Stingy Investor

Discuss your favourite picks, broker, and trading or investment style.
ig17
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 3418
Joined: 21 Feb 2005 20:54

Re: Stingy Investor

Post by ig17 »

Still, I would not invest in what I perceive is a 'declining' business model.
Yes.

Last quarter revenue: -6% YoY
Same store sales, large stores: -6.5% YoY
Same store sales, small stores: -2.2% YoY
They also closed 7 small stores.

I have no idea how can they spend their pile of cash to turn the tide.
User avatar
AltaRed
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 33398
Joined: 05 Mar 2005 20:04
Location: Ogopogo Land

Re: Stingy Investor

Post by AltaRed »

ig17 wrote:I have no idea how can they spend their pile of cash to turn the tide.
Other business ventures, new lines of goods and services, etc.
Imagefiniki, the Canadian financial wiki The go-to place to bolster your financial freedom
Taggart
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 6893
Joined: 05 Dec 2005 07:34

Re: Stingy Investor

Post by Taggart »

Companies that lower their share count: Why they're worth looking for

NORMAN ROTHERY
Special to The Globe and Mail
Published Friday, Nov. 08 2013, 7:29 PM EST
Last updated Friday, Nov. 08 2013, 8:46 PM EST

-----------------------

I'm wondering out loud, but wouldn't another reason for a company to issue new common shares could be that their payout ratio is too high and they can't cover their payments to shareholders for their usual dividends from either earnings or cash flow?
ig17
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 3418
Joined: 21 Feb 2005 20:54

Re: Stingy Investor

Post by ig17 »

Taggart wrote:I'm wondering out loud, but wouldn't another reason for a company to issue new common shares could be that their payout ratio is too high and they can't cover their payments to shareholders for their usual dividends from either earnings or cash flow?
I don't follow. Issuing new shares hurts, not helps, in the situation you described. They have to pay the same nominal dividend to more shareholders. It only helps if most shareholders choose to DRIP.
twa2w
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 2054
Joined: 22 Feb 2005 13:08

Re: Stingy Investor

Post by twa2w »

I think what Taggart was meaning was they issued extra shares to raise cash to cover payouts to shareholders or to replace the cash that was used to pay dividends. A short term solution that costs more in the long run as the number of shares go up. You can keep diluting your shares. It may be a short term solution to a short term cash crunch but you are right - it wont work longer term
User avatar
Shakespeare
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 23396
Joined: 15 Feb 2005 23:25
Location: Calgary, AB

Re: Stingy Investor

Post by Shakespeare »

It may be a short term solution
TransAlta has been doing it for years IIRC. (A significant portion of their dividend is DRIPed, or was a few years ago.)
Sic transit gloria mundi. Tuesday is usually worse. - Robert A. Heinlein, Starman Jones
Taggart
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 6893
Joined: 05 Dec 2005 07:34

Re: Stingy Investor

Post by Taggart »

ig17 wrote:
Taggart wrote:I'm wondering out loud, but wouldn't another reason for a company to issue new common shares could be that their payout ratio is too high and they can't cover their payments to shareholders for their usual dividends from either earnings or cash flow?
I don't follow. Issuing new shares hurts, not helps, in the situation you described. They have to pay the same nominal dividend to more shareholders. It only helps if most shareholders choose to DRIP.
ig17:

You could be right, but my thinking is that they keep issuing new shares annually in order to cover their shortfall in cash to pay their dividends to shareholders. A couple of other ways I can think of are to increase long term debt, or cannibalize the assets or a combination of all three.

Again I'm just guessing, because the money has to come from somewhere.
BRIAN5000
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 9063
Joined: 08 Jun 2007 23:27

Re: Stingy Investor

Post by BRIAN5000 »

The idea of indexing with indivdual stocks is part of the stragety I use in my portfolio. The stingy investor site has a calculaor which compares costs of ETF's and individual stock purchases.

http://www.ndir.com/cgi-bin/ETFsVsStocks.cgi

To bad there wasn't a calculator which you could imput your sector percentage/or dollar amount and it would tell you how much of each stock to buy. A sliding bar would be nice to be able to vary the percentage of the index to replicate maybe based on another dollar amount or percentage in each stock.

