Yannix wrote:
The Real K5 wrote:You imagine insight where you have none
If perhaps I do and it is you who is lacking.
You want to re-order that sentence so it resembles English?
Yannix wrote:
The Real K5 wrote:You imagine insight where you have none
If perhaps I do and it is you who is lacking.
You want to re-order that sentence so it resembles English?
Yannix wrote:
Perhaps I do and it is you who is lacking.
Not my first language. Sorry.
Yannix wrote:
Yannix wrote:Perhaps I do and it is you who is lacking.
Not my first language. Sorry.
I imagine you are not conversant in any language.
I imagine you like little boys.
Yannix wrote:
I imagine you like little boys.
You imagine right. Little girls too.
Flagpole wrote:
[quote]you put the lime in the... wrote:
In other news, Artisan Mid Cap Fund is down 6.02% on the day.
Flagpole wrote:
Who cares about one day? That fund is up 21.82% YTD (and it's actually bringing my YTD total of 26.4% DOWN!
You really don't see the connection between your 8% dividend, and a 6% 1-day drop on the day that mid-cap stocks were up?
The Real K5 wrote:
Yannix wrote:I imagine you like little boys.
You imagine right. Little girls too.
That must be you, the "you're welcome guy.
The Real K5 wrote:
That must be you, the "you're welcome guy.
You want to re-order that sentence so it resembles English?
hey, guess what?
New all time high for the dow. and s&p
just 4 trading days left. the market could crash 1,000 points, so we'll wait it out.
but if you want the bear case, valuations in the US are very high, and then there is this chart, which suggests much of this rally might be phony - stemming from Fed-added liquidity
U R A Funny Little Man wrote:
Flagpole wrote:Explain yourself. Do you mean because there are fees?
If you get a dividend that is reinvested, then that fund is now worth what it was PLUS the added dividend. Are you just playing a game of percentages BEFORE the addition and AFTER?
Are you saying I'm lying about the percentage of the dividend compared to what the fund WAS worth before the dividend.
You need to explain yourself, brother.
Let's use numbers.
Let us take as given that at the close of business today a mutual fund has $1B in assets and a share price of $100 (10 million shares). Further, let us imagine that you have 1,000 shares in said mutual fund ($100,000).
Now after close of business today the fund pays out its 8.03% dividend. Let's imagine that everyone is as brilliant as you and reinvests all dividends. Now, what is the value of the assets in the mutual fund? I'm going to take a wild guess and say that it still has $1B in assets. Unless you think that it can magically increase the value of its assets simply by declaring a dividend.
So, now it has $1B in assets. What percentage of those shares do you own? Well, before the dividend you owned 0.01% of the shares in the fund. After the dividend you now own 0.01% of the shares in the fund. So, your shares are worth $1B x 0.01% = $100,000.
Gee, that's odd. After the dividend your wealth in this mutual fund is precisely the same as it was before. Of course, because there was a distribution you will now owe taxes on the dividend so practically speaking you will have a bit less money than before.
Now, there is another possibility which I alluded to earlier. That is, perhaps the fund managers are magically increasing the value of the fund's assets by declaring a dividend. Of course, if this is the case I would argue that the fund managers are guilty of gross malfeasance. After all, their job is to increase the wealth of the fund's shareholders. As such, if they can create wealth simply by declaring a dividend they should probably declare an 8% dividend EVERY DAY. Heck, why stop there, Iet's let the shareholders get rich quickly. They should declare a 100% dividend every day. In just a week or two you will be the richest man in the world (well, you and your other lucky shareholders in this magical fund).
And so we see once again.
A) Flaggy's failure to understand even the most basic of investment issues absolutely staggers the imagination.
B) Flaggy's inability to admit how embarrassingly wrong he was is confirmed for the nth time.
Typical Flaggy Responses to above post sequence:
1) Delete offending post (better yet, the entire thread if possible) and hope nobody notices/remembers.
2) Ignore offending post and hope nobody notices/remembers. (appears to be the chosen strategy to this point)
3) Give the usual:
"INCORRECT!
a) I NEVER said what I actually said
b) I did not MEAN what my post plainly states
c) It doesn't matter because here is the REAL POINT - can we change the topic now please?"
...and another all time high for the Dow.
Super call, klondike5
agip wrote:
...and another all time high for the Dow.
Super call, klondike5
Let's not rush to any conclusions yet. The market still has today, tomorrow, and part of Friday to crash and make Klondike5 look like he's not a complete fool.
Judah wrote:
agip wrote:...and another all time high for the Dow.
Super call, klondike5
Let's not rush to any conclusions yet. The market still has today, tomorrow, and part of Friday to crash and make Klondike5 look like he's not a complete fool.
Are you folks serious? K5 may well have made a bad call here. But nearly everyone who ever tries to get in and out of the market at lows/highs respectively makes LOTS of bad calls. That does not make them 'complete fools'.
Bpk wrote:
Flagpole- a dividend from a mutual fund does not increase your net worth.
What are you talking about? Of course it does. It gets reinvested, then grows along with the fund. Of course it increases my net worth.
