-
Stock Market
-
Facebook
I think it’s a trend or a fad that will be replaced by something else. I wouldn’t touch it long term
But, I was wrong about google so what do I know
The only way Facebook becomes a great investment is if it innovates and gets into other markets like Google did
I think it’s risky to think it will do that
-
agree with fb. The multi-app eco system model has some merits, but i don’t see significant growth in its future.
aapl has definitely set itself to go sig higher in the next few years with the split. A tech company with a PE of 12 with great earnings and a stock price south of $100? While I wouldn’t jump in today, it’s definitely going to be trading higher than this in December.
Any new products coming out q3 or so such as an iwatch will only make the slope more steep, but I don’t see how money put in today wont beat the indices for the next year or so..
fwiw, i think tsla has peaked and will be in trading range until we start getting model x out the door. The short squeeze is over =(.
-
i really wish nflx would buy amc networks. They already have a great relationship, but that would decimate any thoughts of competition from amzn or aapl.
-
For a while I was hoping aapl would buy nflx.
But then I realized with iTunes and their licensing prowess they already have a distribution network and so they don’t need nflx. They only need a strong campaign to port iTunes to TV.
Two things they really need before they can win the industry:
1. wait until most others weigh in with their competition (e.g., amzn, amc, sony, etc.),
2. introduce a broadband mux without the associated increase in price for multiple channels. Perhaps even purchase Broadcom outright.
-
Quote from Lux
For a while I was hoping aapl would buy nflx.
But then I realized with iTunes and their licensing prowess they already have a distribution network and so they don’t need nflx. They only need a strong campaign to port iTunes to TV.
Two things they really need before they can win the industry:
1. wait until most others weigh in with their competition (e.g., amzn, amc, sony, etc.),
2. introduce a broadband mux without the associated increase in price for multiple channels. Perhaps even purchase Broadcom outright.
Or they could just actually spend their $$$$$$$$ and actually start producing exclusive content. House of cards did more for nflx (and the streaming industry) than any acquisition or licensing agreement did. In the future, getting these online distribution agreements will get very expensive and dicey. Having a pipeline of exclusive content (because you OWN it, not because of some piece of paper that has to be renewed) is the best way to maintain a user-base.
-
Quote from Adeelmd
Or they could just actually spend their $$$$$$$$ and actually start producing exclusive content. House of cards did more for nflx (and the streaming industry) than any acquisition or licensing agreement did. In the future, getting these online distribution agreements will get very expensive and dicey. Having a pipeline of exclusive content (because you OWN it, not because of some piece of paper that has to be renewed) is the best way to maintain a user-base.
Absolutely. I suppose a lot of it has to do with how much of the distribution channel aapl has locked up in its IP. If it owns the entire iTunes concept, then it may be tougher for Netflix to compete on portable devices — e.g., do we know for sure who is paying who for what royalty so that Samsung can put Netflix streaming on their smart phones?
-
There is a huge opportunity in content delivery to TV’s. Cable and/or Direct TV command huge amounts of money for home TV content. They force you to pay for 200 channels when you only watch five of those. Many household’s TV bill is over $100/mo. Netflix and Apple TV lack channel content such as History cannel, science channel, the network channels or FOX news.
If Apple can figure out a way to allow selected TV channels to be purchased on a per channel or per click basis, many would drop their ridiculously expensive cable bills.-
Quote from aldadoc
There is a huge opportunity in content delivery to TV’s. Cable and/or Direct TV command huge amounts of money for home TV content. They force you to pay for 200 channels when you only watch five of those. Many household’s TV bill is over $100/mo. Netflix and Apple TV lack channel content such as History cannel, science channel, the network channels or FOX news.
If Apple can figure out a way to allow selected TV channels to be purchased on a per channel or per click basis, many would drop their ridiculously expensive cable bills.
Agreed. But do they even have to have live streaming channels? Outside of news shows, there isn’t really a need for 24 hour live streaming; just rather a listing of all the programs offered by the channel and on demand viewing of whatever episode you want to see. My kids for example are so used to netflix and youtube they have no concept of watching a show at a specific air time (nor would they rearrange their schedule for a show). With DVR’s if its been a few years since I set it to autorecord I pretty much forget when the program aired and just check to see if anything new got recored.
As for sports, Apple TV has been my main source (mlb network) for a couple of years. It streams the games live, and gives you the option of watching any previous regular season game on demand if you’d like. That’s how I want all my sports!
-
Even for news, 24/7 “news” streaming degrades the news. CNN is absolutely great followed by everyone else in breathlessly streaming non-events as they “happen.”
-
Quote from Adeelmd
Quote from aldadoc
There is a huge opportunity in content delivery to TV’s. Cable and/or Direct TV command huge amounts of money for home TV content. They force you to pay for 200 channels when you only watch five of those. Many household’s TV bill is over $100/mo. Netflix and Apple TV lack channel content such as History cannel, science channel, the network channels or FOX news.
If Apple can figure out a way to allow selected TV channels to be purchased on a per channel or per click basis, many would drop their ridiculously expensive cable bills.
Agreed. But do they even have to have live streaming channels? Outside of news shows, there isn’t really a need for 24 hour live streaming; just rather a listing of all the programs offered by the channel and on demand viewing of whatever episode you want to see. My kids for example are so used to netflix and youtube they have no concept of watching a show at a specific air time (nor would they rearrange their schedule for a show). With DVR’s if its been a few years since I set it to autorecord I pretty much forget when the program aired and just check to see if anything new got recored.
As for sports, Apple TV has been my main source (mlb network) for a couple of years. It streams the games live, and gives you the option of watching any previous regular season game on demand if you’d like. That’s how I want all my sports!
Streaming seems to be more and more the main stream, no pun intended. I actually think the big thing to watch for is the Aereo company (think I got the name right). They are taking over the air signals which are free and turning them into signals you get over their service. It’s pretty cool. I think it’s going to the supreme court as the cable companies will probably fight tooth and nail not to let you get networks that way.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Quote from DICOM_Dan
I actually think the big thing to watch for is the Aereo company (think I got the name right). They are taking over the air signals which are free and turning them into signals you get over their service. It’s pretty cool. I think it’s going to the supreme court as the cable companies will probably fight tooth and nail not to let you get networks that way.
Arguments were earlier this week. I heard the summary.
The craziest thing about it was hearing how little technological know how our SCOTUS justices have overall. They don’t even understand the basics of the internet, subscription broadcasting, or the cloud. Some of the quotes from the justices (both liberal and conservative I might add) were off in left field on the tech of the case.
Mashable did a nice “Rank the Justices in their tech IQ” piece on it. Scalia came in last place (which was 8th since once again Thomas didn’t say a word). Sotomayor wins at #1 … she has a Roku.
[h3]8. Associate Justice Antonin Scalia[/h3] The most embarrassing comments of the oral arguments came from Scalia. At one point he indicated that he did not know that HBO is a paid premium cable channel, thinking instead that it is available for free over the airwaves.
[h3]1. Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor[/h3] Sotomayor, who was appointed by President Obama, demonstrated a good grip of the technology and some of the nuances involved in the Aereo case. At one point, she asked a lawyer for the broadcasters: “How about Simple.TV or Nimble.TV, which is not quite a hybrid?” Both of those services are newcomers to the scene. She also asked questions about how Aereo relates to other cloud computing and streaming companies, like Roku, iCloud and Dropbox.
[link=http://www.ringoffireradio.com/2014/04/scotus-doesnt-understand-technology-can-decide-aereo/]http://www.ringoffireradi…logy-can-decide-aereo/[/link] -
Go Apple, back to 700 then split
I would even settle for 650-
Quote from irayd8u
Go Apple, back to 700 then split
I would even settle for 650
Only at $614 today. But that’s good pre-split.
__
In other news:
[b]S&P 500 Closes Above 1,900 for First Time [/b]
[link=http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-05-23/u-s-index-futures-little-changed-before-home-sales-data.html]http://www.bloomberg.com/…e-home-sales-data.html[/link]-
Sell it soon
Buy it when falls back 15-20%
-
Quote from kpack123
Sell it soon
Buy it when falls back 15-20%
Market timing doesn’t work for the vast majority of people.
Quote from aldadoc
Sold out of all equities today. Even my favorite, Apple. Things just seem to be too unstable and artificially propped up by the central banks. Going Galt to the sidelines for a while.
Like this. A judgement in late 2012 based on a gut feeling that, if it had been executed as per your recommendation to “Buy it when it falls back 15-20%” would still be on the sidelines in cash…. and having missed a 30% rally.
-
It’s not going much higher
This recent spike is due to smoke and mirrors of a stock split
It’s a great wonderful fantastic company but it is a company like many of its blue chip predecessors that is settling into a multi year trading range
Go look at IBM, Microsoft, Intel, Oracle etc. all great companies hit these periods when the reality sets in that they can no longer continue to grow like a start up
apples dead money for many years unless you buy on dips and sell on highs
-
Oh. I thought you were saying “sell the [b]market[/b]” generally and wait for a 15-20% dip.
Individual stock AAPL … *shrugs* yeah … I suppose you could do that. I’d wait to post split though. The “smoke & mirrors” will probably run a while longer with the press leading up to and immediately after the split.
-
How many stocks stall immediately after a split?
I think it would be foolish to sell AAPL now and not enjoy what surely will be a post-split double-digit expansion.-
If I could time the market perfectly, I’d be a tycoon
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
The Dow Jones Industrial Average and S&P 500 are on their way to close at [link=http://www.businessinsider.com/closing-bell-may-9-2014-5]new highs.[/link]
The Dow actually set a new intraday high of 16,699.55 earlier today. On Friday, the Dow set an all-time closing high of 16,583.34.
The S&P 500 is above its record closing high of 1,890.90, which occured on April 2. Currently, it’s just 2 points from its all-time intraday high of 1,897.28.[link=http://www.businessinsider.com/stock-market-update-may-12-2014-2014-5#ixzz31X18CtlI]http://www.businessinsider.com/stock-market-update-may-12-2014-2014-5#ixzz31X18CtlI[/link]
-
I think I might get my pre split wish 650
-
Quote from irayd8u
I think I might get my pre split wish 650
Split at 93.70. That’s $655.90 …. nice.
btw, for the AAPL is dead money crowd ….. from my personal buy point at just after Steve Jobs death AAPL is a slight out-perform on the S&P 500….and that’s during one of the greatest S&P 500 bull markets in history.
-
My opinion. The only real money to be made from Apple over the next several years is on peaks and valley trading or it’s dividend
It is not going to double for a long time
Just my ameteur opinion
Not sure there are any screaming buys at the moment. Recently I loaded up on more pipeline and Nat Gas suppliers and Pfizer when it dipped, but other than that I’m setting tight for a while
-
The cost of healthcare is a top-tier bipartisan issue in the USA. Anyone that can significantly reduce the cost of healthcare will get pretty much unlimited help from just about any politician, from Mayor to POTUS.
Assuming Apple’s IP is strong, if they can prove to CMS that its upcoming mobile medical product technology can provide clinical solutions at a significantly lower cost per code and/or within the healthcare industry as well as the provider infrastructure, the stock will double in no time at all. Don’t forget their P/E is [i]still[/i] only around 15. It’s ready for just that kind of new product paradigm.
But if it turns out that they’re only targeting the sports and hobbyist segment, then consider selling.
-
All great companies mature
When they do they catch up to their previous astronomical year after year rate of growth and stagnate for a 5-10 year period
Other companies enter their markets and chip away at them. New fads and trends occur
Go look at IBM, Microsoft, Intel, GE etc
Apple is no different
-
Well, it depends on what is meant by “new fads and trends”. It’s one thing to shrink the size of a tablet or add 3D to a phone’s display as examples of a fad or trend, but it’s another thing to dive into a huge industry like healthcare which is going through it’s own re-engineering that’s groping for drastic economic solutions. The latter is not an incremental fad or trend, it’s a paradigm shift with huge growth opportunity for the keeper of the IP.
This development of Apple getting into the healthcare business is not a new fad or trend announcement. Apple has been working on this concept for years. I got my first call from them in 2010 inquiring about the utility of using an iPhone to achieve remote, mobile diagnosis. Since then, GE has started using Macs as the main controller workstation in their capital equipment suites. And so more recently, the announcement of consumer apps in healthcare is no isolated trend. Rather, I believe it is an indication of a new expansion paradigm that offers huge, not incremental, potential for growth. The same thing happened when they introduced the iPhone when all they had were computers before that. And no one considers the iPhone an “incremental” growth step for the company. The iPhone helped triple their stock in a few years, during the Great Recession no less!
Of course desktop computers, iPhone, and iPad were all Jobs’ brainchildren. Whether AAPL has now retained a thinktank of healthcare visionaries remains to be seen.
In that regard, let’s also keep our eye on Samsung. With those two companies battling it out we should see some major new developments that have a positive impact on healthcare economics over the next few years.
-
-
[link=http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-06-27/s-p-500-heads-for-longest-rally-since-1998-on-economy.html]http://www.bloomberg.com/…e-1998-on-economy.html[/link]
[b]S&P 500 Heads for Longest Rally Since 1998 on Economy, Global Stimulus[/b]
The [link=http://www.bloomberg.com/quote/SPX:IND]Standard & Poors 500 Index (SPX)[/link] is one trading day away from completing the longest stretch of quarterly gains in 16 years, as central bank stimulus and confidence in economic growth sent stocks to all-time highs.
