Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Safe Bulkers, Inc. Message Board

uhlerf 17 posts  |  Last Activity: May 22, 2015 2:30 AM Member since: Jul 23, 2010
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    Why would one buy this stock?

    by suzy7509 Apr 29, 2015 1:20 PM
    uhlerf uhlerf May 22, 2015 2:30 AM Flag

    Joe must be referring to "A" shrs ---- BRK-B began in 1996.....(19 yrs ago).....
    but wait, lowest share price for 1991 was about $8,000/share, which is about 1/27 of today's price..... not sure who, but either someone's math is fuzzy or I need a different broker.....
    I still think BRK-B is a good stock, but 40x??
    ps: in 1996 BRK-B was originally $1110.00/shr, split 50:1 in 2010, which adjusts that original cost basis to about $27 per shr, so having grown to $145/shr is not bad.....
    Dividends ARE important and useful though, so I wouldn't "put ALL my eggs in the BRK basket."
    pps: BTW, I think the B shares were originally supposed to be 1/33 the price of the A shrs, and, dividing $145 (current price) into $218,280, the B shares have grown slightly more (now 1/30), so unless one is a BIG investor, BRK-B looks to me more practical.....

  • Reply to

    Why would one buy this stock?

    by suzy7509 Apr 29, 2015 1:20 PM
    uhlerf uhlerf May 13, 2015 12:30 AM Flag

    Me too, but not sure I'd say "avoid taking ownership"..... I'd say it's sort of like being "on the fence", or maybe " take it for what it's worth.....", or "don't take what I've said as gospel".....
    BTW, ccjjpp, I know what you mean - LOTS of things I see tick me off - especially spelling & poor grammar (also, BTW, looks like I'm 29 yrs older, and I've almost deleted "embarrassed" from my vocabulary (among several other things).

  • Reply to

    Why would one buy this stock?

    by suzy7509 Apr 29, 2015 1:20 PM
    uhlerf uhlerf May 10, 2015 2:12 AM Flag

    Suzy: I guess what I was saying is that in retrospect, I may be better off if I had forgone the dividends, not sold the shrs of BRK-B that I owned. At the time (2003) it seemed like a good idea, but I can't be sure without going back over the past 12 years - If you look at a "max" chart you can see that BRK did trend upward, albeit gradually, but the past 3 to 3.5 years it has grown more rapidly (the chart inclines more steeply)
    One thing I can be sure of, since the 50:1 split, the shares are now much more affordable. Easier to sell a few shrs if money is needed, or in my case, since I now have some dividends supplementing retirement income, the smaller shrs/price induces me to consider slowly re-building my BRK-B position, after all it's a good stock (for all the reasons others have stated.)
    Butttt,,,,, "diversification" is still important..... I don't know how the one poster's value increased 10 times in 20 yrs, while mine works out to 6.7 times in 19 years (not gonna dispute him), but my BRK position is only 8% of my total now, whereas it was a much larger % at one time.....(and I still like/need the dividends).

    Sentiment: Buy

  • Reply to

    Why would one buy this stock?

    by suzy7509 Apr 29, 2015 1:20 PM
    uhlerf uhlerf May 9, 2015 7:58 PM Flag

    ccjjpp: oops, 'nother apology I won't be 78 'til June, so I'm actually 77-11/12, sorry fer exaggerating.....

  • Reply to

    Why would one buy this stock?

    by suzy7509 Apr 29, 2015 1:20 PM
    uhlerf uhlerf May 9, 2015 7:00 PM Flag

    cc: sorry, meant "grandmother" (my typing's getting worse all the time).....

  • Reply to

    Why would one buy this stock?

    by suzy7509 Apr 29, 2015 1:20 PM
    uhlerf uhlerf May 9, 2015 6:55 PM Flag

    ccjjpp: forgive me!! as my grandmotger used to say "excuse me for living"..... that old enough fer ya? BTW, who made YOU the judge & jury of how anyone should talk? But, JFYI, been hanging around younger generation too long, I guess..... but then if you'd read my entire post you'd probly know that..... (just sayin")
    "nother BTW: would you explain what explain what "1966" stands for (your ID) (if I'm not getting too nosy or personal)..........

  • Reply to

    Return Of Capital

    by jc29142 Mar 2, 2015 11:56 AM
    uhlerf uhlerf May 8, 2015 3:33 PM Flag

    So what if MCGC gets sold..... there's still CIM, FTR, NLY, TGH, just to name a few!! In fact TGH's entire yield last year was 100% "return of capital".....