For example if I would like to have $50000 in the materials sector in XMA it would output


POT $15,730.00
G $10,530.00
ABX $9,425.00
AGU $7,280.00
TCK.B $6,630.00
$49,595.00

For this amount of money it would maybe stop at the top five in XMA.
Cost to buy $50
Cost to own the ETF over 25 years with 10% growth $28417.71 at 50% replication.
This information is believed to be from reliable sources but may include rumor and speculation. Accuracy is not guaranteed
User avatar
NormR
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 5234
Joined: 18 Feb 2005 11:19
Contact:

Re: Stingy Investor

Post by NormR »

Gee, I forgot I had that calculator. Anyway, I just did a quick update of the data.
User avatar
Shakespeare
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 23396
Joined: 15 Feb 2005 23:25
Location: Calgary, AB

Re: Stingy Investor

Post by Shakespeare »

So Norm sent out an email last night discontinuing the Stingy News Weekly, which I have received for a good many years, blaming the new anti-spam rules.


Many thanks to Norm for the weekly emails. :thumbsup:
Sic transit gloria mundi. Tuesday is usually worse. - Robert A. Heinlein, Starman Jones
User avatar
NormR
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 5234
Joined: 18 Feb 2005 11:19
Contact:

Re: Stingy Investor

Post by NormR »

Shakespeare wrote:Many thanks to Norm for the weekly emails. :thumbsup:
Thanks Shakes, I'm sad to let it go.
User avatar
kcowan
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 16033
Joined: 18 Apr 2006 20:33
Location: Pacific latitude 20/49

Re: Stingy Investor

Post by kcowan »

Yes Norm, thanks for including us in all those mailings. I had no idea that the anti-spam legislation prevented opt-in mailings.

I suppose we can see the weekly missives on your web site?
For the fun of it...Keith
User avatar
NormR
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 5234
Joined: 18 Feb 2005 11:19
Contact:

Re: Stingy Investor

Post by NormR »

kcowan wrote:I had no idea that the anti-spam legislation prevented opt-in mailings.
Well, not quite. It just entails a huge amount of accounting/paperwork and if you make a mistake you could be fined up to $10 million. Sort of like playing a negative lottery.
kcowan wrote:I suppose we can see the weekly missives on your web site?
Yup. I'll put reminders on the main page, rss feed, and twitter. The latest Stingy News Weekly will be posted here.
peter
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 662
Joined: 10 Oct 2005 21:37
Location: Alberta

Re: Stingy Investor

Post by peter »

Does this mean I can suggest to the annoying Edmonton RE agent he should consider removing me from his mailing list or pay $10 million? Ideally to me. I've tried to get removed several times. This wasn't even opt-in.
User avatar
NormR
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 5234
Joined: 18 Feb 2005 11:19
Contact:

Re: Stingy Investor

Post by NormR »

peter wrote:Does this mean I can suggest to the annoying Edmonton RE agent he should consider removing me from his mailing list or pay $10 million? Ideally to me. I've tried to get removed several times. This wasn't even opt-in.
If you mean email list and you haven't bought something from him then he needs your consent and has to provide a simple opt out. I don't know about you getting the $10mil tho.

A bunch of small businesses are going to get pounded by the rule over the next little while.
BRIAN5000
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 9063
Joined: 08 Jun 2007 23:27

Re: Stingy Investor

Post by BRIAN5000 »

NormR wrote:
Shakespeare wrote:Many thanks to Norm for the weekly emails. :thumbsup:
Thanks Shakes, I'm sad to let it go.
Yes I've liked them and passed them on to a few others.
This information is believed to be from reliable sources but may include rumor and speculation. Accuracy is not guaranteed
User avatar
parvus
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 10014
Joined: 20 Feb 2005 16:09
Location: Waiting for the real estate meltdown on Rua Açores.