The [link=http://topics.bloomberg.com/s%26p-500/]S&P 500[/link] has climbed 4.7 percent to 1,960.96 for the three months, poised for a sixth quarterly gain, the longest stretch since 1998. The Dow Jones [link=http://www.bloomberg.com/quote/INDU:IND]Industrial Average (INDU)[/link] added 394.18 points, or 2.4 percent, to 16,851.84. The Nasdaq Composite Index has jumped 4.7 percent and the [link=http://topics.bloomberg.com/russell-2000/]Russell 2000[/link] Index is up 1.4 percent.
The S&P 500 rose to an [link=http://www.bloomberg.com/quote/SPX:IND]all-time high[/link] of 1,962.87 on June 20 as data from employment to housing fueled confidence that the [link=http://topics.bloomberg.com/u.s.-economy/]U.S. economy[/link] is rebounding after the worst contraction in gross domestic product since 2009. The index held at record levels in the latest week, falling only 0.1 percent for the five days, in the face of conflicts in Iraq and Ukraine, weaker-than-anticipated economic data and concern over rising rates. -
AAPL pushing towards its all-time high (up 3% to $97.50). Profit margins still higher than the rest of the industry, new product line expected to do well (but perhaps parasitize the iPad with a larger-screen iPhone), returns continue to outpace S&P 500.
It’s only 0.7% of my portfolio, but when Apple performs well it make me happy. 🙂
___
Speaking of the S&P …. it was at another all-time high mid-day today.
-
Quote from dergon
AAPL pushing towards its all-time high (up 3% to $97.50). Profit margins still higher than the rest of the industry, new product line expected to do well (but perhaps parasitize the iPad with a larger-screen iPhone), returns continue to outpace S&P 500.
It’s only 0.7% of my portfolio, but when Apple performs well it make me happy. 🙂
___
Speaking of the S&P …. it was at another all-time high mid-day today.
I got a nice gain on Chipolte the other day. They also make a good product line, better than Qdoba who lacks structural integrity in their burrito manufacturing. I bought some towards the bottom, and los burritos have done much better than I’d have expected.-
Quote from DICOM_Dan
Quote from dergon
AAPL pushing towards its all-time high (up 3% to $97.50). Profit margins still higher than the rest of the industry, new product line expected to do well (but perhaps parasitize the iPad with a larger-screen iPhone), returns continue to outpace S&P 500.
It’s only 0.7% of my portfolio, but when Apple performs well it make me happy. 🙂
___
Speaking of the S&P …. it was at another all-time high mid-day today.
I got a nice gain on Chipolte the other day. They also make a good product line, better than Qdoba who lacks structural integrity in their burrito manufacturing. I bought some towards the bottom, and los burritos have done much better than I’d have expected.
Qdoba is right next door to the hospital. I get a free drink with my ID. So I go there … but Chipotle is much better 🙂-
Quote from dergon
Quote from DICOM_Dan
Quote from dergon
AAPL pushing towards its all-time high (up 3% to $97.50). Profit margins still higher than the rest of the industry, new product line expected to do well (but perhaps parasitize the iPad with a larger-screen iPhone), returns continue to outpace S&P 500.
It’s only 0.7% of my portfolio, but when Apple performs well it make me happy. 🙂
___
Speaking of the S&P …. it was at another all-time high mid-day today.
I got a nice gain on Chipolte the other day. They also make a good product line, better than Qdoba who lacks structural integrity in their burrito manufacturing. I bought some towards the bottom, and los burritos have done much better than I’d have expected.
Qdoba is right next door to the hospital. I get a free drink with my ID. So I go there … but Chipotle is much better 🙂
Do they do that for everyone with an ID? Qdoba has the superior beverage dispensing technology. I might have to walk over there and get Diet Dr Pepper with cherry/vanilla added. I usually conceal my identity when I’m off site.
Chipolte NYSE:CMG trading up 10 cents today at $661, Jack in the Box, NASDAQ:JACK (Qdoba) trading down 50cent at $56.90. Although they appear to pay a dividend.-
Quote from DICOM_Dan
Quote from dergon
Quote from DICOM_Dan
Quote from dergon
AAPL pushing towards its all-time high (up 3% to $97.50). Profit margins still higher than the rest of the industry, new product line expected to do well (but perhaps parasitize the iPad with a larger-screen iPhone), returns continue to outpace S&P 500.
It’s only 0.7% of my portfolio, but when Apple performs well it make me happy. 🙂
___
Speaking of the S&P …. it was at another all-time high mid-day today.
I got a nice gain on Chipolte the other day. They also make a good product line, better than Qdoba who lacks structural integrity in their burrito manufacturing. I bought some towards the bottom, and los burritos have done much better than I’d have expected.
Qdoba is right next door to the hospital. I get a free drink with my ID. So I go there … but Chipotle is much better 🙂
Do they do that for everyone with an ID? Qdoba has the superior beverage dispensing technology. I might have to walk over there and get Diet Dr Pepper with cherry/vanilla added. I usually conceal my identity when I’m off site.
Chipolte NYSE:CMG trading up 10 cents today at $661, Jack in the Box, NASDAQ:JACK (Qdoba) trading down 50cent at $56.90. Although they appear to pay a dividend.
They do indeed have a funky pop dispenser.
They give CWRU ID holders free soda 🙂
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Commercial spam in the post above.
-
Here’s where I have made my big bets this year: Apple, Facebook, Gilead, Biogen, Boeing, Haliburton, Tesla, JP Morgan and Amazon. So far, so good.
-
Boeing and Facebook?
Interesting bet. What’s up with them?-
Facebook is kicking butt. Boeing earnings beat estimates, but forward guidance lacking. Plenty of orders. They are due for a run.
-
just buy the index.
-
Quote from macrophallus
just buy the index.
Yeah! Like I said. My AAPL is less than 1% of my portfolio and that is the only individual stock I own.
My biggest holdings are Indexes on the S&P 500, Total Stock Market, US Small Cap, and a MSCI — all with the lowest expense ratios I can find.-
For index funds I like IYY and VOO.
-
Correction?
Buy the dip?
-
[link=http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-08-19/apple-soars-to-record-amid-optimism-about-coming-products.html]http://www.bloomberg.com/…t-coming-products.html[/link]
[b]Apple Soars to Record Amid Optimism About Coming Products[/b]
[link=http://www.bloomberg.com/quote/AAPL:US]Apple Inc. (AAPL)[/link]s stock closed at an all-time high, surpassing a 2012 record as investors look ahead to new products such as bigger-screen iPhones and a wristwatch-like device that may jump-start revenue growth.
