找回密码
 注册
搜索
楼主: overdrunk

[原创] 没有分红的股市是纯投机股市--不存在投资基础

[复制链接]
 楼主| 发表于 2010-7-20 11:23 PM | 显示全部楼层


回复 17# lite1067
我想知道如果不分红,投资这个公司的终极目标是什么?你的股票的价值是什么?你能拿你的股票到该公司兑现票面价值吗?

只有分红,市场的价值才会不断增加,才会有大家都赢的可能。不分红,那么股市是零和游戏。因为总体来看,市场的资金没有增加。只不过一部分人的钱跑到了另一部分人口袋里。
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-7-20 11:28 PM | 显示全部楼层
有除分红之外的价值体现方法。你仔细想想吧
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-7-20 11:55 PM | 显示全部楼层
回复  lite1067
我想知道如果不分红,投资这个公司的终极目标是什么?你的股票的价值是什么?你能拿你的股票到该公司兑现票面价值吗?

只有分红,市场的价值才会不断增加,才会有大家都赢的可能。不分红,那么股市是零和游戏。因为总体来看,市场的资金没有增加。只不过一部分人的钱跑到了另一部分人口袋里。
overdrunk 发表于 2010-7-20 23:23


"你能拿你的股票到该公司兑现票面价值吗"
什么是你想的公司票面价值? do you know for most common stocks, the face value(par) is $0.01 per share?

老大,多体会一下我在第一个回帖里说的。或者随便找本corporate finance or financial accounting book.
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-7-20 11:58 PM | 显示全部楼层
A company not making dividend does not mean such company is not able to make dividend.  For good companies, if the directors choose not to make dividend but to reinvest to generate higher capital return, such ability to generate future dividend or capital return will be reflected on its share price.  Such companies should not be forced to make dividend to "prove" its internal value.  For example, Company A earns $1 per share with 1 million shares outstanding.  It should not change Company A's valuation whether or not its directors decide to distribute such $1 per share to its sharesholders because if you buy all of company A's shares today and become the sole shareholder, you can name your own directors and order the company to pay your dividend now, or even liquidate the company and get all cash out.  A company's valuation is mainly determined by its ability to generate profit, not by whether it will make any distributions.

Just assume you invest $100 in a company with EBITDA of $1 million in year 1, and in year 5 such company is generating EBITDA of $1 billion a year.  However, during the 5 years, the company did not distribute any dividend.  Do you think your original $100 is worth nothing now?   If your investment is now worth $100,000, do you think such growth is just speculation?

回复 16# overdrunk
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-7-21 12:07 AM | 显示全部楼层
“股”的意思是你拥有的份额,是个相对数。一个公司好比一台机器,如果一开始你拥有这台机器1%的股份, 过来两年,这台机器变得更强了,产出翻了几番,如果有人想买这台机器,当然不会是两年前的价格,而你始终拥有1%的股份,这1%的股份会随着机器的增强而增值,虽然这个增值在卖这台机器的时候才能变成cash。像苹果这样的公司,能一年接一年的把机器变强,根本不用分红。msft不同,手里的钱一大堆,但是有钱没处用,不能花到地方让公司更强,能花的都花了,还有剩余,只有分红。
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-7-21 12:34 AM | 显示全部楼层
What is your 终极目标?  Make money, right?  "Ultimately", it should not make a difference if your return is distributed every year by way of dividend or distributed at the end by way of sale of your shares.   

Example: you bought one share of company A at $100 which has 1 million shares outstanding and is generating profit of $1 million per year, it makes dividend of $1 per share per year.  In year 5, assuming everything is equal, your share is still worth $100 and you have earned $5 in dividend.

Now assume the company is still generating $1 million profit a year but is hoarding cash.  In year 5, you have not earned any dividend but the company has extra $5 million cash on its balance sheet.  If everything is equal, don't you think your share should worth $105 now, rather than $100?

Now assume the company is still generating $1 million profit a year but is reinvesting such profit into its business by buying other assets with zero return.  In year 5, you have no dividend income but the company has extra $5 million other assets on its balance sheet.  Don't you think your share should worth $105 now, rather than $100?

