PP vs Dividend Growth Investing

Discussion of the Stock portion of the Permanent Portfolio

Moderator: Global Moderator

Post Reply
User avatar
mathjak107
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4456
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:54 am
Location: bayside queens ny
Contact:

Re: PP vs Dividend Growth Investing

Post by mathjak107 » Mon Feb 17, 2020 8:54 am

What Is A Zero-Sum Game

what exactly is a zero-sum game? Game theory was first introduced by John von Neumann in 1944 in his book, Theory of Games And Economic Behavior.

It takes into account various factors, including gains, losses, individual behaviors and more.

The classic definition of zero-sum game is when one person wins, the other person loses. For example, if you and I are playing poker and my hand is better than yours and I win, then you lose. I take the money in the pot.

In other words, the winner takes the money and the loser is left with nothing. Understand that a zero-sum game can happen between two people or hundreds or even millions of people. All that matters is there is a winner and loser.

Why Investing Is Not A Zero-Sum Game

Now that we know exactly what a zero-sum game is, how is investing not this? After all, when I sell a stock that I’ve lost money in, I am losing aren’t I? Not necessarily.

First off, it is important to know that part of zero-sum games is that it assumes all parties in the transaction have all of the information to make the best decision. When it comes to buying or selling stock, both parties don’t have all the same information. One might have more information or better information that leads them to believe a stock is worth buying or selling.

As a result, they make their informed decision based on what they know.

When it comes to the money aspect, just because someone is selling a stock it doesn’t mean they are losing money. They might have made a substantial gain and are looking to lock in this gain. Or they may decide there is another investment that better fits their needs.

In either case, both parties of the stock transaction can come out winners or even losers.

https://www.modestmoney.com/investing-n ... /40330/amp
User avatar
mathjak107
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4456
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:54 am
Location: bayside queens ny
Contact:

Re: PP vs Dividend Growth Investing

Post by mathjak107 » Mon Feb 17, 2020 9:00 am

Xan wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 8:45 am
mathjak107 wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 8:34 am
Again I have to disagree with everything you just posted .... so my growth funds that have near zero dividend yield which have appreciated tremendously over the years have near zero roi ?... does that even make sense .....my return on investment has nothing to do with taking a draw or not .

My roi is only dependent on the companies doing well , increasing their value ...they may have the ability to pay a dividend but
If they never do it is irrelevant my roi is my roi ...

A zero sum game is having a loser for every winner ... stocks are never a zero sum game ....we can all be winners ..you are mis-using a term .

And so we go round and round
Do you think it might help if you made an effort to understand an idea that's new to you?

Yes, you may be up on an investment, but the dollars only came from another investor. The set of investors as a whole cannot realize an increase in dollars until there's a dividend. This should not be controversial. It's like you have a mental block when I say "as a whole".
But there is no increase in dollars when a dividend is paid .....if I have 100k invested and I get a 10% dividend ,I have 90k invested left compounding and 10k in pocket ...there is no increase in dollars

If I reinvest the 10k I have the same 100k invested I had pre ex div ...there is no increase in dollars.

You keep saying there is this mythical increase in dollars . there is no increase in dollars it is zero sum.

Net worth on the investment is the same 100k as was had pre ex div .

If market action doubled the stock pre ex div you got 200k..

If you got the dividend and reinvested you got 200k

If you kept the dividend then you have 90k doubling to 180k and a 10k dividend for 190k balance

At no point does magical money appear increasing what anyone had pre ex div
User avatar
Xan
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 4392
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 1:51 pm

Re: PP vs Dividend Growth Investing

Post by Xan » Mon Feb 17, 2020 9:12 am

mathjak107 wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 9:00 am
But there is no increase in dollars when a dividend is paid .....if I have 100k invested and I get a 10% dividend ,I have 90k invested left compounding and 10k in pocket ...there is no increase in dollars

If I reinvest the 10k I have the same 100k invested I had pre ex div ...there is no increase in dollars.