Apple rose 1.4 percent to $100.53, topping the split-adjusted record of $100.30 reached on Sept. 19, 2012, just before the iPhone 5 went on sale. The shares have gained 25 percent this year.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Of course I sold my shares yesterday
-
You could have done worse 🙂
-
Lately, every time there is a sell-off I have no money to invest in Common stocks, but I do increase my 403 retirement monthly investment a little bit.
-
-
-
It’s not doable on a consistent and sustained basis macro.
I guess you are referring to the imperfections in the micro cap market. Researching pink sheet and venture companies is a full time career in itself.Just watched Wolf of Wall St on Netflix last night – excellent movie. The central character reminds me very much of a young accountant I had to let go a few years ago.
-
Quote from kpack123
My opinion only
Companies with a long 10 plus years of increasing dividends is the key.
Just playing devil’s advocate – here is the annual report for Enron for the year 2000 – looks like it fits your criteria with almost 15 years of dividend growth. [b]Enron was also considered best of breed [/b][i][b]at the time[/b]………….[/i]
[link=http://picker.uchicago.edu/Enron/EnronAnnualReport2000.pdf]http://picker.uchicago.ed…onAnnualReport2000.pdf[/link]
Could do the same for Merrill Lynch, Citibank, Bank of America, Royal Bank of Scotland, Washington Mutual, AIG group etc……….. All highly rated within 6 months of their respective implosions………….-
You are not hearing what I’m saying
Look at the charts for the dividend aristocrats.
Not any dividend just dividends with a proven track record. when they cut dividend you sell
WGL
FRT
DUK
SO
SYY
PPL
SE
UIL
AV
T
KO
CL
XOM
MCD
JNJDon’t just buy a stock because it pays a dividend. Buy stocks that have a long history of increasing their dividends for extended periods of time
-
Quote from adopted canuck
Quote from kpack123
My opinion only
Companies with a long 10 plus years of increasing dividends is the key.
Just playing devil’s advocate – here is the annual report for Enron for the year 2000 – looks like it fits your criteria with almost 15 years of dividend growth. [b]Enron was also considered best of breed [/b][i][b]at the time[/b]………….[/i]
[link=http://picker.uchicago.edu/Enron/EnronAnnualReport2000.pdf]http://picker.uchicago.ed…onAnnualReport2000.pdf[/link]
Could do the same for Merrill Lynch, Citibank, Bank of America, Royal Bank of Scotland, Washington Mutual, AIG group etc……….. All highly rated within 6 months of their respective implosions………….
Quote from kpack123
You are not hearing what I’m saying
Look at the charts for the dividend aristocrats.
Not any dividend just dividends with a proven track record.
WGL
FRT
DUK
SO
SYY
PPL
SE
UIL
AV
T
KO
CL
XOM
MCD
JNJDon’t just buy a stock because it pays a dividend. Buy stocks that have a long history of increasing their dividends for extended periods of time
I think he is hearing you.
I’ll reference the same article I did above
[b]Question: Rather than investing in a portfolio of index funds, would I not be better off by simply assembling a collection of well-known individual stocks that have a history of increasing their dividends?[/b]
[b]Answer: There is an enormous problem with assembling a portfolio of individual stocks based on a characteristic (such as increasing dividends) that you see today and then assuming that any historical alpha (return above a risk-appropriate benchmark) would persist into the future. Namely, you are making the assumption that you would have chosen the exact same stocks at the beginning of the period. Not only would some of todays stocks not been chosen say twenty years ago based on the dividend criteria, but there would have been other stocks that you would have chosen that did not deliver positive alpha, to put it mildly. We can think about this as an example of survivorship bias, which makes the average historical returns of active managers look higher than what they truly are because the ones that fail are excluded. [/b]
Example: At this point, it may help to look at some specific examples. Twenty years ago, a blue chip portfolio of dividend paying stocks likely would have included General Motors, and if you recall from the 2009 bankruptcy, GMs common shareholders were completely wiped out. Investors who reinvested their dividends through GMs DRIP got a minus 100% (total loss) return on their investment. Seven years ago, General Electric was widely considered to be among the best dividend-paying stocks, but in 2009, it slashed its dividend by 67% after its share price dropped by 56% in 2008. Thus, it would not be included in a portfolio that would be assembled today. From the opposite prospective, Apple is now considered a solid dividend-paying stock, and its very high historical return would substantially boost the historical return of a portfolio that includes it. However, twenty years ago, Apple was paying no dividend, so it would not have been included in a model portfolio.
[b][/b]
-
You are always going to be able to find a few out of the mainstream examples aka an outlier
But that doesn’t prove anything. It’s not a perfect strategy and not without some risk
Yes your portfolio of 20 stocks may have included one bum but your other 19 have quadrupled and your yield is now 50% per year on your original investment
Try getting that with an index fund
I bought 200 shares of FRT in 1993 for an initial investment of 4000$
Today I own 850 shares worth 100 grand and a yearly dividend of 2500$
Like I said try getting that in an index fund
-
Kpack – i hear you loud and clear. The companies I listed above are not outliers – they were highly respected indeed “venerable” institutions at the time. Dergon added GE and GM for further examples. I ordered the 2000 enron annual report way back – because I was intrigued as to how it was making money. I was still none the wiser after investing 4 or 5 hours reading it.
As stated in the post above – the stars of today that you will no doubt be considering – for the “[i][b]elite dividend portfolio[/b][/i]” – will not be the stars in 10 years time. I can’t prove this – because you haven’t fully specified the criteria for inclusion – but the “[i][b]dogs of the dow[/b][/i]” has a statistically more likely chance of beating that strategy.
I honestly wish you all the best – this is not a personal attack, but as physicians we have big ego’s. We think we are destined to be right most of the time. We assume we are able to analyze companies and sort out the wheat from the chaff because we are successful for the most part with our patients. Stock picking can’t be done on a consistent or sustained basis…………………… Can you really pull apart a MD&A and an annual statement? Do you really have time to invest in learning the skills to do so? I know I can’t…………….
Your biggest investment is almost certainly your career, and the earning potential that it generates………….. That is the actively managed part of any rad’s portfolio.-
They are outliers
I gave you 20 that are not
And that was just if the top of my head
That being said, the strategy isn’t 100% foolproof! but you could get hit by a bus tomorrow too
Nothing’s perfect but this has worked well for me and based on total dollar of everything I invested over 10 years ago has at more than doubled in equity and my yearly returns from dividends alone are 30% of my original investment
That’s pretty good and I sleep easy
-
I’ve always been a huge Jeremy Seigel fan
Best free advice available. Inmho
-
Stocks for the long run is an essential read! Seigel makes a great case for equity investing…………… definitely the best asset class for the long term.
