Login
Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login. New Registrations are disabled.

Notification

Icon
Error

6 Pages123>»
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
DannyM  
#1 Posted : Tuesday, November 6, 2007 10:12:26 AM(UTC)
DannyM

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 262

Does anyone have the Barrons article from 11/3/07 "Speaking of Dividends " that they could share. I wanted to save a file of that article. Highlight is a discussion on buybacks vs dividends and who they really serve. thanks in advance

Wanna join the discussion?! Login to your forum account. New Registrations are disabled.

daf323  
#2 Posted : Tuesday, November 6, 2007 10:34:28 AM(UTC)
daf323

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 126

Found it online here

DannyM  
#3 Posted : Tuesday, November 6, 2007 11:07:53 AM(UTC)
DannyM

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 262

Thanks Dave, that was an earlier article I believe. I saw the title which was peer power. next to the one you forwarded. One line in the middle of the article you forwarded was that buybacks "benefit the issuer". CEO's can prop up the price of an underperforming stock with buybacks  which also helps when their options come due. S&P has done a paper on whether compnaies which do buybacks outperform the market. The author was on CNBC today and his data showed no great benefit to the stocks performance comapred to the S&P.

Here's the link  http://www.cnbc.com/id/21652874/ 

 

daf323  
#4 Posted : Tuesday, November 6, 2007 11:40:59 AM(UTC)
daf323

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 126

Hi Danny,

maybe i should move this posting to the classroom and re-name it Barron's - Speaking of Dividends? would you mind? thanks!

dave
skimmerscott  
#5 Posted : Tuesday, November 6, 2007 12:56:56 PM(UTC)
skimmerscott

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 25

This a great discussion - this question comes up in our club alot and there is debate over whether the buybacks are good for us, the investor, or good for the company as a whole, or just fluff to make the numbers look good.  It would be nice to have some clarification, with proof to back it up.  Thanks...

Laura

DannyM  
#6 Posted : Tuesday, November 6, 2007 2:31:34 PM(UTC)
DannyM

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 262

This a great discussion - It would be nice to have some clarification, with proof to back it up.  Thanks...

Laura

Hi Laura, the only “proof” I have seen is the article by the S&P author today on CNBC. (Linked in a message below). In my opinion buybacks do a couple of things; one is to prop up the price in the short term. My question is, why not concern themselves with increasing profits instead of this short term approach. Most buybacks prop up the price short term and benefit those few who have stock options. If the stock is at such an “under valued price” why are they not buying the stock with their own money? Secondly the buying back reduces the number of shares outstanding, thus increasing the EPS. Again, grow the profits and they won't have to bother with how many shares to repurchase. To me this is wasted energy and not the company’s core business. One argument for not wanting to pay the dividends is that they give the company less flexibility if things tighten later on down the economic cycle. Hockey Puck!!! If the dividend policy stated a certain percent payout goal the company could pay out profits and this would take out any surprises in future releases. One would know that they are always going to get 33% payout ratio or whatever number the company sets. Dividends benefit all shareowners while buybacks benefit a few. Some CEO’s even claim to be concerned with putting a tax burden on the shareowners, more hockey puck! I’ll take responsibility for my tax burden just as I do with the other monies I collect during the year. So as you can see I am a dividend believer!

DannyM  
#7 Posted : Tuesday, November 6, 2007 2:39:34 PM(UTC)
DannyM

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 262

Here's the article I was first mentioning.

DannyM  
#8 Posted : Wednesday, November 7, 2007 2:09:56 AM(UTC)
DannyM

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 262

Here's the Lord Abbett article mentioned in the Barrons article. Shows chart of dividend payers vs non payers for the past 35 years.

https://www.lordabbett.com/articles/return_of_dividend.pdf 

skimmerscott  
#9 Posted : Saturday, November 10, 2007 6:34:43 AM(UTC)
skimmerscott

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 25

Danny:

Thanks for your article links.  I'll read thru them and see if they make sense to me.  I agree with you about the individual tax implications, that's my problem, not theirs to worry about.  Plus, we're getting taxed at the lower 15% rate right now, if held for longer than a year, so I'm jiggy with that.  Plus, if it's in your IRA, taxes are deferred until later on when hopefully you are in a lower bracket (course all that could change, and probably will by the time I'm allowed to start withdrawing (another 20 yrs!!).

Laura

DannyM  
#10 Posted : Saturday, November 10, 2007 6:42:23 AM(UTC)
DannyM

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 262

Laura, so you are not blindsided remember that you will pay income tax rates on deferred acounts not capital gains when you withdraw these accounts. This goes for all gains, price and dividend growth.

skimmerscott  
#11 Posted : Saturday, November 10, 2007 6:55:55 AM(UTC)
skimmerscott

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 25

Which means I should be socking as much as I can into my ROTH account which grows tax-free, right?  What other tax-friendly investments are there, when one has maxed out their 401K's and have additional monies to invest? 

Laura

 

DannyM  
#12 Posted : Saturday, November 10, 2007 7:35:33 AM(UTC)
DannyM

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 262

Which means I should be socking as much as I can into my ROTH account which grows tax-free, right? 

Laura

That is what I do with my Roth. Last year the max was $4000, or $5000 if you are over 50. Other tax free investments that I know of are municipal bonds. I have never dealt with those.