You keep saying there is this mythical increase in dollars . No there is no increase in dollars it is zero sum
Maybe this is the crux of the disagreement. I don't consider that I have a dollar until I have the dollar. In other words, I'm only caring about realized gains. You look at your unrealized gains and see dollars, so when a dollar comes out of your unrealized gains and goes into your pocket, you see a no-op.

When a dollar comes out of unrealized gains and into my pocket, I see that I went from theory to reality. (At least in terms of stock investing, where the point is to put more dollars in my pocket. Not looking to argue about fiat currency or whatever at this point.)

So, when you see a stock increase in appreciation, you see everybody gaining dollars. I don't: I see that everybody has some combination of shares along with exactly the same dollars they had before, they just shuffle them around a bit.

My math doesn't care about unrealized gains. When I say that investors as a whole are up zero realized dollars, I mean just that: realized dollars. The only time the investors as a whole realize any dollars at all is when a dividend is paid (okay, or a buyback I suppose).

The point of owning a company is to bring in dollars, so I believe my view is the best way of looking at it. And it is an indisputable fact that the investors of a company, as a whole, don't realize one red cent until a dividend is paid.

Another way to put it is: the only time dollars go from a company to its shareholders is when it pays a dividend. Or: investors don't receive money from a company until they receive money from the company. It's a tautology.

This doesn't mean that you can't make money by trading stocks that don't pay dividends. Sure you can. But any dollars you get from doing that are dollars that came from a fellow investor, zero-sum style, not from the company.
User avatar
mathjak107
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4456
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:54 am
Location: bayside queens ny
Contact:

Re: PP vs Dividend Growth Investing

Post by mathjak107 » Mon Feb 17, 2020 9:22 am

Realized or unrealized my net worth is what it is at any point in time ...in fact each years withdrawals in retirement are based on that portfolio value whether realized or unrealized .

Want an asset based loan , realized and unrealized counts

State estate tax thresholds , all about realized and un realized .

That is all your money for the taking at any point in time ..the fact you may choose to keep the money in play each night in the same investment or close out a position and realize a gain and buy a new investment in the morning is irrelevant. Your value is your value ...

Don’t forget that not caring what your unrealized investments are doing at a certain point in time vs whether they count or not are two different things ...my portfolio value sets my draw rate each Jan 1.. those gains represent my success rate in retirement .

In fact if you are drawing 4% inflation adjusted , you need to maintain at least a 2% real return the first 15 years of a 30 year retirement in order for 4% to survive mathematically ...so those unrealized gains count more than you think and those gains determine your entire outcome ..that is all about total return not how the returns are distributed or made up.

Those unrealized gains are your goose laying the golden eggs and all compounding going forward is on those portfolio values ....

So this is why I keep saying this whole premise of it doesn’t count if not in dividends is a lot of myth ......every dollar of value. Increase my draw now
Last edited by mathjak107 on Mon Feb 17, 2020 9:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Xan
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 4392
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 1:51 pm

Re: PP vs Dividend Growth Investing

Post by Xan » Mon Feb 17, 2020 9:33 am

And those stock assets have value because of their projected future dividend.
User avatar
mathjak107
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4456
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:54 am
Location: bayside queens ny
Contact:

Re: PP vs Dividend Growth Investing

Post by mathjak107 » Mon Feb 17, 2020 9:36 am

Xan wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 9:33 am
And those stock assets have value because of their projected future dividend.
No , those assets are worth more because of fear , greed ,and perception of future growth and share appreciation no matter what that appreciation comes from whether stock buy backs , mergers ,acquisitions, increasing market share , better profitability and increased sales

Dividends that can be paid if the company wants are the result of that growth or you have zero roi.