Re: Stingy Investor

Post by parvus »

kcowan wrote:Yes Norm, thanks for including us in all those mailings. I had no idea that the anti-spam legislation prevented opt-in mailings.

I suppose we can see the weekly missives on your web site?
So sad to hear about this. Not surprising that regulation of trade means the suppression of trade, however -- a mordida disguised as a tax in the public interest from which only a few public servants benefit in terms of greatly expanded employment opportunities ...
Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muß man schweigen — a wit
Imagefiniki, the Canadian financial wiki Your go-to guide for financial basics
Image
robertro
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 91
Joined: 07 Apr 2009 21:41

Re: Stingy Investor

Post by robertro »

Getting a bit off-topic ... but in case anyone's interested, here is the low-down on the regulation guidelines from the CRTC:
http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/casl-lcap.htm


parvus wrote:
kcowan wrote:Yes Norm, thanks for including us in all those mailings. I had no idea that the anti-spam legislation prevented opt-in mailings.

I suppose we can see the weekly missives on your web site?
So sad to hear about this. Not surprising that regulation of trade means the suppression of trade, however -- a mordida disguised as a tax in the public interest from which only a few public servants benefit in terms of greatly expanded employment opportunities ...
User avatar
NormR
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 5234
Joined: 18 Feb 2005 11:19
Contact:

Re: Stingy Investor

Post by NormR »

I'm giving a talk to the nice folk at a Canadian MoneySaver seminar this weekend. The slides I expect to use can be found at

http://www.ndir.com/SI/articles/talk_0215.pdf

Any feedback / typo spotting would be appreciated. :D
BRIAN5000
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 9063
Joined: 08 Jun 2007 23:27

Re: Stingy Investor

Post by BRIAN5000 »

Any feedback
On your minimizing regret slide you have seven different "choices" of investments over 10 years. I would like to see a total return at the end of the ten years for each of the "choices". How much more return over the balanced fund would each get compared to the volatility experienced.
This information is believed to be from reliable sources but may include rumor and speculation. Accuracy is not guaranteed
User avatar
Norbert Schlenker
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 7960
Joined: 16 Feb 2005 09:56
Location: An Argument Surrounded By Water
Contact:

Re: Stingy Investor

Post by Norbert Schlenker »

Log scales on most of the y axes.
Nothing can protect people who want to buy the Brooklyn Bridge.
User avatar
NormR
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 5234
Joined: 18 Feb 2005 11:19
Contact:

Re: Stingy Investor

Post by NormR »

Norbert Schlenker wrote:Log scales on most of the y axes.
I like the sentiment, I fear that log graphs won't be understandable to a general audience. I've been chastised in other venues about using "complicated" concepts like standard deviation. Sigh.
User avatar
NormR
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 5234
Joined: 18 Feb 2005 11:19
Contact:

Re: Stingy Investor

Post by NormR »

BRIAN5000 wrote:
Any feedback
On your minimizing regret slide you have seven different "choices" of investments over 10 years. I would like to see a total return at the end of the ten years for each of the "choices". How much more return over the balanced fund would each get compared to the volatility experienced.
It's counter to the point to the slide. The idea being to compare the experience of two investors. The first holds the balanced fund. The second holds the individual components of the balanced fund.

A similar point could be made by comparing an investor who holds fund x to one who holds all of the stocks fund x holds.
User avatar
Springbok
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 5438
Joined: 22 Mar 2005 16:47

Re: Stingy Investor

Post by Springbok »

Taxing gains slide 6. Not clear to me. Are the 2 and 2.3% lines fees or taxes?
User avatar
NormR
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 5234
Joined: 18 Feb 2005 11:19
Contact:

Re: Stingy Investor

Post by NormR »

Springbok wrote:Taxing gains slide 6. Not clear to me. Are the 2 and 2.3% lines fees or taxes?
The 23% line is after tax, the 2/2.5% dashed lines are after annual fees for comparison.
Post Reply