BlueOkie  
#13 Posted : Sunday, November 11, 2007 6:32:43 AM(UTC)
BlueOkie

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 42

Danny,

 

Thanks for the Lord Abbett article.  It helped reinforce my view of dividends.  I would like to see a more indepth discussion of buybacks and their effect on dividends.  If management if being rewarded with stocks, is it better to give dividends vs buybacks?  If the Board authorizes buybacks, and management purchases stock when they are on sale or of great value, what then?

I own a electric company who had several bad quarters but refused to stop the dividend.  Instead of becoming a Albatross, it became a target and inspiration to make the dividend. 

 

What is your view of ROE and its relation to dividend payout?

 

Bob

Ralphs  
#14 Posted : Sunday, November 11, 2007 6:43:29 AM(UTC)
Ralphs

Rank:: Member

Posts: 26


November 11, 2007
My concept of stock buy backs differs from what seems to be the opinion in Wall Street.  I feel if management does a stock but back it then has no ideas for investing the cash to improve profit margins, put new products on the market or rewarding the share holders. Further those who do stock buy backs seem to have little or no understanding of what is a reasonable price to pay.  The P/E ratio paid too frequently is excessive.  Too often the stock buy backs are accompanied by options for management regardless of whether they produce excellent results or not. The proliferation of stock options was the forerunner of back dating of prices for options. 
Ralph Seger
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2007 11:32 AM
Subject: [The Classroom]: RE: Barrons - "Speaking of Dividends" (efb1c192-fce7-4d4b-954d-89d576c917ba)
 
From the The Classroom forum at StockCentral.com, Bob Blanchette writes:

Danny,

 

Thanks for the Lord Abbett article.  It helped reinforce my view of dividends.  I would like to see a more indepth discussion of buybacks and their effect on dividends.  If management if being rewarded with stocks, is it better to give dividends vs buybacks?  If the Board authorizes buybacks, and management purchases stock when they are on sale or of great value, what then?

I own a electric company who had several bad quarters but refused to stop the dividend.  Instead of becoming a Albatross, it became a target and inspiration to make the dividend. 

 

What is your view of ROE and its relation to dividend payout?

 

Bob



----------
Posted by: Bob Blanchette
DannyM  
#15 Posted : Sunday, November 11, 2007 6:52:52 AM(UTC)
DannyM

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 262

Bob you hit it right, the fact that mgt is being rewarded with options is why they favor buybacks. They are using shareowners cash to buy stocks to cover their options. As I said in an earlier post if the mgt really believed in a company why aren't they putting their own money into it? The more shares thye own the more dividends they could collect, possibly forever. When companies announce a buyback it is only an announcement. They are authorized, not required, to initiate the purchases. I believe the only way a buyback would actually help the shareowner is if they retired the shares purchased not just put them in the treasury for later reissue.

By artifically propping up the price the mgt's track record will look better than it actually is. This seems to be a policy of feeding off of one self instead of truly increasing profits. A good dividend policy should be one that grows dividends at or near the same rate of earnings growth. If the payout ratio is maintained it should not affect the ROE to any significant degree, IMO.

Congrats to you for taking the challenge and maintaining a dividend to shareowners. It can be done but the appetite for many is not there as buybacks benefit the policy makers.

DannyM  
#16 Posted : Saturday, December 8, 2007 9:01:31 AM(UTC)
DannyM

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 262

12/8/ issue of Barrons has an article titled "Buybacks that Bite back" The story carries stats that show again that buybacks are not helpful to the the shareholder. Most buy backs are covering options grants to upper management. some are taking on debt to the detriment of their financial ratings just to fund these buybacks. The last paragraph states, "Over the long haul, the best way for Corporate America to make shareholders happy might be to spend less effort on buying shares and more on finding new opputunities to expand its businesses".

 

DannyM  
#17 Posted : Tuesday, December 18, 2007 7:27:02 AM(UTC)
DannyM

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 262

DannyM  
#18 Posted : Friday, January 11, 2008 6:52:10 AM(UTC)
DannyM

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 262

Here's a review of dividend payouts in 2007 and an outlook. I like what they are saying.

robert  
#19 Posted : Monday, January 14, 2008 5:05:39 PM(UTC)
robert

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 97


















I enjoyed the article Danny.  The thing it omits to point out .
. . and an argument for stock buybacks versus dividends . . . is that a
dividend triggers a tax event whether or not the shareholder wants it.  A stock
buyback allows the shareholder to choose when to trigger a tax event (by
choosing to hold or sell).  Therefore, I think I would prefer a buyback . . . does this argument make sense?








DannyM  
#20 Posted : Tuesday, January 15, 2008 3:07:44 AM(UTC)
DannyM

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 262

Hi Robert, yes I have heard and read that concept in different media outlets. However, I am of the camp that I and many are able to manage our tax situations. I would rather have them give me my cash and then I can decide if putting that money back into the same stock is a worth investment. If I know what my dividend income will be in any given year I have time to negate, or not, my tax liability. Probably not a right or wrong on this but it comes down to preferences.

Users browsing this topic
Guest
6 Pages123>»
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Powered by YAF.NET | YAF.NET © 2003-2024, Yet Another Forum.NET
This page was generated in 0.185 seconds.