Paying a dollar in dividends without a dollar growth in appreciation in share price is a zero return for investors and no dollars gained
User avatar
Xan
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 4392
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 1:51 pm

Re: PP vs Dividend Growth Investing

Post by Xan » Mon Feb 17, 2020 9:45 am

mathjak107 wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 9:36 am
Paying a dollar in dividends without a dollar growth in appreciation in share price is a zero return for investors and no dollars gained
I think we've boiled it down here.

I've proven that paying a dividend is the only way that investors as a whole realize dollars from owning a company, which at the end of the day is the entire point of owning a company.

I think the disagreement is that you don't see that as the point of owning a company.

Also, the only reason the company has any value is its theoretical future dividend, as has also been proven.


I'd also like to point out that in your rental business (which is a business, is it not?) you take the profits (that is, the monthly rent minus expenses) and pay it out to yourself as a dividend, right? You don't keep it in the "company".
User avatar
mathjak107
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4456
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:54 am
Location: bayside queens ny
Contact:

Re: PP vs Dividend Growth Investing

Post by mathjak107 » Mon Feb 17, 2020 10:35 am

Rent is different One dollar paid in rent is not subtracted off the values of my property like a dividend then it is a wash In the dividend case I have to decide if it is worth getting taxed rather than keep those dollars in the stock compounding on the full dollar. If anyhthing total dollars I had decreased because of taxes compared to leaving that dollar invested
Last edited by mathjak107 on Mon Feb 17, 2020 10:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
Kbg
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2815
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 4:18 pm

Re: PP vs Dividend Growth Investing

Post by Kbg » Mon Feb 17, 2020 10:36 am

Xan,

The biggest problem with your argument is that less than half of all publicly traded stocks on an exchange in the US pay dividends. If you throw in OTC stocks then it’s around 10%. So clearly it’s not about the dividend. Facts are facts and particularly when those facts are numbers. Owning shares mean you are a partial owner of the company. And while you may not like what MJ is saying, for healthy companies in the US that could pay dividends, most do not because their owners realize it is not advantageous to do so under current US tax law. Globally you will see a relationship between dividends paid and tax law...most companies are economically rational and factor in tax law when developing their policies for dividends.

As an investor, taxes aside, dividends are nice in that they do represent an actual income stream from the business and there are methods specifically designed for this style of investing. There is a major spin off style called shareholder yield that captures dividends and stock buybacks which is also a form of direct payback of business profits to owners.

Ultimately I think both sides are arguing over personal preference...if dividends and capital gains were taxed the same in the US then this would be a pretty pointless argument assuming payouts were needed at the same time. However, just like a 401k, being able to defer taxes (and in theory compounding growth of the business), is almost always a good thing.
User avatar
InsuranceGuy
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 425
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2015 1:44 pm

Re: PP vs Dividend Growth Investing

Post by InsuranceGuy » Mon Feb 17, 2020 10:37 am

[deleted]
Last edited by InsuranceGuy on Mon Mar 08, 2021 5:44 pm, edited 6 times in total.
Kbg
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2815
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 4:18 pm

Re: PP vs Dividend Growth Investing

Post by Kbg » Mon Feb 17, 2020 10:45 am

Also, the only reason the company has any value is its theoretical future dividend, as has also been proven.

This is incorrect and is not proven. All you have to do to realize this statement is incorrect is do a Charlie Munger “invert, always invert.” Let’s try it. The only reason there is a dividend is because a company has value...categorically false. Companies do not have to pay dividends and most do not and very unprofitable businesses can pay dividends right up to the point they go bankrupt.

If you changed dividends to profits, then it works. You seem unwilling to recognize several things can be done with profits.
User avatar
mathjak107
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4456
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:54 am
Location: bayside queens ny
Contact:

Re: PP vs Dividend Growth Investing

Post by mathjak107 » Mon Feb 17, 2020 11:05 am

Taxes are very unfavorable for dividends ...like the rent example xan used .