The contention is – can you really pick correctly in every sector? – coca cola over pepsico? Pfizer over Merck? Exxon over BP??? It’s a crapshoot…………………….
-
The odds aren’t perfect but it’s better than a crap shoot if you are diversified
And it’s a lot safer to especially in down markets
-
Quote from kpack123
The odds aren’t perfect but it’s better than a crap shoot if you are diversified
And it’s a lot safer to especially in down markets
But unless you have a short time horizon a down market shouldn’t matter to you. Unless you plan to sell you ride out the peak and valleys.
While it is true that there is less volatility in Div equities it is important to rememebr that they are still stocks. Dividend stocks still dropped 25-30% in the great recession. Yeah, that’s better than 50%, but it’s not “safe”. And the majority of dividend paying companies reduced or halted their dividend in the crash too.
My bottom line continues to be — if you have a long time horizon and are an average investor you are still likely to outperform dividends with a low cost broad index fund in the long run all things considered.
-
Quote from dergon
Quote from kpack123
The odds aren’t perfect but it’s better than a crap shoot if you are diversified
And it’s a lot safer to especially in down markets
But unless you have a short time horizon a down market shouldn’t matter to you. Unless you plan to sell you ride out the peak and valleys.
While it is true that there is less volatility in Div equities it is important to rememebr that they are still stocks. Dividend stocks still dropped 25-30% in the great recession. Yeah, that’s better than 50%, but it’s not “safe”. [style=”color: #ff0000;”]And the majority of dividend paying companies reduced or halted their dividend in the crash too. [/style]
My bottom line continues to be — if you have a long time horizon and are an average investor you are still likely to outperform dividends with a low cost broad index fund in the long run all things considered.
+1
Under the active management strategy outlinedin other posts above – you [style=”color: #ff0000;”]sell once the dividend is reduced[/style] – therefore you accumulate at a premium and sell when the stock price is diminished. Ill stick with dollar cost averaging a basket of index funds……………. -
Dividend reinvestment is dollar cost averaging
With the caveat of no fees
I know Vanguard claims low fees but research them deeper. While their fees are lower than others, they still hide fees that they do not include in their published fees
If it works for you that’s great.
Like frank Sinatra sang—– I did it my way and my way has way out performed the basket of funds I hold in a small part of my IRA. In fact it’s not even close
Looking back I’ve only had to sell twice over the past 20 years from my basket of stocks because of reduced dividend. And I’ve held over 30 stocks for the past 15 years. Even those 2 instances I still had a gain
One time I did not sell and that was with Pfizer, when they cut their dividend and the price went to 18, I bought a boat load more because I like the companies 15 year horizon
Whatever works
-
Seems that you would like
Vanguard Dividend Appreciation Index Fund Admiral Shares (VDADX)
Quote from kpack123
Dividend reinvestment is dollar cost averaging
With the caveat of no fees
I know Vanguard claims low fees but research them deeper. While their fees are lower than others, they still hide fees that they do not include in their published fees
If it works for you that’s great.
Like frank Sinatra sang—– I did it my way and my way has way out performed the basket of funds I hold in a small part of my IRA. In fact it’s not even close
Looking back I’ve only had to sell twice over the past 20 years from my basket of stocks because of reduced dividend. And I’ve held over 30 stocks for the past 15 years. Even those 2 instances I still had a gain
One time I did not sell and that was with Pfizer, when they cut their dividend and the price went to 18, I bought a boat load more because I like the companies 15 year horizon
Whatever works
-
Quote from NYPhD
Seems that you would like
Vanguard Dividend Appreciation Index Fund Admiral Shares (VDADX)
+1
Tiny expense ratio and a good bet.
I am slowly building a position in VBTLX as I get older………………
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Quote from kpack123
You are not hearing what I’m saying
Look at the charts for the dividend aristocrats.
Not any dividend just dividends with a proven track record.[i][b] when they cut dividend you sell[/b][/i][/style]
Don’t just buy a stock because it pays a dividend. Buy stocks that have a long history of increasing their dividends for extended periods of time
Seems like one of your more successful trades was ignoring this strategy!
-
Actually that wasn’t even one of my top 10 successful trades
Best trade by far was putting 4 grand in FRT 20 yrs ago. After div reinvestment for all these years it worth over 100 grand and paying over 2500 bucks a year in dividends.
The yearly dividend alone 60% return per year on original investment and it increases every year by increasing dividend and repurchase of more shares
Try getting that from a mutual fund……haha
But you stick to your mutual funds and smile while they tell you they are low cost.
-
Quote from kpack123
Actually that wasn’t even one of my top 10 successful trades
Best trade by far was putting 4 grand in FRT 20 yrs ago. After div reinvestment for all these years it worth over 100 grand and paying over 2500 bucks a year in dividends.
The yearly dividend alone 60% return per year on original investment and it increases every year by increasing dividend and repurchase of more shares
Try getting that from a mutual fund……haha
But you stick to your mutual funds and smile while they tell you they are low cost.
You are the consummate stock picker kpack! Strong recollection of successful trades and amnesia for the duds………….
-
To the contrary
I rembember my losses best of all
MCI World com went bankrupt- lost 8,000 Fng Bernie Ebbers that no good right wing Christian SOB
Also got burned in
Advanced digital bankrupt- lost 3000
Lucent- lost 7500
Citibank for 15,000- although I’m holding it on the hopes it comes backThose are my losers. Never forget them
I will tell you this I have never missed one one and often quadrupled my initial investment on every stock I’ve ever bought that had a 25 plus year of increasing their dividend.
Never once
-
-
-
-
-
-
A strong dividend reinvestment portfolio benefits from a bear market
Your dividend stays even or increases but the share price is less
So you buy more shares
When the price goes back up to normal range you make that much more
You see what I mean
-
As Seigel would say
The power of compounding
-
-
The only way to fairly judge is to compared your returns to what you could have got from a passive strategy. This tells you if your efforts are really adding value.
I have a diversified approach holding many different asset classes but I still compare myself to what I could have gotten in a passive index or target date fund.-
I think if anything the last 20-post discussion has affirmed that he believes his strategy has beat the passive approach.
-
If you are young. This will work for you. This is strictly long term and boring but it works. I already have my kids invested in this
Look up s and p dividend aristocrats ( these are companies that have raised….. Not only paid but raised their dividend for at least 25 years).
Buy 100 shares of 5 of your favorites immediately enroll in their dividend reinvestment plan. Add to it extra cash/ shares when you feel like it. Keep a weekly eye on things just to make sure nothing crazy happens and then sit back and watch it grow
You don’t even need a brokerage account for these companies as you can buy them straight from the company. Thus you never pay a fee. Never. Sone companies even give you a 1-4% discount on the dividend purchased shares………. So on top of the 3-5% dividend you are getting an automatic additional gain.
It doesn’t take much to average 15% a year long term
You will wake up in 20 yrs and realize you are sitting on a huge pile of savings
-
Getting a dividend is not a “gain”. Dividends are not wealth creators.
Example:
$100 bond with $3 interest = $103 = wealth creation.
$100 stock with $3 dividend = $97 stock ex-div + $3 = $100
Think about this for a while. You are really relying on stock price appreciation for wealth creation in dividend strategy also. So you are better off investing in S&P 500 as it will certainly appreciate more. Dividend strategy may be ok for those looking for income and a little growth, like near retirement etc.
Not for a younger rad that can sock away large amounts and retirement is far off.-
Quote from macrophallus
You are really relying on stock price appreciation for wealth creation in dividend strategy also. So you are better off investing in S&P 500 as it will certainly appreciate more.
He’s saying that he can pick stocks that outperform the market and has his own empirical proof. Not gonna change his mind bud. Let’s let this one go into the night ..
-
[b]$100 bond with $3 interest = $103 = wealth creation. [/b]
[b]$100 stock with $3 dividend = $97 stock ex-div + $3 = $100 [/b]
I am not following you because on paper I still have 100 dollar stock that pays you 3 bucks a year. Your basically telling me because a stock of 100 pays a 3 dollar dividend it is only worth 97 dollars. I am saying if I can sell that stock for 100 dollars then its worth 100 dollars and I can then either put the 3 dollars in my pocket or reinvest it to buy mor shares. Either way I still have 103 dollars
I dont follow your point
[b]Think about this for a while. You are really relying on stock price appreciation for wealth creation in dividend strategy also. So you are better off investing in S&P 500 as it will certainly appreciate more. [/b]
I agree I am relying on stock appreciation for wealth creation……………..but I throw that in with the caveat of Dividend reinvesting helps me to Acquire more shares over time thus Growing the yearly return exponentially on my original investment.
I pay no fees
Many of my companies sell me their shares at 1-4% discount because I dividend reinvest
This accomplishes several key point for me
And I invest in companies that raise their dividends yearly….so while that 100 dollar stock is paying 5 bucks a share today in 5 years it will paying 6 bucks a share
Here is what I see
100 dollar stock with 5% dividend= 1 share of stock—-original investment 100 dollars
dividend reinvested after one year = 1.05 shares of stock
2yrs= 1.105 shares of stock
3 yrs = 1.1536 shares of stock
4yrs=1.21 shares of stock
5yrs = 1.27 shares of stock ———————even if the stock price stays the same I know have 1.33 shares of stock at 100$/share………….. if the stock goes up 3% per year you have 1.27 shares of stock worth 117$ /share =149 dollars
a 5% yearly gain ….you have 172$ in equity
So after 5 years if you reinvest the dividend your return on your original investment gives you a 27% gain [b]on dividends alone[/b] even if your stock does not change price
Now if your stock goes up 6% you double your money in 5 years
If your stock tanks 5% per year—you break even.
extrapolate this strategy over 20-25 yr period and you are sitting on a boatload of money that pays you a dividend of many thousands of dollars per month………………………..and you semi retire before age 50
-
Yes but…… what you forget is that that dividend the company is paying comes with the “cost” of lower growth.
Rather than invest in capital, new products, R&D, merger activity… all things that over time lead to revenue growth and increasing share price, dividend paying companies are giving you the shareholder that cash.
That means that in the long run the share price (the “growth”) of the dividend paying companies is lower than the share price of the of the company that reinvested that cash in their business.
If you look at various analyses, the total return of a basket of dividend stocks– their share price & the dividend being reinvested — is [i]less[/i] than that of a basket of equities in the stock market overall over a long period of time.
Your response that analysis has been essentially “But I pick them better. I have a system.” And “I keep an eye on it for problems” (Read: “I try to do market timing with the share price of the individual companies in my portfolio”). That might work for you. You may actually have a stock picking gift that allows you to pick the gems, miss the dogs, and sell just before your dividend aristocrat becomes a dividend dog. But that system is unlikely to be reproducible by the average investor.-
Point by point here
[b]Yes but…… what you forget is that that dividend the company is paying comes with the “cost” of lower growth.[/b]
I agree. I got burned in the past by High growth companies making me very risk averse to a degree. I will miss out on all the latest up and comers. I accept that. I will miss out on the googles and the ali babbas etc
Also…..Dont care what anyone says about Mutual funds and Vanguard funds in particular….They are hiding their fees. The returns you see them publish are smoke and mirrors My brother worked for Vanguard for years
As a caveat i will add IMHO a company increasing their dividend yearly is usually a growing company
[b]If you look at various analyses, the total return of a basket of dividend stocks– their share price & the dividend being reinvested — is [i]less[/i] than that of a basket of equities in the stock market overall over a long period of time. [/b]
What you keep doing is trying to compare what I do to a [b]random basket[/b] of dividend paying stocks
That is not what I do
My stocks are not randomly chosen.
I am saying I buy stock in companies that have a track record of [b]INCREASING DIVIDENDS year in year out. [/b]I use 15 years of increasing dividends as a cuttoff. ( true aristocrats will use 25 yrs)
[b]Your response that analysis has been essentially “But I pick them better. I have a system.” And “I keep an eye on it for problems” (Read: “I try to do market timing with the share price of the individual companies in my portfolio”). That might work for you.[/b]
Well it definitely works. And I am definitely not that smart. So you can take that for what it is worth. You can call it market timing if you want but sometimes in life you have to use your brain and reasoning ability to know when to hold them or fold them
I can tell you this. I pay no fees. Period
[b]You may actually have a stock picking gift that allows you to pick the gems, miss the dogs, and sell just before your dividend aristocrat becomes a dividend dog. But that system is unlikely to be reproducible by the average[/b]
[b] investor.[/b]
I don’t think it takes much of a gift to buy stock in Washington gas and light reinvest the dividends and triple my money in 10 yrs.
The company has been paying a dividend usually increasing it yearly since 1848……… and Washing DC is not going to automatically stop using electricity
What I do is not glamourous………………….You will not get rich overnight………………And you won’t get to talk about Ali baba, facebook or twitter to your friends
but you do it over 20-30 yrs and you will retire early with a nice stream of income …………at a lower tax rate I might add
It is a patient way of accumulating sustainable stream of income with a long term horizon meant to preserve capital at the same time
So when I die My capital is still preserved
-
[b]If you look at various analyses, the total return of a basket of dividend stocks– their share price & the dividend being reinvested — is [i]less[/i] than that of a basket of equities in the stock market overall over a long period of time. [/b]
I couldnt let this one go
And do you know why there are no Analysis between A group of stocks with a history of increasing dividends and the stock market overall?
