Don't worry... modern computers are fully capable of doing all the complicated math calculations to make sure you get your fair share of the distribution. My only concern is seeing the unit price go higher.
IMO, rising interest rates are almost as much a certainty as death and taxes. It's only a matter of when, not if. When the Greenspan Fed raised rates they did it way too fast and way too much. I suspect the present Fed Board has learned a lesson from that debacle. We'll see.
You're all right... a split does absolutely nothing for the overall value of the partnership. Berkshire Hathaway has proven that it's not necessary to split the price for a stock to go up. GOOG, PCLN, AMZN, and a host of other companies have come to the same conclusion. The demise of the odd-lot price differential and commission penalties, there seems to be little reason for splits. It matters very little whether I own 1000 shares at 80 or 2000 shares at 40. At the end of the day, all I really care about is seeing the price go up.
I'd settle for clean restrooms for starters. Televisions are more of an annoyance than a benefit. During busy times (particularly lunch) there has to be some sort of time limit. WiFi would be nice, but it invites customers to linger without buying anything. That becomes problematic. The idea is to increase traffic that spends $$$ rather than sits around taking up valuable space at tables.
If you're expecting a good earnings report, I'm afraid you're about to be sadly very disappointed. In the case of MCD, I believe the negativity is well deserved.
AMGN is acting more like it's headed for $100 (or $90 or $80) rather than $150. The reality is that it's showing considerable weakness. The whole biotech sector has turned sour and could be in for more selling pressure in coming weeks and months. I wouldn't be a buyer of AMGN above a 2.5% yield (about $100).
They can't even manage what they have now, so how do think they'll be able to efficiently and profitably manage a company double the size of what they already have? Bad idea. A much better idea would be to replace the top management with competent people. Their worst idea ever was to borrow tons of money to do buybacks and pay bigger dividends is their worst idea ever. That's a recipe for certain disaster.
Someone is taking advantage of the weak market to load up on OPK. I haven't seen anything to account for the strength, but I'll take it. The combination of the big short interest plus the huge pile of shares in very strong insider hands gives me a sense of confidence that the downside is not great and the upside is tremendous. Once OPK breaks out, and I believe it will, I think it could run all the way to around $10 or maybe even $11.
Get real. Take a look at a chart comparison of MCD vs. VTI for the past year. MCD is up barely 1% vs. about 23% for VTI. Is that what you call raising the value of your shares?
The more comments I see like faz239, the higher the stock seems to go. I'm not sure why, but some people delight in making themselves look as stupid as they can. Must be some sort of psychological defect that compels this sort of behavior.
As a very small investor, you would probably be better off owning VTI. There's no commission to buy or sell (if done through Vanguard), management fee is a ridiculously low 0.05%, you get maximum diversification all in one convenient package, and it has been outperforming MCD by a wide margin in recent years. I sold MCD at $100 and put the money into VTI at $92.
Without looking further into what you're saying, this smacks of a too-good-to-be-true scenario. Anything with a 9% yield immediately raises big red flags as far as I'm concerned. What worked in the past won't necessarily work in the future. Anything that boosts the return by a factor of 2 MUST involve increased risk by the same multiple.