Flagpole wrote:
Bpk wrote:Flagpole- a dividend from a mutual fund does not increase your net worth.
What are you talking about? Of course it does. It gets reinvested, then grows along with the fund. Of course it increases my net worth.
let's say the NAV of the fund is $10. Then it pays out a dividend of $1 per share. Do you have $11 per share now? No, because the NAV dropped that same $1, to $9. So you have the same $10 before and after. $9 of mutual fund and $1 of cash.
Think of it this way - the fund has been collecting dividends each month from companies. Do you get those dividends each month? Not usually - they are kept by the mutual fund, and slowly increment. The NAV of the fund goes up as the cash is received because the dividends belong to the fund shareholders. $10.01, $10.02, $10.03...but then one day the cash is disbursed. Where did the dividend cash go? out of the fund. So the NAV drops by that exact amount.
U R A Funny Little Man wrote:
U R A Funny Little Man wrote:Let's use numbers.
Let us take as given that at the close of business today a mutual fund has $1B in assets and a share price of $100 (10 million shares). Further, let us imagine that you have 1,000 shares in said mutual fund ($100,000).
Now after close of business today the fund pays out its 8.03% dividend. Let's imagine that everyone is as brilliant as you and reinvests all dividends. Now, what is the value of the assets in the mutual fund? I'm going to take a wild guess and say that it still has $1B in assets. Unless you think that it can magically increase the value of its assets simply by declaring a dividend.
So, now it has $1B in assets. What percentage of those shares do you own? Well, before the dividend you owned 0.01% of the shares in the fund. After the dividend you now own 0.01% of the shares in the fund. So, your shares are worth $1B x 0.01% = $100,000.
Gee, that's odd. After the dividend your wealth in this mutual fund is precisely the same as it was before. Of course, because there was a distribution you will now owe taxes on the dividend so practically speaking you will have a bit less money than before.
Now, there is another possibility which I alluded to earlier. That is, perhaps the fund managers are magically increasing the value of the fund's assets by declaring a dividend. Of course, if this is the case I would argue that the fund managers are guilty of gross malfeasance. After all, their job is to increase the wealth of the fund's shareholders. As such, if they can create wealth simply by declaring a dividend they should probably declare an 8% dividend EVERY DAY. Heck, why stop there, Iet's let the shareholders get rich quickly. They should declare a 100% dividend every day. In just a week or two you will be the richest man in the world (well, you and your other lucky shareholders in this magical fund).
And so we see once again.
A) Flaggy's failure to understand even the most basic of investment issues absolutely staggers the imagination.
B) Flaggy's inability to admit how embarrassingly wrong he was is confirmed for the nth time.
Typical Flaggy Responses to above post sequence:
1) Delete offending post (better yet, the entire thread if possible) and hope nobody notices/remembers.
2) Ignore offending post and hope nobody notices/remembers. (appears to be the chosen strategy to this point)
3) Give the usual:
"INCORRECT!
a) I NEVER said what I actually said
b) I did not MEAN what my post plainly states
c) It doesn't matter because here is the REAL POINT - can we change the topic now please?"
That is all BS, brother. Dividends are paid out by the individual companies in the fund that then equal the large sum dividend that I get as a holder of that fund. Dividends are paid to shareholders out of the profits that the companies in the fund make. A fund doesn't just have a set value.
agip wrote:
let's say the NAV of the fund is $10. Then it pays out a dividend of $1 per share. Do you have $11 per share now? No, because the NAV dropped that same $1, to $9. So you have the same $10 before and after. $9 of mutual fund and $1 of cash.
Think of it this way - the fund has been collecting dividends each month from companies. Do you get those dividends each month? Not usually - they are kept by the mutual fund, and slowly increment. The NAV of the fund goes up as the cash is received because the dividends belong to the fund shareholders. $10.01, $10.02, $10.03...but then one day the cash is disbursed. Where did the dividend cash go? out of the fund. So the NAV drops by that exact amount.
That is a defeatist way to think of mutual funds and dividends. The alternative is getting NO dividend, and so even if you want to look at Net Asset Value, I say it's STILL higher than it would have been without dividends. Would you rather not receive them?
And another thing! [wagging my finger]...
When a dividend is paid and the NAV drops, and the investor reinvests that dividend (as most due before they are retired), then the investor RECEIVES MORE SHARES!!! So, ultimately the investor makes out when receiving dividends and reinvesting them!!!
Recognizer of Ridiculousness wrote:
Judah wrote:Let's not rush to any conclusions yet. The market still has today, tomorrow, and part of Friday to crash and make Klondike5 look like he's not a complete fool.
Are you folks serious? K5 may well have made a bad call here. But nearly everyone who ever tries to get in and out of the market at lows/highs respectively makes LOTS of bad calls. That does not make them 'complete fools'.
It ain't over until I get back in. If ever.
Clearly I would have been better off getting out today instead of five months ago. Still, I got back in with the Dow at 9k in 2009 and got our with it at 15k. I believe there is a very good chance I will be getting in with it appreciably below 15k. So far over the past 14 plus years I have done much better getting in and out of the market than had I just held the hold time like these other geniuses who took the ride all the way down to 6,800 in 2009