Because these stocks actually beat the market year in and year out and the people who do these studies would be out of business-
Basically, a dividend is a percentage of the stock value they return to investors. It is not a wealth creator. This is basic investing stuff. I am not Warren Buffett but this is finance 101.
Dividends are not interest.
Just look at any index fund, when there is a dividend payment the NAV drops accordingly.
Having said that if you can buy at a discount that is a good strategy.-
[b]Basically, a dividend is a percentage of the stock value they return to investors. It is not a wealth creator. This is basic investing stuff. I am not Warren Buffett but this is finance 101. [/b]
Uhhhhh What are you talking about?
In what country is finance 101?
Im looking at a statement on my desk right now from Duke Energy
They paid a quarterly dividend of 79 cents a share on sept 16
the ex -div date was aug 11—the price was 71. 40
last friday the shares closed a 74.38
So again I have no idea what you are talking about
I don’t know what text book you are reading but that is not finance 101 in the real world
Granted an individual stock can go up and down the days leading up to and after the ex dividend while certain short term traders get in and out for a quick gain but paying a dividend does not immediately drop a stocks price
[b]
[/b]
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Kpack – everyone, lets agree to disagree. To change the subject and break the ice – here are the extreme trades from the “AC wannabe hedge fund manager portfolio”:
Following the yellow media recap I bought the convertible debentures and shorted the common equity when the stock hit parity with the converts. 7% effective yield on the convert which was trading just above parity with downside risk covered by short trade on common stock.
Total outlay = zero dollars. (proceeds of short sale used to purchase bonds)
Interest on $xxx k face value bonds = .07 x $xxxk
Will have to break the hedge if they declare a dividend, but still a couple of years away. I started humming dire straits and wore braces to work for a couple of days after that one.
Worst Trade – I have been drawn to some truly terrible investing ideas but Washington Mutual and Fannie Mae were the all time worst. I am currently getting killed in the oil patch, having bought some junk debt trading at 1.5 x the coupon – this may need writing off in the event of default………………….
I won’t be quitting my day job anytime soon! For every one hit out of the park, there are several that strike out………………-
Damn bro, your knowledge is at another level.
Having said that I would love more investment related discussion on this board. It is a hobby of mine!
-
Quote from macrophallus
Damn bro, your knowledge is at another level.
Having said that I would love more investment related discussion on this board. It is a hobby of mine!
Problem is it isn’t macro………..
The “AC wannabe hedge fund manager portfolio” is under water, bleeding red ink as we speak………………….
I use this account for fun and to confirm that outsmarting the market is not possible on a long term sustained basis………
-
-
[b]Kpack – everyone, lets agree to disagree.[/b]
There are ways of beating the market that are quite simple and not rocket science. What it takes is Patience and a few hours a week on yahoo finance making sure nothing major is going on in your holdings.
Honestly my personal feelings are index funds are for dummies. They are ok if you are either lazy or have no interest in managing your money.
You have to remember these funds are sold to the public….so of course you are going to get all this propaganda and Pseudo research out there from the companies and other interests who promote them telling you to not think just drink the kool-aid
Again just my opinion but I will stick to what I do. I have averaged well over 15% annually since 2000 and I am not a super genius.
Started doing this to ahve alternative streams of income. Ultimate goal was to have 10,000 grand per month in Dividend income by the time I was 60. I am almost there with more than 12 years to spare
And with every penny being reinvested—-essentially I have these companies donating thousands of bucks monthly to me to be invested
in my mind this the biggest no brainer ever.
kinda like buying pfizer at 16 Dow chemical at 6. One of the Duhhhhhhhh moments that does not take a genius to figure out
I liken what I do to a combination of philosphy of Jeremy Seigle, Peter lynch and buy and hold. I buy what I know…. i buy for the long term….. I reinvest every penney of dividend……….and watch it grow.
i
-
I think it is very misleading to tell young investors that Low cost index funds are the way to go
Because index funds are basically crap for lazy people
If I would have did that when I was 30 yrs old I would have left a couple Million on someone elses table
-
Quote from kpack123
I think it is very misleading to tell young investors that Low cost index funds are the way to go
Because index funds are basically crap for lazy people
OK then – I guess we’re in irreconcilable disagreement.
My [s]final [/s]bottom line: Index funds are not crap and there is a growing body of evidence that the large majority of investors who index out-perform actively managed portfolios over the long run of an investment life time.
To regularly invest in a diversified mix of low cost index funds is indeed the [b]best piece of investing advice a young investor can get. [/b]
[b]Edit: I had to strike “final” out of the post above… I got sucked back in!
[/b]-
No one gets rich on index funds
If I would have invested only in index funds I would have had to work full time til I was 65So I hear you but I in no way agree with what you are preaching
-
After reading NYPHD string of posts
I have to say Dergon and Canuck
I stand corrected you are right
The average investor should stick to low fee index related funds
I didn’t realize how some can make such a simple principle so complex
-
Quote from dergon
Quote from kpack123
I think it is very misleading to tell young investors that Low cost index funds are the way to go
Because index funds are basically crap for lazy people
OK then – I guess we’re in irreconcilable disagreement.
My final bottom line: Index funds are not crap and there is a growing body of evidence that the large majority of investors who index out-perform actively managed portfolios over the long run of an investment life time.
To regularly invest in a diversified mix of low cost index funds is indeed the [b]best piece of investing advice a young investor can get.
[/b]
+1. Lets agree to disagree.
Kpack you have done really well and congratulations to you. I admire people that stick with a system that works for them.
-
-
-
Quote from kpack123
Ultimate goal was to have 10,000 grand per month in Dividend income by the time I was 60. I am almost there with more than 12 years to spare
No offense, but what does this get you? What is dividend income? Any dividend is offset by a capital loss.
-
Quote from NYPhD
Quote from kpack123
Ultimate goal was to have 10,000 grand per month in Dividend income by the time I was 60. I am almost there with more than 12 years to spare
No offense, but what does this get you? What is dividend income? Any dividend is offset by a capital loss.
What are you talking about?
I’m talking individual stocks ……. A price of an individual stock does not go down because it pays a dividend. Where are you getting your information at
10, 000 a month is income. It’s pure income.
My capital is preserved……there is no loss to capital. I’m not sure where you guys are getting this from?
I don’t think a lot of you have an understanding of investing
-
Sorry to burst your bubble.
