9/30/03 - 9/30/14 (sno, just in case: that would be eleven years)
S&P Consumer Staples Index: 198.97%
S&P 500: 148.12%
And for FUN! CL: 199.17%
I am long both PG & CL; makes sense to own more than one horse in the sector.
File under: Keeping it REAL
snow, on behalf of the US educational system, please accept my apology that the system has FAILED you.
It's "you're" not "your" for goodness sake!
"...slow moving stock 11 years is almost DEAD..." Perhaps you should check into PG's TOTAL RETURN for the past eleven years--but why would you, since by doing so, your (in this case it is "your" and not the conjunction "you're) "argument" would lose a lot of its steam!
Thanks for the laughs!
It can be fairly costly to be a vendor.
Perhaps "management" felt it was a better use of the company's funds to "buy back a few shares".
Sure is FUN to follow this "company".
"I previously explained why TRC should not be in any index."
Very poorly and not successfully.
"You excused Vanguard for its gross negligence in this matter."
No, I didn't excuse Vanguard. Vanguard DOES NOT select the components of the total market index; it simply does an admirable job of matching said index.
YIKES!!! Why do I have to review this over and over with you? It is black and white.
"They probably exited profitable cattle-ranching..." ("probably" being the operative word)
Does "they" mean individual board members who were once ranchers, OR does "they" refer to TRC?
TRC does LEASE quite a few acres to ranchers, but the company is not in the business of ranching.
I'm cool with that. Just like I'm cool with having almonds grown on company land, but no almond butter is manufactured by TRC.
Some time ago, the board make up was changed from being mostly populated by farmers/ranchers to those with real estate backgrounds (and large stake holders). This makes sense to me, since the company has made it clear that, although there will be agricultural businesses on its land, it was becoming more of a real estate company. (Rome wasn't built in a day).
Have a delightful day.
Oh yeah, keep asking the pressing questions!
"I first posted about the overvaluation of TRC stock on
March 31, 2013: "Why is TRC priced so high?" I presume
the defensive Reply was yours under another alias."
Wrong, since I only use one ID; how about you???
"defensive"? Really, you think eotp01's reply (only other poster for this thread besides you) was defensive?:
"Its priced that high on the anticipation that the land is worth much more than it is carried at book value. Probably a correct assumption, but it could be a long time before that value is realized. I own some shares, but they have not done anything in years."
I came across a rather curious post of yours (why haven't you deleted these dated posts? LOL):
On April 4, 2013, you posted:
"With the possible exception of the index funds,
EVERY manager of the below-named institutions can be presumed to be a major financial-criminal."
I was very surprised to read "With the possible exception of the index funds..." A year and a half ago, it appears that you grasped HOW indexes and index fund investing worked, but your recent posts showed you didn't have a clue (or you were simply being antagonistic?). Or, your old age is affecting how you "think"???
I imagine only a handful of shareholders ever attend a TRC annual meeting, hence I doubt there would be a need for a place "to host a major conference".
Who goes to annual meetings??? Last one I attended was G's when they were in the midst of a takeover attempt by Coniston Partners.
WARNING: Troll alert!!! (LOL)
"very disturbed with all the talk of the VEGAS party etc and not a word out of his mouth since..."
No feedback from the "new and prospective distributors". Hmmm.....
This does seem rather strange, but I imagine the vpor possy had a nice time at the Four Seasons.
On another note, I'm intrigued that some of the posters here are not relying on vpor's super dooper prospects/fundamentals as catalysts for the share price to rise. Instead they are holding out hope for some pump and dumpers to promote the stock.
Very interesting "investing" strategy.
"Well Seeking Alpha was right."
To be clear: Seeking Alpha is an online venue for MANY people to publish posts.
RE the post you cited, the AUTHOR was "right", not Seeking Alpha.
(You may already know what I posted, but I often see posters write about S.A. as if only the Great Oz is behind the curtain.)
Nice job avoiding answering my questions!
(but I think I understand WHY you are not able to do so!!!)
I'll try again:
What is the "VALUE for a SHAREHOLDER when it comes to a split"?
How have I, a shareholder of INTC since it paid its first dividend, benefited from its multiple splits...particularly the last split .
Am I right stating that the reason you have not answered these questions is that I have taught you something (a benefit of reading these boards) and you now realize that having a pizza sliced into eight slices v. having it sliced into four is the SAME thing, or in other words, splits are nothing to get excited about, nor to they create value?
"They didn't raise the dividend this time around which may have contributed to yesterday's weakness"
JNJ has had a history of raising its dividend annually and has done so each year since 1963!!!
In the recent past, JNJ has raised its div with its JUNE payment. On 6/10/14, shareholders received .70/share up from .66/share.
(Do you feel better now?)
Are you published?
I don't delete my posts; that way I can be held accountable for what I have written.
For example, if you search this board, you will see that I wrote about the curious location of TRC's annual meetings; most likely before you were born.
Actually I think dahust... is doing a fine job posting; perhaps some novice "investor" will read his/her posts (and also hatch's) and realize that this is a total scam. CLEARLY there are some viable companies to speculate in; vape is not worthy of a speculation. Think about it for 10 seconds....what differentiates lil vape with all the other vaporizor companies??? Bigger question: why oh why is lil vape a public company? How has the company benefited by being public?
No, I "don't see the VALUE for a SHAREHOLDER when it comes to a split"
Please enlighten me and the board.
Let's say a company has 50 million shares outstanding
Investor A owns 100 shares
Shares are split 2:1
Post split there are now 100 million shares outstanding
Investor A owns 200 shares BUT he/she has THE SAME % OWNERSHIP. It's a wash.
Splits signal that the shares HAVE appreciated.
Splits do not affect the operations of a company.
The only "benefit" I derive from a split is that management may be telegraphing that it is optimistic re the future.
Splits do not benefit a company nor a shareholder.
Splits are cosmetic.
Emotional people get excited about splits, but when asked why, no logical response is received.
Riddle me this: how have I, a shareholder of INTC since it paid its first dividend, benefited from its multiple splits...particularly the last split LOL.
What you are missing is that splits have NOTHING to do with a company's value (with the possible exception of a short term pop in price via increased demand from uniformed investors.)
P.S. Anyone who owned 10000 shares of AAPL pre split would own 70000 shares post split, since AAPL split its shares 7:1.