CMO, are you kidding?
I'm laughing, Wow! with a long history of cmo paying out .02 in div qtrly. Yea, what a reputation cmo has.
Do any of you people really think any one of these outfits is any more safe than any other?
I don't, and as soon as I smell a whiff of div getting cut or the big money starting to leave, im out.
But for now I'm sticking wit the best price to div payer of the bunch, and that is agnc.
"Sorry i am so slow, but i just seem to be missing this. Can you please point this out for me. Just give me a page number from the financials please. "
First, I was in error and got it a bit backwards on the income from cap gains and from interest spread. In the longer run, it really makes not much difference.
Look at this part of the 10-Q - Management discussion from Edgar
Break out the cap gain which is about 0.80 and you end up with $1.00 for spread income. That is larger that the 0.80 I wrote before, in error. But the basic point is that this company cannot maintain anything like a $1.40 dividend. The $1.00 or so was earned in about as positive environment as could possibly occur. I'm in at about $20 and hope for 3.00 a year for a while. That is darned good. The numbers reported for the income were not "cheater" results. that is how it turned out. But it cannot be repeated. The people writing about dividends of 1.50 continuing in the future and getting diluted out of them are smoking bad weed.
When this thing was at BV X 1.4 or so it was over priced. As a small investor, I cannot replicate what they do with the financing costs and will pay something of a premium for that. NLY is at 1.1 X BV. That is in the range of fair and has better speculative position should long rates increase. If industry trends change, the most overpriced wil have the greatest declines.
It was your playpal sid who suggested the $1.50 and who made the post to which I replied.
However when you write:
"There is a reason why the stock is not trading at or above the $26.60 offering level and a reason wny it did so poorly on Thursday" you should recognize that the reason for the decline is that it is already too expensive relative to the others in the industry and relative to the regular earnings of last quarter. It had a two week or so reaction to the large reported earnings. They will not be able to repeat that.
It's actually the opposite situation from the Ponzi scheme that you describe. In a Ponzi scheme money flows from new investors to old investors. However money is flowing from "old ones" to "new folks" in AGNC's case. The fact that us "old ones" now have 90 cents of undistributed dividends to share with the newbies is evidence that AGNC knew how to profitable invest the equity that we injected. It is because of those profits that we can add "new ones" without decreasing our dividend per share. This equity raise is about 25% dilutive, meaning a group of three "old ones" is inviting a 4th person (new one) to join them. Us old one's already have assets that earn us $1.50/quarter. If us three "old ones" also have 90 cents extra in cash, and each of us gives 50 cents of that to the "new one" then the new one gets 3($.50)=$1.50. That means that the "new one's" 4Q 2009 dividend is completely covered at inception. Even the dividend after that one (1Q 2010) is already mostly covered by that remaining 40 cents 3($.40)=$1.20. All AGNC has to do is have the new one's money generating $1.50 within the next 6 months and we are all golden. Most people don't understand how REITS and MLP's operate. There are good equity raises and bad ones. This one is good. I actually hope it really sells off on the synergy of an equity raise during a (hopefully continued) broad market pullback. I like to buy safe dividenders on the cheap so bearish markets make me happy.
You don't understand as you said .
I'll try another way.
Most other co's issue shares to raise money for ( lets say a buyout of another co).
So that dilutes earnings per share in the short term.
Over time if the purchase of the other co becomes accretive to earnings the pps would rise.
In the case of co's like agnc the offering is immediatly put to work earning money at real high earnings. So why should the pps fall when there is no hit to the coming div.
Hope that helps.