If rent worked like a dividend then every dollar I got in rent would be subtracted off the value of my property ...in reality I would have been better off keeping the dollar in property value growing tax deferred ....so if I reinvest that dollar dividend even back in to the same stock I have less than a dollar going back in ...now I have less dollars in total than had I not gotten that dividend invested Because of taxes being subtracted


But it gets worse ...that dividend is taxed on a corporate level when paid to me and there is no offsetting write off so now there is a corporate tax on a dollar paid and I am taxed on that dollar paid .....

That is now a pretty steep reduction.


So if you get that dividend you need to reinvest it at a pretty high growth rate somewhere else because of taxes or you will reinvest it and get stuck with a tax bill and have less money in total than had you not gotten that dividend..you could spend it but then you have less dollars compounding ...no where in the equation is anyone a head in more dollars because of a payout
User avatar
mathjak107
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4456
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:54 am
Location: bayside queens ny
Contact:

Re: PP vs Dividend Growth Investing

Post by mathjak107 » Mon Feb 17, 2020 11:17 am

Kbg wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 10:45 am
Also, the only reason the company has any value is its theoretical future dividend, as has also been proven.

This is incorrect and is not proven. All you have to do to realize this statement is incorrect is do a Charlie Munger “invert, always invert.” Let’s try it. The only reason there is a dividend is because a company has value...categorically false. Companies do not have to pay dividends and most do not and very unprofitable businesses can pay dividends right up to the point they go bankrupt.

If you changed dividends to profits, then it works. You seem unwilling to recognize several things can be done with profits.
Spot on ..when you have profits and share appreciation in a company you have choices ..you can pay out or not ......either way if the gains are there investors will come,

No appreciation in share price and a payout leaves you with zero return ...not one dollar increase anywhere for your invested dollars ....so all value starts with share appreciation or you got no gains no matter what they pay out
Kbg
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2815
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 4:18 pm

Re: PP vs Dividend Growth Investing

Post by Kbg » Mon Feb 17, 2020 11:21 am

I agree.

However, I do wish US tax law was more neutral on this and it should be. It would give shareholders more power in forcing dividends for companies that probably should be paying dividends vs retaining earnings.

The downside of not having a neutral tax code is it leaves effective business valuation almost completely to the whims of speculative forces which as we all know are manic.
User avatar
Xan
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 4392
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 1:51 pm

Re: PP vs Dividend Growth Investing

Post by Xan » Mon Feb 17, 2020 11:30 am

My position isn't based on how many companies do pay dividends. It's just that fundamentally, that is the only (effectively, barring buybacks) mechanism for investors as a whole to realize gains.

InsuranceGuy, I'm not sure what you're saying on how swapping around cash and shares for the same shares is not a zero-sum game. Are you considering realized gains, or just theoretical gains?

Okay, so many companies could but don't issue dividends, largely because of tax implications. Doesn't mean that the backstop on their value isn't that they have money that they could pay out.

I don't think business going under while paying dividends disproves my point at all. If a business is going under, that may be the time I MOST want them to pay dividends, rather than putting the money back into a sinking business.

Mathjak, I certainly understand the tax differences between rent and true dividends makes taking your "dividends" from rental properties much more palatable than stock dividends. But we're talking about fundamentals, not tax details. I believe that the dollar in rent you get out DOES reduce your value in the "company", just as a dividend does. Because you could instead put that dollar back into the property in the form of improvements. This is exactly analogous to a public company. You don't do that, because you don't think you'd be increasing the rent you could get in the future as much by doing so (you're following Buffet's advice on when to issue a dividend). You're weighing the future rent increase (dividend) that would be possible by keeping the rent in the "company" and deciding to take the dividend now instead.

That also happens to be the point that you said you'd find some other investment: when more money isn't useful to it for improving itself. Will you be divesting your rentals? :-)
User avatar
InsuranceGuy
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 425
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2015 1:44 pm

Re: PP vs Dividend Growth Investing

Post by InsuranceGuy » Mon Feb 17, 2020 11:42 am

[deleted]
Last edited by InsuranceGuy on Mon Mar 08, 2021 5:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Xan
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 4392
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 1:51 pm

Re: PP vs Dividend Growth Investing

Post by Xan » Mon Feb 17, 2020 11:44 am

InsuranceGuy wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 11:42 am
Xan wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 11:30 am
InsuranceGuy, I'm not sure what you're saying on how swapping around cash and shares for the same shares is not a zero-sum game. Are you considering realized gains, or just theoretical gains?
I'm not saying anything about gains, only that earnings for investors are created regardless of distribution and that when earnings are retained they can be cashed out any time by selling some (or all) of their shares.
Not as a whole, though, right? Any "earnings" an investor gets from selling is just the amount another investor is down.
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: PP vs Dividend Growth Investing

Post by vnatale » Mon Feb 17, 2020 12:29 pm

Xan wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 11:44 am
InsuranceGuy wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 11:42 am
Xan wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 11:30 am
InsuranceGuy, I'm not sure what you're saying on how swapping around cash and shares for the same shares is not a zero-sum game. Are you considering realized gains, or just theoretical gains?
I'm not saying anything about gains, only that earnings for investors are created regardless of distribution and that when earnings are retained they can be cashed out any time by selling some (or all) of their shares.
Not as a whole, though, right? Any "earnings" an investor gets from selling is just the amount another investor is down.
I think you've said this a few times and I'm still not understanding it.

If you bought your shares at the accounting net book value of the company three years ago and now sell me those shares at their current accounting net book value (which produced a gain for you) how am I now down in any way? In theory I could turn right around and sell it in the next minute for exactly what I paid for it.

Vinny
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
User avatar
mathjak107
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4456
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:54 am
Location: bayside queens ny
Contact:

Re: PP vs Dividend Growth Investing

Post by mathjak107 » Mon Feb 17, 2020 12:40 pm

Xan wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 11:44 am
InsuranceGuy wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 11:42 am
Xan wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 11:30 am
InsuranceGuy, I'm not sure what you're saying on how swapping around cash and shares for the same shares is not a zero-sum game. Are you considering realized gains, or just theoretical gains?
I'm not saying anything about gains, only that earnings for investors are created regardless of distribution and that when earnings are retained they can be cashed out any time by selling some (or all) of their shares.
Not as a whole, though, right? Any "earnings" an investor gets from selling is just the amount another investor is down.
Silly reasoning. 362k in gains last year says this is absolutely ridiculous logic in investing
User avatar
Xan
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 4392
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 1:51 pm

Re: PP vs Dividend Growth Investing

Post by Xan » Mon Feb 17, 2020 1:07 pm

May I just say that I really appreciate Vinny asking for clarification on a point, as opposed to Mathjak just saying it's silly and then going off on yet another non-sequitur.

Vinny, I tried to illustrate this point in an earlier post.
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=10382&start=72#p185948
I'll put a brief excerpt here.

In 1950, a company that Investor A founded goes public, and A divests himself. B and C buy the shares. In 1960, B "makes his own dividend" and sells half of his interest to C.

The point is that the bottom-right cell, the all-time total gain for all investors, never budges. Investors swapping shares between each other is a complete non-event from the perspective of realized dollars. It's zero-sum. B got some cash, only because that cash came from D, not from the company.

That bottom-right cell only changes when the company pays a dividend. That's when investors as a whole, or maybe I should say as a group or as a class, get any reward at all from holding the company.