“An individual stock DOES GO DOWN when it pays a dividend.”
Just as a mutual fund goes down when it distribute capital gains.
Check out wikipedia… dividend…. effect on the stock price….
“After a stock goes ex-dividend (i.e. the financial obligation for the company to pay the dividend to the holder), the stock price should drop.”
Quote from kpack123
A price of an individual stock does not go down because it pays a dividend. Where are you getting your information at
10, 000 a month is income. It’s pure income.
My capital is preserved……there is no loss to capital. I’m not sure where you guys are getting this from?
I don’t think a lot of you have an understanding of investing-
Are you serious
With all do respect. You info is very wrong. You are very very very very wrong
To prove it do this
Go to Yahoo finance and verify what I will say below
Duke energy symbol DUK
Im looking at a statement on my desk right now from Duke Energy
They paid a quarterly dividend of 79 cents a share on sept 16
the ex -div date was aug 11—the price was 71. 40
last friday the shares closed a 74.38
-
And the Wikipedia thing you referenced
you are reading that the wrong way and out of context
I don’t want to be smart arse but I can explain that too you if you want me too
If you don’t then I won’t
-
I am serious.
“On the [link=http://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/ex-dividend.asp]ex-dividend[/link] date, the stock price is adjusted downward by the amount of the dividend by the exchange on which the stock trades.”
from [link=http://www.investopedia.com/articles/stocks/07/dividend_implications.asp]http://www.investopedia.c…idend_implications.asp[/link]
And I am being real real nice…..
Everyone knows this…. It’s fact. It’s basic. 101.
Quote from kpack123
Are you serious
With all do respect. You info is very wrong. You are very very very very wrong
To prove it do this
Go to Yahoo finance and verify what I will say below
Duke energy symbol DUK
Im looking at a statement on my desk right now from Duke Energy
They paid a quarterly dividend of 79 cents a share on sept 16
the ex -div date was aug 11—the price was 71. 40
last friday the shares closed a 74.38
-
“On the ex-dividend date, the stock price is adjusted downward by the amount of the dividend by the exchange on which the stock
This has no real effect on the stock price as I demonstrate below
To prove it do this
Go to Yahoo finance and verify what I will say below
Duke energy symbol DUK
Im looking at a statement on my desk right now from Duke Energy
They paid a quarterly dividend of 79 cents a share on sept 16
the ex -div date was aug 11—the price was 71. 40
last friday the shares closed a 74.38
-
-
OK.. One last time… It’s [b]simple[/b].
“The reason the stock falls when a stock goes ex-dividend is [b]simple[/b]. When a dividend is paid, a portion of the company’s value is being transferred from the company’s bank account to the accounts of investors. That draw down in value is to be expected because paying a dividend reduces the value of a company’s assets. The ex-dividend date is such a powerful force that it’s usually noted in the printed stock price tables in the back of most newspapers.”
[link=http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/money/perfi/columnist/krantz/story/2012-01-05/stock-prices-dividends/52397766/1]http://usatoday30.usatoda…s-dividends/52397766/1[/link]
Quote from kpack123
Are you serious
With all do respect. You info is very wrong. You are very very very very wrong
To prove it do this
Go to Yahoo finance and verify what I will say below
Duke energy symbol DUK
Im looking at a statement on my desk right now from Duke Energy
They paid a quarterly dividend of 79 cents a share on sept 16
the ex -div date was aug 11—the price was 71. 40
last friday the shares closed a 74.38
-
To prove it do this
Go to Yahoo finance and verify what I will say below
Duke energy symbol DUK
Im looking at a statement on my desk right now from Duke Energy
They paid a quarterly dividend of 79 cents a share on sept 16
the ex -div date was aug 11—the price was 71. 40
last friday the shares closed a 74.38
-
A one day or one hour blip in a stock price means nothing to me. It doesn’t matter what a stock opens at to me
I’m not a day trader.
I think you are reading something out of context
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Quote from kpack123
And with every penny being reinvested—-essentially I have these companies donating thousands of bucks monthly to me to be invested
in my mind this the biggest no brainer ever.
Wow… you have no idea what a dividend is or why one would want to own dividend stocks. You are either another troll or one lucky b^%$&d
Dergon’s isn’t the only way, but he’s no dummy.
When a company pays a dividend, they take it out of your equity in the company. It’s no donation. They are taking it out of your investment.-
Quote from NYPhD
Quote from kpack123
And with every penny being reinvested—-essentially I have these companies donating thousands of bucks monthly to me to be invested
in my mind this the biggest no brainer ever.Wow… you have no idea what a dividend is or why one would want to own dividend stocks. You are either another troll or one lucky b^%$&d
Dergon’s isn’t the only way, but he’s no dummy.When a company pays a dividend, they take it out of your equity in the company. It’s no donation. They are taking it out of your investment.
Buddy…….. But the stock price does not change
My capital is not diminished
Seriously don’t you understand this
-
Dergon
You might be right
These people maybe should be in index funds where they can do no harm to themselves
If they don’t understand a dividend it’s better they let someone else help them
-
-
-
Kpack123, I think NYPHD definitly does not have a PHD in business
-
God help us if he does have a PhD in business
Maybe he is one of the academics who writes the vanguard articles
I mean he is equating a pre market one day blip on the radar to me losing capital
It maybe academic……. But it’s not reality
-
“on the ex-div date, the exchange automatically reduces the price of the stock by the amount of the dividend. If the dividend is $1, and the stock had been offered at $40 and bid at $39.50 the day before, on the ex-div date the offer price and bid price will be adjusted to $39 and the bid to $38.50 to account for the fact that the dividend is not included.”
FROM [link=http://wiki.fool.com/Do_Stock_Prices_Drop_During_the_Ex-Dividend_Date%3F]http://wiki.fool.com/Do_S…he_Ex-Dividend_Date%3F[/link]
It is reality. EVERYONE knows this. It’s on every financial website.
Quote from kpack123
God help us if he does have a PhD in business
Maybe he is one of the academics who writes the vanguard articles
I mean he is equating a pre market one day blip on the radar to me losing capital
It maybe academic……. But it’s not reality-
See below
-
It is reality. EVERYONE knows this. It’s on every financial website.
Sure I will play
Again. You are totally taking this out of context when dealing with individual stock
Answer this please
What does it matter to the investor if the premarket adjustment is quickly eliminated, often in the first minutes of trading?
You are talking about a blip on the radar?
And please comment on the DUK- Duke power reference I made and explain to me why in hello would that matter to me
I’m waiting
-
-
-
irayd8u,
I think Kpack123, definitly has not passed the CT registry, either….Quote from irayd8u
Kpack123, I think NYPHD definitly does not have a PHD in business
-
