year, and three of us got paid to produce things.

the ticker that broke rule one

Dev worked adjacent to biotech and in December 2024 he arrived with a printout and a glow. A phase-three readout for a cholesterol drug, anticipated June, a company capitalized at $340 million, which every person at that table could hear bumping against rule one's billion-dollar floor. Dev's pitch was eleven minutes long. The vote against the rule took eleven seconds. Marcus raised the charter, actually said the words page 3, and Dev answered with the phrase calculated risk and a story about his colleague who had paid off a car, and we voted 4-0 with one abstention, Marcus, to buy $3,000 at $2.10 a share. I remember feeling the specific thrill of breaking a rule that existed for a version of us we did not wanna be. That thrill is a product, and somebody was selling it to us for free.

the $2,000 average-down

June came, the readout slipped to October, and the stock halved on a financing announcement, a dilution at $1.05 that any boring ETF would never have had to hear about. Dev's response was mathematical and fatal: averaging down, $2,000 more at what he called the floor, our own capital thrown after the first lot in the exact shape the charter's diversification section, page 4, existed to prevent. The vote was 3-2 this time. Priya voted no with an actual physical copy of the charter on the table, and I voted yeah, which is the sentence I would erase from my own history if I could. Total position, $5,000. It was the largest single bet the club ever made, in our most speculative name, made at the moment of maximum pain instead of maximum sense.

what the argument was actually about

By March 2025 the position was worth $2,950 and the meetings had become forensic. Marcus wanted out and a rule against individual stocks under any cap. Dev wanted one more quarter for the readout that had slipped again. Priya, and this is the part I respect most in retrospect, never once argued about the drug or the science, and only ever pointed at page 3, because her position was that we were not having an investment argument at all. We were having a governance argument about whether documents we sign mean anything when a friend is excited. Eleven seconds, February 2022 through December 2024, we were a rules-based partnership. Eleven seconds in December 2024, we were five individuals sharing a login. The $2,050 was just the invoice for the difference.

the April split, $3,482 each

We dissolved at the April meeting, unanimously, which was the only unanimous thing that spring. The mechanics were clean cuz Priya had kept the ledger: $17,410 remained after the biotech mark, we sold everythin on April 15 and distributed $3,482 to each partner, and the EIN paperwork to close the partnership took Dev, of all people, one efficient evenin. Nobody yelled. Dev apologized for the averaging down, not for the original pick, which he still defends in a way I find almost noble. The treasury position had made money, the dividend fund had made money, and every boring thing we owned paid for the one interesting thing. There is a sermon in that and all five of us have privately written it.

dinner club, no ledger

Four of us still meet monthly, same back room, no agenda, no brokerage login, no treasurer's report, and Dev comes when his schedule allows, which is most months now, and nobody screens his printouts because there is nothin to screen. Each of us owns a plain index fund privately, auto-contributed, unmentioned, unargued. At one dinner in the fall someone floated, as a joke with a real question inside it, splitting the cost of an hour with a fee-only investment advisor to review whether we had all absorbed anything, and we voted that idea down in eleven seconds too, laughing, because some reflexes outlive their context. June 2026, Dev's readout ultimately landed, the drug worked, and the stock rose 60 percent off a base we no longer owned. He texted the chart to the group with no commentary. Priya reacted with a thumbs up, which might be the most emotionally mature thing I have ever witnessed.

page 3, kept in a drawer

I keep a photocopy of the charter in my desk drawer, page 3 on top, nine words highlighted in yellow by someone, I think Marcus, the night we dissolved. Funds and stocks above $1 billion market cap only. It is the cheapest education I have ever purchased, $410 per person plus three years of dinner, and I would pay it again except for the part where I lost the club. Next month we are back at the Anchor on a Wednesday, the sconce still flickering, last I heard. The statement comes around face up now, somebody's phone with a portfolio on it, and the numbers on it are boring in a way I intend to protect for an awfully long time.