Posted on 03/24/2025 8:43:28 AM PDT by JSM_Liberty
Roger that.
“Sound advice.”
Have you ever had a situation where a formerly reliable increasing-dividend stock has cut back their dividend substantially?
If so, do you divest of it and move the money into other Steady Freddys ?
You may not have heard my anecdote about the industry.
Many decades ago I was finishing up my MBA and was being interviewed by various companies for jobs.
One of them was a major investment management firm.
They were trying to recruit me—and told me that as a new analyst I would be responsible for managing a billion dollars in assets.
I knew I was totally unqualified for that type of responsibility (since I had zero real world business experience) and immediately told them “no thanks”.
What a bunch of clowns.
The only way we see the end of Big Oil is is somebody makes it against the law. Not in our lifetimes anyway.
At $30 XOM was like printing money. Dang near the same for CVX. Both boards would sell their own children to keep paying a dividend. I used to tell the kids at CVX that the board would empty the office before they missed a dividend.
I saw a very similar thing in the management consluting business. A whole gang of well paid and newly minted bright kids without any experience led by one partner of the firm. What they told you was what your people have been trying to tell you Mr. Manager if only you would listen to them. Their process is formulary and the bottle and sell it over and over and over.
I laugh but feel a little sorry for the kids at the bank that are part of their offering of money management.
There is hardly any way that any money manager is actually culling and sifting through for the very best investments They all follow some kind of protocol. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn’t. All in all, if they stick to it they will be OK and you will come out below average. If you don’t like what they are selling you need to go somewhere else because they can’t afford the time to customize for your desires. They are too busy managing their package and selling more of it. That is the way the game is played and if you don’t like it you can go somewhere else or do it yourself.
Good point about the management consulting business...
What blew me away was that in the MBA program we were trained that every type of business had unique elements and if you did have an excellent understanding of those you were doomed to failure.
The “investment management” industry apparently could not care less.
Have you ever had a situation where a formerly reliable increasing-dividend stock has cut back their dividend substantially?
If so, do you divest of it and move the money into other Steady Freddys ?
_______________________________________________
Yes, General Electric and that crook Jeff Immelt cut the dividend on me about 15 years ago. Also, during the mortgage meltdown I think a stock may have not increased its dividend one year. However, I also had a situation where Aflac dropped from $60 to $8 during 2009 when a report came out claiming they were highly leveraged with junk debt. Shortly thereafter, the CEO and other insiders bought up AFL stock, and I then bought myself, and now Aflac is at $110/share. Therein lies the problem with mutual funds. You are guaranteed below average returns, while one stock can power my portfolio to great returns.
On the other hand, over long periods of time, the advantage of the S&P 500 is that it automatically weeds out poor performers (International Paper) and adds up-and-comers.
The problem is the price weighting so you overweight on the (vastly overpriced) Magnificent 7.
FReegards!
Dividend Aristocrats.
There are no brokers or advisors that do not have a conflict of interest. NONE.
“These funds take almost 2% off the top,”
Index funds expense ratios are about a tenth of that
___________________________________________
You are correct that Index funds charge much lower fees, but there are hidden fees (12-B fees, etc.) that make it a little higher than what is advertised. The point I am making is that it is actually fairly easy to beat “average market returns” when you are not overseeing 5 billion dollars of $$. When a fund is that huge, it is a de facto Index Fund. They have very little flexibility, and they are always worried about their Morningstar rating. IMHO I think individuals would be better served by creating their own mutual fund, and then doing the opposite of what Jim Cramer advises!
On the other hand, over long periods of time, the advantage of the S&P 500 is that it automatically weeds out poor performers (International Paper) and adds up-and-comers.
Absolutely agreed.
I have had a couple of home runs, but they were not with large sums of money.
🥹
Speaking of conslutants. Try this one on. In the Treasury Department Booze, Allen and Hamilton get 80% or so of the contract revenue six months at a time for the last 20 years or so.
https://www.independentsentinel.com/sec-bessent-explains-the-grift/
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.