  • Reply to

    Return Of Capital

    by jc29142 Mar 2, 2015 11:56 AM
    uhlerf uhlerf May 8, 2015 2:51 PM Flag

    mero - "don't worry"?? there are several other companies out there that do include "ROC" in their dividend (distribution), and we never know about it 'til we get a 1099 from our broker..... (sometimes they use different words, such as "non-dividend distribution")
    My biggest gripe is when people tout some company as paying a "huge" yield, when part of that yield is actually YER OWN MONEY!!!! (Isn't that what ROC is)
    (still looking for answer to "how is ROC an advantageous investing strategy??"

  • Reply to

    Return Of Capital

    by jc29142 Mar 2, 2015 11:56 AM
    uhlerf uhlerf May 8, 2015 2:37 PM Flag

    jc, it's not yer fault..... everyone, including the companies, calls everything "dividends," even tho some distributions are not what I would define as a true "dividend"..... I was informed (by someone I contacted at some company, years ago) that SOME distributions get reclassified (as "return of capital" [ROC], and that this reclassification cannot be done until end of year, so, meanwhile, distributions get credited to yer brokerage acct as "dividends" and then get reclassified later. IMO this is one of the reasons we receive "amended" 1099's and may be told to file our tax return at last minute (or even "late" [with an extension])
    I have thrown out the question "how is ROC an advantageous investment strategy?" multiple times but never received an answer.....
    casey is exactly right in that any ROC does reduce yer cost basis by the amount of the ROC, so you do have a "capital gain" later, when you sell.
    It's my understanding that ROC is not currently taxed (sort of like "tax deferred," since it lowers your cost basis and then you pay capital gain tax on any amount above that "adjusted cost basis" when/if you sell.)
    Note the word "adjusted cost basis." MY broker shows that term on my monthly statements, but keep in mind that the "adjusting" can only be known for distributions paid thru the previous year, (not including any payment in the current year.) Also note the words "distribution" vs "dividend".... (not always the same thing)
    Sorry so long winded - I believe some of these posters do so to clarify their own thinking, as much as to actually answer a question.....
    ps. - I think the dates you quoted were the "ex" dates (not the pay dates - again, not the same thing, but you probly already know that).....
    bottom line: you did receive a "distribution" (even tho it was called a "dividend" at the time) - you will never receive a "check" - it's all just a matter of wording (definition).....

  • Reply to

    Carpet Baggers

    by the_stakeholder Mar 27, 2015 11:42 AM
    uhlerf uhlerf May 8, 2015 4:38 AM Flag

    slow learner here, but it took me years to figure out that it wasn't just me buying a stock that caused the price to go down after I bought it!!! What did you (and I) expect - after all, that dividend does belong to the guy who "owned" the stock on the record day (not the guy who bought it on the "ex" date)..... Why should you be aggravated, if you know how it works.....? (ps - just an observation, not an owner of STWD)

  • Reply to

    Why would one buy this stock?

    by suzy7509 Apr 29, 2015 1:20 PM
    uhlerf uhlerf May 8, 2015 3:09 AM Flag

    Funny, out of all the responses here, not one refers to the age of the questioner, or why she is so interested in dividends, not that either point is extremely important, but they could be. I for one am a 78 yr old retired school teacher, and at one time dividends were, and still are, an important deciding factor, but now not the only one.
    As one who used to "chase" dividends I am persuaded to pass on this "woulda, coulda, shoulda" story: If I had not sold any shares of BRK-B, they would have grown from $27750 to about $180000, 'stead of the $36000 it now is - bought 25 shrs at $1100/shr when they first came out in 1996, sold some in '03 & '04,(cuz I didn't think they were doing that well) (& wanted to buy some other stuff),
    But now, having around $18k in div coming in, (on top of teachers retirement) and having learned much, am considering more "growth" along with "income", and BRK-B is looking like maybe selling wasn't such a great idea.....
    As I said at the beginning, funny how so many on these boards are so quick with answers (without knowing all the facts).....
    Every comment posted here is right on point, but, just sayin'..........

  • Reply to

    greed?

    by uhlerf May 2, 2015 11:08 PM
    uhlerf uhlerf May 2, 2015 11:26 PM Flag

    BTW, January was only 4 months ago (actually a little less than 4)..... Gosh, even if I'd been a little slow on the draw, it went clear up to 5..... I'd have only made 80%..... darn..... sounds like another "shoulda, coulda,woulda" story.....

