Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    rec.arts.sf.written    |    Discussion of written science fiction an    |    448,027 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 447,369 of 448,027    |
|    William Hyde to All    |
|    Re: Garfield: Predicting the future    |
|    17 Jan 26 15:05:33    |
      XPost: rec.arts.comics.strips       From: wthyde1953@gmail.com              Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:       > On Fri, 16 Jan 2026 18:18:20 -0500, William Hyde wrote:       >       >> Rule 6. As much as possible, confine your purchases to stocks that       >> pay a dividend (but not too high a one, that is a danger sign). This       >> is a personal rule that many would not agree with.       >       > Some background knowledge of the industry in question can be helpful.       > For example, among computing-related companies, Microsoft didn’t pay       > any dividends for about the first 15 years after it went public -- it       > didn’t need to, because as a “growth stock”, increases in the value of       > the shares were enough to keep shareholders happy.       >       Quite right - this is a personal rule. But it is one followed by many       successful investors. It also tends to involve a lower frequency of       trading, which saves money but does not make it popular with financial       advisors as the business profits from trades.              I tend to avoid growth stocks because I am not good at picking them.       The press loves stories like that of Amazon, Microsoft, Subaru, and so       on. But a fair number of growth stories turn rapidly to shrinking       stories, and yesterday's darlings like Yahoo, Nortel, and so on become       today's dogs.              Turnaround stocks are also very difficult to call. For every Chrysler       out there there are a dozen turnarounds that didn't work. Nortel again,       for example.              Peter Lynch or Jeff Vinik can judge these things. I cannot.              I prefer a safety net, and the commitment to have enough cash to meet a       dividend is such a net, if not an infallible one. It keeps management       focused.              The shysters do know that there are people with my attitude, so fake       dividend stories have been concocted, with dividends paid from borrowed       money, often fraudulently described. Even staid utilities can go bad       this way, as did Tucson electric power circa 1990. A common symptom of       this is a very high dividend, which as I said should be seen as a       warning sign.                     William Hyde              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca