Obviously when buying in to a company you want to get it at the lowest price/highest yield but other then that it can really trap some people and spoil long term growth.
By free carry do you mean waiting for the value of your stock to increase by 100% so that you can withdraw your initial capital investment value yet keep a holding in that stock worth the initial capital investment?
I call free carry any profit left in, considering the sideways market we are in i find a profit range of 10 to 18% reasonably easy to achieve given a reasonably open ended time frame...of course not every entry goes according to plan.
Thanks for the clarificationinteresting system, makes sense considering the sideways market and the number of dips we've been experiencing.
That being said, say the market becomes bullish a d continues to rise past the 10-18% profit target you've set, and doesn't come back to the current sideways action. Aren't you concerned you may miss out on having a good dividend yield by accumulating and holding at very cheap prices?
Id encourage you to name any company thats earning over 10% dividend that you think is both safe and high growth, and i bet 1 of 50 people in here can come back with evidence that it is either high risk or low growth....
OK here's one
HDF - HASTINGS DIVERSIFIED UTILITIES FUND has a Market Cap of 567 mill
HDF last traded at $1.16 and is forecast to pay quarterly distributions of 3 cents per share...so a little over 10%
haaaaaahaaaaaaaaaaaaa
Too easy
Now im no rockety scientist but i know how to analyse a stock and this one really worries me...
Its a high risk low growth stock and hence its high yeild....come in spinners...
I would not invest in this with my money ever....declining in nearly all aspects and high to extremely high risk...no real obvious growth prospects showing in its figures .....
This stock highlights exactly what i said....If in todays market you get a high yeild you are getting either or both a high risk and low growth....and this is a classic example...and pardon the pun but Im being honest not cynical...
Jezz condog you disappoint me..
condog you certainly are no rockety scientist and that goes for me too...i could care less about outdated EPS figures and cyclical economic factors, lol HDF owns pipelines where there are no other pipelines, they have a monopoly (in some areas) moving an essential, growth commodity....with CPI linked contracts and spare capacity, with new capacity coming with the (now fully funded) South West Queensland Pipeline Stage 3 expansion.
Ill save this thread in my favourites so i can remind you about it in 12 or so months when HDF is $2 a share.
Hey cynical youve lost the plot, the argument was whether you could produce a company with 10%+ dive that is (not might be) high growth, and low risk....on that basis this is a resounding failure....
For your sake I hope your right...and I will concede some companies occassioanlly look crap for ages then suddenly turn around because of a sudden development in thier circumstances....or because they suddenly acquire a super profitable asset.......but you cant go saying they are high growth, low risk and good dividend till they at least have all 3 in place, or some type of history of all three.... Just becaus Orbis says they think its outlook is good, doesnt mean it is high growth, low risk and good dividend....
But on the face of thit this one looks terrible...
Remember here though the argument is not can we find a company thats crap now and good in 12 months time.....its can we find a company with low risk, high growth and 10+% dividend in todays price.........
On that basis you lose fair and square. In this case, as it is not high growth,
For beginners, as a learning experience go and look at the 5 year price charts and balance sheet summary for HDF and then compare it to JBH....very quickly you will see why JBH has a low dividend and why HDF has a high dividend... ..... if the balance sheet confuses you just look at the share price charts and you will see why one is classified as growth and the other is not....
If you lack the integrity to admit you got it wrong and that HDF is clearly not a growth stock, so be it.....
Thats another lesson for beginners, be sure to cross check the infiormation your getting , it could be from some one who thinks HDF is a growth stock...
Beginners go to your charts and look at the growth charts for JBH and HDF....you will soon see the difference why one pays 10%+ and the other pays 1.6%.... the market has priced in that JBH has significant growth prospects, so investors pay a premium and as a result the dividend is limited.....on the other hand HDF has a history of low to stagnant or negative growth and wise investors have seen this and priced it in, unwilling to pay a premium price.....hence the high dividend.....
Signing off from this garbage....goodbye...
condog and i had the following exchange (text in quotes below) in this thread back in mid January 2010..now 8 months later i feel its interesting to look back with hindsight and learn a little about perception, timing and risk/reward.
Alot of what condog was going on about was true, especially the last bit ive bolded, the market was pricing in more of the same for JBH and more of the same for HDF...8 months later turns out the market was wrong, hence the subsequent re-pricing of both , HDF up 25% and JBH down 5%
So this begs the question 'is JBH still a growth stock'? or is/has the market been pricing in flat growth for JBH? does the market actually have a clue or are they all just stumbling around in the dark?
HDF hit a new 14 month high on Friday breaking thru resistance at $1.39 to hit a high of $1.48...what's the market pricing in now? :dunno: take over, dividend increase, perhaps JBH was a bargain a couple of months or so ago at its last significant low?
All i know is that so far condog and the market got it wrong with JHB and little old contrarian me got it right.this and other results ive had, gives me confidence in my stock picking ability's going forward and going against the market.
According to the recent HDF half yearly report, revenue was up 8.4% EBITDA was up 9.1% and profit before tax was up 23.8% does this now mean that the market thinks HDF is a growth stock?
~
For anyone interested in yield.
IMF will be listing a new issue of convertible notes at $1.65 per note to raise around 40 million to fund growth, The terms of the notes will be four years, and interest will be paid at a fixed rate of 10.25%, initially the notes will be issued to IMF share holders (like me) via a rights issue 1 for 10 and via a placement.
The company can elect to redeem the notes at face value after two years on paying an early redemption fee of 2% per annum for the remaining period of the notes, notes are convertible at quarterly intervals at $1.65 each.
The only catch i can find is that IMF can stop paying interest on these notes if there cash at bank drops below 40 million...the notes will be ASX listed so there's some chance of getting a few cheap if IMF look like they may stop paying interest or have a bad case outcome or 2 and also capital upside if IMF do exceptionally well over the next few years.
Notes should be trading on the ASX after 14th December.
http://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20101029/pdf/31tj22cb0czrjw.pdf
is the interest cumulative if the interest is suspended
Agree...what your talking about is straight buy and hold for yield, and as you have pointed out its not a big money spinner...my strategy is buy low and establish free carry, sell to get the bulk of my capital back leaving the profit in, wait for the re-trace and buy again, establish free carry, sell to get the bulk of my capital back leaving the profit in, wait for the re-trace and buy again and establish free carry, sell to get the bulk of my capital back leaving the profit in, wait for the re-trace and buy again and establish free carry etc.
Easy to see how its reasonably easy to go in and out of a property stock 3 or 4 times over 12 or 18 months and triple your dividend stream simply re-cycling the same 5 or 10 grand and leaving the profit in...ive been doing this for 18 months and its working pretty well for me.
See thats where you and I differ so much....risk perception / risk assessment
.... you seem to classify a stock as low risk if you think its not going to fall over any time soon....
Where as when i wiegh up whether its low or high risk...I look at
Firstly its debt to equity....and personally TLS debt to equity is getting up amongst many companies that have already failed.....
I have been reading through this thread and tend to aggree with So_c more than you condog.
The Stocks that So_C as been describing,( eg. Safe companies with strong cashflow that due to unfair market setiment have had there share prices Bashed which has resulted in strong sustainable yields). do make fantastic investments that are very low risk.
You see as a share price of a solid company falls the stock is getting safer and safer because like a coke can the further a share price is crushed the more it resists further crushing. And on the other hand a company that has seen signifcant gains is likely to have a speculative frothyness to it's share price and it's risk is high.
So if you find a solid company that has seen share price falls to the point it's dividend is yield is over 10%, you are much more likely to see a share price recovery that brings it's yield back to 8% than further falls that make it's yield 20%.
Buying such a share will give you a steady high return and also staying power to wait for the large capital gain.
some example that I personally profited from.
APA @ $2.70 - 11.7% yield , Share price has since recovered to $4.19 bringing a 55% capital gain on top of an 11.7% cashflow.
MCW@ $0.20 - 40% yeild, share price recovered to 60c bringing a 300% capital gain on top of the 40% cashflow.
AHE@ $0.55 - 29% yield, share price has recovered to $2.39 bringing more than 400% capital gain on top of the 29% cashflow yield.
How nice that you remembered what I'd said, Tyson.To give an example that most people are familar with that is available now, I give TLS ( telstra ).
It currently has a yield of over 10%.
Now people (i'm looking at you julia), will jump in and say "if you bought for yield back in 2000 you would have lost 70% of your capital" and they are right. But I am not talking about buying back then, When it was considered a growth stock by the way.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?