1950. Company valued at $100,000. Company has $0 in retained earnings/savings.
Investor Shares owned Amount spent on stock Amount earned from stock All-time total gain
A 0 $50,000 $100,000 $50,000
B 5,000 $50,000 $0 $-50,000
C 5,000 $50,000 $0 $-50,000
Totals 10,000 $150,000 $100,000 $-50,000


1960. Company valued at $350,000. Company has $250,000 in retained earnings/savings.
Investor Shares owned Amount spent on stock Amount earned from stock All-time total gain
A 0 $50,000 $100,000 $50,000
B 2,500 $50,000 $87,500 $37,500
C 5,000 $50,000 $0 $-50,000
D 2,500 $87,500 $0 $-87,500
Totals 10,000 $237,500 $187,500 $-50,000


The bottom right cell is always the total amount the company has distributed in dividends, minus the initial startup cost. Which makes sense. That's exactly how a sole proprietorship would clearly work, and it makes sense that swapping shares around between people wouldn't change that, no matter what their value at the time of the swap.

Any individual investor, like our resident hotshot investor, may be up. But if he is, it's because someone else is down.

Every investor is either hoping for a dividend, or is hoping to sell to someone who's hoping for a dividend. Or hoping to sell to someone who's hoping to sell to someone who's hoping for a dividend. Etc. At the bottom is always the dividend.
User avatar
mathjak107
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4456
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:54 am
Location: bayside queens ny
Contact:

Re: PP vs Dividend Growth Investing

Post by mathjak107 » Mon Feb 17, 2020 1:39 pm

it is simple math ... if your net worth is up a dollar regardless how , than you have a gain .

if you get a forced withdrawal of a dollar by the company and a matching dollar off your balance there are no additional dollars added and no gain without the same or greater appreciation in share price which already took place pre ex div

there is nothing else to look at..

you can spin it any way you like ...just look at your starting balance and ending balance on the investment plus the payouts .. it tells all
User avatar
mathjak107
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4456
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:54 am
Location: bayside queens ny
Contact:

Re: PP vs Dividend Growth Investing

Post by mathjak107 » Mon Feb 17, 2020 1:48 pm

Xan wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 11:44 am
InsuranceGuy wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 11:42 am
Xan wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 11:30 am
InsuranceGuy, I'm not sure what you're saying on how swapping around cash and shares for the same shares is not a zero-sum game. Are you considering realized gains, or just theoretical gains?
I'm not saying anything about gains, only that earnings for investors are created regardless of distribution and that when earnings are retained they can be cashed out any time by selling some (or all) of their shares.
Not as a whole, though, right? Any "earnings" an investor gets from selling is just the amount another investor is down.
nope ... everyone can be a winner when selling or everyone can be a loser or a winner and a loser ...

we buy an investment -we sell an investment ..the difference is my gain ... my buyer invests his money and buys it from me and he sells the investment later on to someone else , that is his gain ... if he does not sell , then his gain or loss is where that investment stands at any given time ...just like my portfolio when i calculate each years draw

that is the real world
User avatar
InsuranceGuy
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 425
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2015 1:44 pm

Re: PP vs Dividend Growth Investing

Post by InsuranceGuy » Mon Feb 17, 2020 1:55 pm

[deleted]
Last edited by InsuranceGuy on Mon Mar 08, 2021 5:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: PP vs Dividend Growth Investing

Post by vnatale » Mon Feb 17, 2020 2:14 pm

Xan wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 1:07 pm
May I just say that I really appreciate Vinny asking for clarification on a point, as opposed to Mathjak just saying it's silly and then going off on yet another non-sequitur.

Vinny, I tried to illustrate this point in an earlier post.
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=10382&start=72#p185948
I'll put a brief excerpt here.

In 1950, a company that Investor A founded goes public, and A divests himself. B and C buy the shares. In 1960, B "makes his own dividend" and sells half of his interest to C.

The point is that the bottom-right cell, the all-time total gain for all investors, never budges. Investors swapping shares between each other is a complete non-event from the perspective of realized dollars. It's zero-sum. B got some cash, only because that cash came from D, not from the company.

That bottom-right cell only changes when the company pays a dividend. That's when investors as a whole, or maybe I should say as a group or as a class, get any reward at all from holding the company.