Now assume the company is still generating $1 million profit a year but is reinvesting such profit into its business with a return of 10% per year.  In year 5, even though you have not earned any dividend, don't think your share should be worth way more than $105?

回复  lite1067
我想知道如果不分红,投资这个公司的终极目标是什么?你的股票的价值是什么?你能拿你的股 ...
overdrunk 发表于 2010-7-21 01:23
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-7-21 01:59 PM | 显示全部楼层
thanks
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-7-22 12:56 PM | 显示全部楼层


这种书呆子理论,让人笑掉大牙。

为什么要分红?主要是防止管理层乱花钱。

但美国的税法对分红很不友好,等于要交两次税(一次corporate income tax,一次personal income tax);
所以,一个管理层如果能信得过,而且公司的投资回报率超过市场平均值,那最好一分钱不分。
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-7-22 01:20 PM | 显示全部楼层
这种书呆子理论,让人笑掉大牙。

为什么要分红?主要是防止管理层乱花钱。 ...
dividend_growth 发表于 2010-7-22 14:56



   
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-7-22 02:20 PM | 显示全部楼层
好像不少人都看漏了楼主的“利润的一部分”、“终极目标”等词。使我联想到以前不少人一说到“为共产主义而终身奋斗”时就热血沸腾的情景。
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-7-22 03:30 PM | 显示全部楼层
有几个大公司的管理层是信的过的?真金白银不骗人!保守一点就买长年分红公司的股票,至少不会赔!
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-7-22 03:49 PM | 显示全部楼层
回复 31# newTA

当然不多,而且青蛙们连好的management需要啥标准都不知道;如果你没兴趣钻研还是买分红的蓝筹股省心,但那样也甭想发大财了。
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 2010-7-22 08:58 PM | 显示全部楼层
这种书呆子理论,让人笑掉大牙。

为什么要分红?主要是防止管理层乱花钱。 ...
dividend_growth 发表于 2010-7-22 14:56

怎么能保证公司的盈利能最终到你的口袋里呢?比如GM,如果分红的话,大家还能拿一点。如果不分红,最后来个chapter 7, 投资者都被涮死了。你买的股票花的钱都被蒙掉了。有人可能靠炒GM的股票赚了钱,不过是赚的别人的钱,不是GM公司的钱。
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-7-22 09:34 PM | 显示全部楼层
怎么能保证公司的盈利能最终到你的口袋里呢?比如GM,如果分红的话,大家还能拿一点。如果不分红,最后来 ...
overdrunk 发表于 2010-7-22 22:58


嘿嘿,谁说GM不分红?GM从上个世纪30年代就稳定分红,每年红利基本上超过5%!

如果你连GM是不是红利股都不知道,你对股市了解实在是太少太少了,俺说你书呆子并不过分。
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 2010-7-22 10:43 PM | 显示全部楼层
回复 34# dividend_growth
老大,我还真是新手,去年入的股市。我如股市的时候GM都要倒闭了。我从来没看过GM。用GM只是个例子。这样的公司应该还有不少哦。倒闭只是极端例子。倒退的公司在少数吗(比如earning节节减少的)?你可以说不要买退步的公司的股票。可是已经持有股票的股东呢?
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-7-22 10:49 PM | 显示全部楼层
怎么能保证公司的盈利能最终到你的口袋里呢? You need to do research about such company.  The theory is - if the company is reinvesting cash in profiting business, you can hold such company's share without demanding dividend.  And if you want to get those profit in your pocket, just sell the shares because in an efficient market, the fair market value will reflect the profits the company accumulated in the past.  If your diligence revealed that the company is burning money, you can get out easily in a liquid market.  Remember, if a company goes bankrupt, not only your "profit" is gone, your "principal" is also gone.  A company typically won't go bankrupt in one day which would give you plenty of time to examine whether to stay in or get out (with a profit, break-even, or at a loss).  

