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 447,409 of 448,027    |
|    Cryptoengineer to William Hyde    |
|    Re: Garfield: Predicting the future    |
|    18 Jan 26 17:14:20    |
      XPost: rec.arts.comics.strips       From: petertrei@gmail.com              On 1/17/2026 3:05 PM, William Hyde wrote:       > 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              I've been kind of quiet in this thread lately.              Most of my investment wealth is in my 401ks and IRAs. - for decades       I put in at least the company match, and put them in broad index       funds. This worked very well.              I was also lucky. The Apple and Tesla purchases were more driven by       enthusiasm than sober analysis, and both did very well (the apple,       spectacularly so, but only after 25 years).              So, most my savings came from get-rich-slow, conservative investment       schemes.              You can make money in stock market, if you're patient. As the saying       goes: "Bulls make money. Bears make money. Pigs get slaughtered."              pt              --- 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