1950. Company valued at $100,000. Company has $0 in retained earnings/savings.
Investor Shares owned Amount spent on stock Amount earned from stock All-time total gain
A 0 $50,000 $100,000 $50,000
B 5,000 $50,000 $0 $-50,000
C 5,000 $50,000 $0 $-50,000
Totals 10,000 $150,000 $100,000 $-50,000


1960. Company valued at $350,000. Company has $250,000 in retained earnings/savings.
Investor Shares owned Amount spent on stock Amount earned from stock All-time total gain
A 0 $50,000 $100,000 $50,000
B 2,500 $50,000 $87,500 $37,500
C 5,000 $50,000 $0 $-50,000
D 2,500 $87,500 $0 $-87,500
Totals 10,000 $237,500 $187,500 $-50,000


The bottom right cell is always the total amount the company has distributed in dividends, minus the initial startup cost. Which makes sense. That's exactly how a sole proprietorship would clearly work, and it makes sense that swapping shares around between people wouldn't change that, no matter what their value at the time of the swap.

Any individual investor, like our resident hotshot investor, may be up. But if he is, it's because someone else is down.

Every investor is either hoping for a dividend, or is hoping to sell to someone who's hoping for a dividend. Or hoping to sell to someone who's hoping to sell to someone who's hoping for a dividend. Etc. At the bottom is always the dividend.
This one took much less time to analyze. Did not put the time in to properly analyze the much longer one you originally created.

However, shouldn't your column entitled "Amount Spent on Stock" be more properly labeled "Net Amount Spent on Stock" and reflect the amount from the column "Amount Earned from Stock"? And, that column should be really split into two columns - "Return of original basis" and "Gain (loss) from original basis".

Then the "New Amount Spent on Stock" (for the 1950 transaction) would be reduced by $50,000, retaining the original $100,000 investment.

Continuing to just focus on the 1950 example (as it's always amazing to me how complicated the analysis can get for even the most simplest of transactions) I'm seeing the following personal financial statements for all involved from strictly the one transaction you have here.

1) A - Cash of $100,000 and Equity of $100,000. The Cash came from his original $50,000 plus the $50,000 appreciation of the stock. The Equity came from having an initial $50,000 Equity to make the investment which then gets increased by the $50,000 gain on the sale.

2) B & C - Before the sale they each had $50,000 of Cash and $50,000 of Equity. They now jointly give up $100,000 in Cash to transform that $100,000 of Cash into another Asset (their investment in this company). At this point their total Assets remain unchanged. As does their Equity remain unchanged at $100,000. They've just jointly decided to deploy their Equities into a different form of asset.

As an accountant the only way I can analyze certain things is through the basic Accounting Equation -- Assets = Liabilities + Equity

For all three investors I'm seeing the following:

ASSETS

Cash: +$50,000 (A1) - $50,000 (A2) + $100,000 (A3) - $50,000 (B) - $50,000 (B) = -$0

Company Value -- +$50,000 (A2) + $50,000 (A3) - $100,000 (A3) + $100,000 (B&C) = $100,000

EQUITY
Equity -- +$50,000 (A1) + $50,000 (A3) - $100,000 (A3) + $50,000 (B) + $50,000 (C) = $100,000

I've never done an analysis like this but I think my intuition (and what Mathjak has been adhering to) is represented by what I state above.

Vinny
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
User avatar
mathjak107
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4456
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:54 am
Location: bayside queens ny
Contact:

Re: PP vs Dividend Growth Investing

Post by mathjak107 » Mon Feb 17, 2020 2:27 pm

all the math in the world and all the spins you want to put on it , can't change the fact a hypothetical 9% total return does not matter if it is a 9% dividend , 9% appreciation or a combination of both ...except for taxes there can not be one difference in your balance or cash flow ... ever!

it does not matter what the stocks are , the total return is inclusive of all as far as what it means to you as an investor
Last edited by mathjak107 on Mon Feb 17, 2020 2:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Post Reply