Talking stocks, trading, and investing in general

[archetypal_yuppie]



Correct on both points. Just found the full disclosure list. My mistake.

Except how its not correct:

DEFINITION of 'SEC Form 13F'

A filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), also known as the Information Required of Institutional Investment Managers Form. It is a quarterly filing required of institutional investment managers with over $100 million in qualifying assets. Companies required to file SEC Form 13-F may include insurance companies, banks, pension funds, investment advisers and broker-dealers. This form, which must be filed within 45 days of the end of each quarter, contains information about the investment manager and potentially a list of their recent investment holdings.

 

[archetypal_yuppie]



Curious why people care about dividends and buybacks. I can see positive information signaling in the case of a buyback - we think our stock is undervalued. However, the transfer of cash to shareholders is mechanically a reduction in equity value, dollar for dollar with the size of the transaction. All this tells me is that the company does not have enough worthwhile projects (i.e. anything that returns in excess of its cost of capital) to spend its cash on.

Pretend you're a 100% owner of a private business. If your business never pays you anything, its not accomplishing its purpose, is it? The attractiveness of this will obviously vary depending on the stage of a business's lifecycle.

A lot of some large businesses' reluctance to cut dividends is due to truly large shareholders' (WalMart - Waltons) reliance on those dividends as their cash stream. They don't want that allowance cut.

 

[BostonHedonist]

Jumping in this thread for the first time. Hope to learn something and not "lose ******."

I'm curious about thoughts on dividends as well. Some like to buy big from the "dividend barons," stocks that haven't reduced dividend yields in 20 years or so, and look to the dividends as a source of income rather than caring about capital appreciation. More of an investment methodology than a source of speculative plays.

Anyone ever take that approach around these parts? Guessing not...

 

[idfnl]



Except how its not correct:

DEFINITION of 'SEC Form 13F'

A filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), also known as the Information Required of Institutional Investment Managers Form. It is a quarterly filing required of institutional investment managers with over $100 million in qualifying assets. Companies required to file SEC Form 13-F may include insurance companies, banks, pension funds, investment advisers and broker-dealers. This form, which must be filed within 45 days of the end of each quarter, contains information about the investment manager and potentially a list of their recent investment holdings.

This has little or nothing to do with 13F. I'm talking about form N-CSR.

Here is the disclosure of the full holdings of Vanguard's total stock market index fund, for example:

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/36405/000093247115005659/index_final.htm

You can search on your own here:

http://www.sec.gov/edgar/searchedgar/mutualsearch.html


So, quote for truth:

Ugh, the moronosity and wrongness on this page alone...

 

[idfnl]



Jumping in this thread for the first time. Hope to learn something and not "lose ******."

I'm curious about thoughts on dividends as well. Some like to buy big from the "dividend barons," stocks that haven't reduced dividend yields in 20 years or so, and look to the dividends as a source of income rather than caring about capital appreciation. More of an investment methodology than a source of speculative plays.

Anyone ever take that approach around these parts? Guessing not...

SkinnyGoomba does.

 

[Texasmade]



Jumping in this thread for the first time. Hope to learn something and not "lose ******."

I'm curious about thoughts on dividends as well. Some like to buy big from the "dividend barons," stocks that haven't reduced dividend yields in 20 years or so, and look to the dividends as a source of income rather than caring about capital appreciation. More of an investment methodology than a source of speculative plays.

Anyone ever take that approach around these parts? Guessing not...

That's my main investing strategy. My decent sized position in Kraft is really paying off today.

 

[djblisk]

MU - Why is it even down?

Doesn't make sense.

 

[jbarwick]

MU - Why is it even down?

Doesn't make sense.

Someone initiated "neutral" coverage on the stock which could cause some selling.

 

[BostonHedonist]

Are there any recommended ETFs for those looking for sustained long term dividend yields and less concerned with capital appreciation?

I am happy to admit, I am a noob with investing. But I've played around with enough small-fry positions to know that I'm not good at stock picking (well there was that one time when I threw everything I had at NFLX at $68 after the CEO made some stupid coke-enabled announcement).

My solar stock tanked when oil got cheap and my EMES position is down 27%, though I anticipate an eventual rebound in fracking at some point.

But my VOO, VONE, and VHT have all done well enough. I like the set-it-and-forget-it approach of Vanguard ETFS. But I wouldn't mind some great low-drama stocks that I wouldn't have to watch too keenly.

It's getting to be around time for me to start investing my cash "for real" and I could use any time-tested wisdom or harsh realities. My thanks for any consideration.

 

[brokencycle]



Are there any recommended ETFs for those looking for sustained long term dividend yields and less concerned with capital appreciation?

I am happy to admit, I am a noob with investing. But I've played around with enough small-fry positions to know that I'm not good at stock picking (well there was that one time when I threw everything I had at NFLX at $68 after the CEO made some stupid coke-enabled announcement).

My solar stock tanked when oil got cheap and my EMES position is down 27%, though I anticipate an eventual rebound in fracking at some point.

But my VOO, VONE, and VHT have all done well enough. I like the set-it-and-forget-it approach of Vanguard ETFS. But I wouldn't mind some great low-drama stocks that I wouldn't have to watch too keenly.

It's getting to be around time for me to start investing my cash "for real" and I could use any time-tested wisdom or harsh realities. My thanks for any consideration.

I was actually looking at dividend funds today. Vanguard has VYM and VIG. They also have a few mutual funds that have similar holdings.

 

[CunningSmeagol]



Pretend you're a 100% owner of a private business. If your business never pays you anything, its not accomplishing its purpose, is it? The attractiveness of this will obviously vary depending on the stage of a business's lifecycle.

A lot of some large businesses' reluctance to cut dividends is due to truly large shareholders' (WalMart - Waltons) reliance on those dividends as their cash stream. They don't want that allowance cut.

I completely understand a large shareholder wanting to extract meaningful liquidity, and the only way of doing so being dividends. However, that has nothing to do with a retail investor in public companies, who can just sell shares on the exchanges for little to no cost to get liquidity.

Secondly, you can pay yourself a salary. It hits the P&L in a different spot - I'm not well versed on the tax implications, but if you eventually sell the company, your shares/unit appreciation would likely be taxed at cap gains rather than ordinary income.

Jumping in this thread for the first time. Hope to learn something and not "lose ******."

I'm curious about thoughts on dividends as well. Some like to buy big from the "dividend barons," stocks that haven't reduced dividend yields in 20 years or so, and look to the dividends as a source of income rather than caring about capital appreciation. More of an investment methodology than a source of speculative plays.

Anyone ever take that approach around these parts? Guessing not...

What is the practical difference to a retail investor between capital appreciation and dividends? Every time a stock pays a dividend, its equity value decreases by exactly that amount. If the company did not pay a dividend, there would be more capital "appreciation" (less equity reduction) and you could sell shares for more on the open market, making up any liquidity lost due to not getting paid a dividend.

 

[jboy718727]

Smeagol, I personally look at dividends as an insurance to not lose money while the stock is down. Growth of PPS is probably where you'll get the most of your money but during a bear market PPS is going down and if you're not getting any dividends your basically losing money, ala time value of money

 

[lawyerdad]



What is the practical difference to a retail investor between capital appreciation and dividends? Every time a stock pays a dividend, its equity value decreases by exactly that amount. If the company did not pay a dividend, there would be more capital "appreciation" (less equity reduction) and you could sell shares for more on the open market, making up any liquidity lost due to not getting paid a dividend.

For one thing (assuming for the sake of discussion that the value of dividend distributions over the relevant period of time is equal to foregone capital appreciation), there's a safety/diversification angle. If you take your pay-out in annual payments over a ten-year period, you can diversify that money into other uses. If everything remains tied up in capital, you're leaving more of your money at risk of some sort of external, black swan event that could reduce the company's value (and thus the value of your proportionate share). It also diminishes (albeit slightly) the risk that an unexpected personal liquidity crunch might force you to sell your equity position at an inopportune time.

Of course, many folks (I think ****** may fall into this camp) are automatically reinvesting their dividends, which mitigates market timing risk via dollar cost averaging.

 

[Piobaire]



I was actually looking at dividend funds today. Vanguard has VYM and VIG. They also have a few mutual funds that have similar holdings.

Is anyone else chuckling over a fund specializing in paying dividends named "VIG?"

 

[brokencycle]



I completely understand a large shareholder wanting to extract meaningful liquidity, and the only way of doing so being dividends. However, that has nothing to do with a retail investor in public companies, who can just sell shares on the exchanges for little to no cost to get liquidity.

Secondly, you can pay yourself a salary. It hits the P&L in a different spot - I'm not well versed on the tax implications, but if you eventually sell the company, your shares/unit appreciation would likely be taxed at cap gains rather than ordinary income.
What is the practical difference to a retail investor between capital appreciation and dividends? Every time a stock pays a dividend, its equity value decreases by exactly that amount. If the company did not pay a dividend, there would be more capital "appreciation" (less equity reduction) and you could sell shares for more on the open market, making up any liquidity lost due to not getting paid a dividend.

The maturity of the company matters here. If large, mature companies suddenly stopped paying dividends (or decreasing them), capital appreciation will almost certainly go away. In theory, stocks are simply the present value of all future dividends. Eventually, investors will expect Amazon to start paying dividends, and if they don't the price will fall.