Again, in a liquid market, stock price is the equivalent of cash.  Whether a portion of such is in your safe vault or reflected in the stock price is not relevant.  Think about interest from your savings account.  Whenever banks pay you interest, they just add that amount to your existing account balance.  Yes, that bank may go bankrupt tomorrow and you will have nothing so you better cash out those interest each time they are paid and put such interest money under your bed.  But, have you ever done that?  Or, do you just watch your bank account balance growing every month just like the stock price?  Whether the interest is reflected in your account balance or reflected as physical money under your bed is iirelevant because theoretically you could immediately turn that account balance into cash under your bed.

Same thing as to dividend.  If you really really want to see some cash under your bed to sleep well, you could sell a portion of your shares each time after the company reports a profit.  In another word, if the company does not make a dividend, you can make a "dividend" by yourself.  

怎么能保证公司的盈利能最终到你的口袋里呢?比如GM,如果分红的话,大家还能拿一点。如果不分红,最后来 ...
overdrunk 发表于 2010-7-22 22:58
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-7-22 10:59 PM | 显示全部楼层
Again, think about your money in your savings account.  Yes, last year there were many banks bankrupted.  And, yes, there are many banks' financial conditions are still deteriorating.  If you happen to maintain your savings account in those "bad" banks, what would you do?  Switch your account to another bank, right?  So, if the company you invested does not perform well, just sell your shares and reinvest it into another good company.  

回复  dividend_growth
老大,我还真是新手,去年入的股市。我如股市的时候GM都要倒闭了。我从来没看过GM ...
overdrunk 发表于 2010-7-23 00:43
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-7-22 11:34 PM | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 dividend_growth 于 2010-7-23 01:38 编辑
回复  dividend_growth
老大,我还真是新手,去年入的股市。我如股市的时候GM都要倒闭了。我从来没看过GM ...
overdrunk 发表于 2010-7-23 00:43



根据美国股市的历史来讲,分红的公司的回报要比那些不分红的高。其中原因如下:

1. 只有财力和盈利能力比较稳定的公司才会分红;

2. 分红防止企业管理层滥用公司的资金;

3. 分红定期的给股东现金,很多投资者需要定期的收入,比如退休老人等;

4. 分红再投资(dividend reinvestment)在熊市中起到一种dollar cost averaging的作用,只要公司不倒掉不砍分红,投资者可以在股价低迷时收集更多的股份,等经济和市场复苏后就能得到更好的回报。


但如果说一个公司如果不分红就没有价值,那绝对是个大大的谬论。那么为什么不分红好呢?原因如此:

1. 公司不分红给股东不代表公司没有价值啊?一个公司需要不停的投资,才能提高自己的盈利能力,如果一个公司把所有的盈利都分掉了,还拿什么钱去发扬光大啊?现在世界上的大公司,哪一个不是从小做起?

2. 市场上发展最快的企业,它们资金的再投资率远远高于市场平均值,这样的情况下投资者把资金留给公司可以得到更高的回报;Avon, IBM, Xerox, Johnson & Johnson, Merck, HP, Schlumberger, Intel, Microsoft, Dell, Oracle, Cisco, Wal-Mart, Starbucks, McDonald's, Berkshire Hathaway这些长期给投资者带来超级回报(几十年几百倍几千倍)的公司,在它们最高的成长期是要么完全不分红,要么分一点点;而当它们开始有规模的分红时,它们给投资者的回报连超过S&P 500都困难,意思不大了;

3. 70-80年代电子交易盛行后,企业回购自己的股票的难度大大降低,于是越来越少的公司愿意分红了。分红等于投资者要像美国政府交两次税,而企业回购股票则没这个问题。企业回购股票的效果跟分后再投资想像;


所以这里的结论是,投资有分红的蓝筹股票是妥当的行为,但最好的公司是不分红或者分红较少的。

评分

1

查看全部评分

回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 注册

本版积分规则

手机版|小黑屋|www.hutong9.net

GMT-5, 2025-8-6 07:41 PM , Processed in 0.118223 second(s), 17 queries .

Powered by Discuz! X3.5

© 2001-2024 Discuz! Team.

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表