  • uhlerf by uhlerf May 2, 2015 11:08 PM Flag

    Wish I had bought in January, around 4 dollars,,,,, Let's see, $9 works out to 125 percent?? What's not to like??

  • Reply to

    I'm no longer lost, Re: 12% dividend

    by lamontcranston17 Apr 16, 2015 6:43 PM
    uhlerf uhlerf Apr 17, 2015 6:50 PM Flag

    : "Lied to" may be a pretty strong expression, but... when terms are tossed around without differentiating or maybe just without understanding their exact definition, I spose we could just chalk up our money losses to "learning experience"..... Words like "distribution" and "dividend" are often used interchangeably, but a dividend is only one form of distribution, and "capital gain" is not a "dividend" either..... These are just a couple examples. (seems like "profit" falls in there somewhere, too).....
    So. Hoosier, maybe you could explain how Yahoo Finance Summary page refers to every stock's "div/yield" when part (or all) of that distribution is not "dividend" at all, but actually "return of capital" (yer own money), especially when that company itself can't determine a given distribution will be treated til AFTER year end.....
    Just when in "investing 101" was that covered?? Did I not pay close enough attention?
    In attempting my DD I'm still waiting for an explanation of "how is 'return of capital' an advantage over straight 'dividend-' or 'capital gain-' investing." Still waiting..... Waiting.....
    (If there really is an "investing 101" maybe someone could point me in that direction).....

  • Reply to

    12%? not really.....

    by uhlerf Apr 14, 2015 10:27 PM
    uhlerf uhlerf Apr 15, 2015 1:46 AM Flag

    oops, my bad (for some readers here) - too many variations in tax treatment, as well as distribution payment for CIM/2014..... My experience in the past has been for ROC to be applied as a single percentage across all qtrly payments, but CIM chose to call the payment on 1/31/14 all ROC (20 cents/share), plus, a small part of the 4/24/14 payment.
    So, since I held 1000 shrs for that first payment, and then 500 thereafter, and since CIM made its 5th (& final) payment for 2014 in January 2015, (total 5 distributions), and cap gain was designated only 3 or the 5 distributions, the arithmetic varies for each investor, and is easy for each of us, but too complicated for here..... Suffice to say the 54% ROC is correct for my situation but probably no one else.
    Still, wish I could figure how ROC is a significantly advantageous investing strategy.
    Anybody???

    Sentiment: Hold

  • Reply to

    12%? not really.....

    by uhlerf Apr 14, 2015 10:27 PM
    uhlerf uhlerf Apr 14, 2015 11:37 PM Flag

    1099 (from broker) & my own record show $380 total. of which $205.92 was ROC. I have found several explanations of ROC is and how it works, but have yet to find any reference as to it being advantageous investing-wise.
    Monthly statements show my cost basis being lowered also. it shows "original" price/share paid, and "adjusted" cost basis.
    My experience has been that the company may not know how distribution is to be treated til after end of year (I have contacted a couple companies about it), and this is part of why some of us receive "amended" 1099 (usually March).
    Only advantage I can think of is lower tax rate on cap gain than tax on div. Still unsure if that's a significant advantage, or if there's something else I haven't figured out.....
    Answer to yer question is 1099 and monthly statements.
    ps, had just 500 shrs (before R/S) (now have 100) (no change in value or cost basis due to R/S)

    Sentiment: Hold

  • I guess everyone here is aware that the "dividend" includes "return of capital" (your own money)?? Last year(2014) ROC was over 54% of the distribution, which means that your cost basis was lowered by 54% of whatever dollar amount you got as "dividends". Now, IF you sell you will make (and be taxed) that much more than you thought (If you thought CIM paid 12% yield). So, I contend that any stock that seemingly pays a "high" dividend really doesn't (when part of their yield is ROC),,,,, I've been trying for several years to find what the investing advantage is in this situation..... If anyone knows, please educate me.
    Granted, the amount that is "ROC" is not currently taxed - that part I know, but if the stock is sold and cost basis is lower than originally paid, then the capital gain (on which we're taxed) increases beyond what it would have been had ROC not occurred. Again, if anyone knows how ROC creates an investing advantage I'm happy to learn.....

    Sentiment: Hold

SB
3.37-0.05(-1.46%)May 27 4:02 PMEDT