Is This Board Exclusively About Dividends?

[dealtn]

The board should not be exclusively about dividends, if that is what you are suggesting then you are simply wrong.

I agree. It should also be about bonds and Prefs and other negotiable fixed income as part of a portfolio although not cash accounts of course, although yes Bonds etc do have their own board. It should be about all types of income-generating options with a high yield.

But not TR.
TR is about flogging stuff off.

My portfolio does not 'generate TR'.
It may fluctuate in value, but when it rises I don't think Whoopee TR, and when it falls I don't think Humphh negative TR.....
Similarly, when my house rises in value, I don't think Whoop-pee I can sell the outside loo.....

TR is the most unreliable and ridiculous income-generating concept. At best one is burning the boat to keep warm. At worst in a bear market, there is no gain to encash. In contrast, income generators whether divis or coupons will always generate, in varying degrees.

As to the Jehova's Witnesses of TR who complain when folks jib at them dragging TR into every topic, they have plenty of Boards where they can TR to their heart's content, without trying to ram their religion down everyone's throat.

Interesting poll, btw.

V8

From a quote elsewhere on this Board.

These are the Board Guidelines.

The High Yield Share Strategies board is intended for wide-ranging discussions of ways to obtain high yields from equities. Securities such as preference shares, PIBs, Investment Trusts, ETFs, etc can be considered.

While discussions of such securities in the context of specific high-yield strategies are appropriate here, dedicated boards for Investment and Unit Trusts, REITs, and ETFs also exist, as does a board for Investment Strategies. In considering where a specific topic would be most appropriate, posters should bear in mind that this board is intended for discussing income-oriented equities or income-investment strategies. Other strategies, discussions not related to income, or discussions of non-income-related equities, should be directed to those other boards. (my bolds)

From this I think we can conclude that starting a thread on the subject of "Total Return", or even making a post that is almost exclusively about Total Return on a thread, is almost certainly in the wrong place. I don't think though that strategies that aren't solely about (dividend) income are excluded though.

Firstly discussions are specifically allowed to be wide ranging discussions. Secondly it is clear that one way of increasing the income potential of one's portfolio is to have a portfolio that is growing in size.

From the above post it is clear that much is misunderstood about an approach that is labelled "Total Return". It is quite possible it means different things to different people. In the same way that an "Income Strategy" will have underlying changes in the price of constituent shares within the portfolio, hence a Capital "Return", a "Capital Strategy" will have income, and changes in income, that are an Income "Return". It is a rare strategy, in practice, that doesn't have a "Total Return".

(There is much else in the Post quoted that I believe is wrong, but let's leave that for now).

There are a number of "Value" strategies that overlap considerably in their share selection with Income strategies, for instance. Those shares are often income-oriented equities and specifically allowed within the guidelines. Whilst the income that is generated by those companies is welcome, it is incidental to the strategy. The strategy is for the value to be "outed" by the market and the shares re-priced higher. When (or perhaps if) that happens the investment might be sold, and replaced with another (income oriented) equity. Precisely because the original share price rose, more shares of the new candidate can be purchased, and the income generated by that new income-oriented equity is higher than would be the case if the original selection hadn't "grown". Not only is such a strategy producing income, but it is pursuing a growing income stream.

There are other different strategies that can be pursued by selecting income-oriented equities.

One of the most followed strategies on this site was "promoted" by pyad. It is interesting that of those 4 letters none stands for income (or dividend), yet it seems many on this Board seem to think it is a home exclusively for a certain type of income/dividend method. It is very clear from the guidelines it is not. Other Boards might have much tighter guidelines.

Moderator Message:
Edited to make cited board guidelines more explicitly a quote. -- MDW1954

[Wizard]

The board should not be exclusively about dividends, if that is what you are suggesting then you are simply wrong.

I agree. It should also be about bonds and Prefs and other negotiable fixed income as part of a portfolio although not cash accounts of course, although yes Bonds etc do have their own board. It should be about all types of income-generating options with a high yield.

But not TR.
TR is about flogging stuff off.

My portfolio does not 'generate TR'.
It may fluctuate in value, but when it rises I don't think Whoopee TR, and when it falls I don't think Humphh negative TR.....
Similarly, when my house rises in value, I don't think Whoop-pee I can sell the outside loo.....

TR is the most unreliable and ridiculous income-generating concept. At best one is burning the boat to keep warm. At worst in a bear market, there is no gain to encash. In contrast, income generators whether divis or coupons will always generate, in varying degrees.

As to the Jehova's Witnesses of TR who complain when folks jib at them dragging TR into every topic, they have plenty of Boards where they can TR to their heart's content, without trying to ram their religion down everyone's throat.

Interesting poll, btw.

V8

Had you not cut the quote from my post short you would have included...

“Take as an example Dogs of the FTSE. In that strategy shares are selected on yield, but the reason for doing so is because they are expected to give a superior total return provided by income and capital growth as the value of these unloved stocks increases.”

How does this fit with your view of this board? This is an example of a strategy that selects shares based on their high yield but is not exclusively focussed on dividends, but is seeking a total return which includes capital appreciation.

[dspp]

Moderator Message:
This (the other board, HYS&S) board is for "wide-ranging discussions of ways to obtain high yields from equities. Securities such as preference shares, PIBs, Investment Trusts, ETFs, etc can be considered" per the guidelines.

It is not for more general discussion re strategies, including for example Total Return, or other non-equity asset classes such as bonds.

Please go to the Investment Strategies Board if you want to get into such wide-ranging discussions. See viewforum.php?f=8 . I have coped this thread over to HERE so you may continue if you wish.

(which is this board, you are welcome to discuss that sort of stuff here)

HERE you are welcome to discuss pretty much anything re strategies. Long, short, sideways, cash, TR, dogs, whatever.

regards, dspp

[dealtn]

Moderator Message:
This (the other board, HYS&S) board is for "wide-ranging discussions of ways to obtain high yields from equities. Securities such as preference shares, PIBs, Investment Trusts, ETFs, etc can be considered" per the guidelines.

It is not for more general discussion re strategies, including for example Total Return, or other non-equity asset classes such as bonds.

Please go to the Investment Strategies Board if you want to get into such wide-ranging discussions. See viewforum.php?f=8 . I have coped this thread over to HERE so you may continue if you wish.

(which is this board, you are welcome to discuss that sort of stuff here)

HERE you are welcome to discuss pretty much anything re strategies. Long, short, sideways, cash, TR, dogs, whatever.

regards, dspp

Well I appreciate on "this" Board it is permissible to talk about all manner of strategies. I think that should be clear to all, and be indisputable given the Board's title.

The thread was started, elsewhere, for the specific reason on "that Board" an accusation was made about TR.

The point being that at least one user seems to think that any strategy that isn't a typical "Income" strategy must be a TR strategy, with TR seeming to mean anything other than an Income strategy.

Nearly all strategies including Income ones have an element of what might be described as TR, but in reality there are a number of strategies that might not be typical Growth, or TR, strategies that at their heart are selecting income-oriented equities but aren't exclusively pursuing Income only (even were this possible).

So if this is only to be discussed "here" Can I rephrase my question that currently makes the header to this thread and ask "Given the guidelines for the High Yield Shares & Strategies - General Board, that has within its guidelines "The...Board is intended for wide ranging discussions..." and "...is intended for discussing income-oriented equities or income-investment strategies..." is it permissible to discuss strategies that aren't solely about dividends? (as per the example strategy I offered).

If so can it be recognised by users that not every strategy is a binary choice between a mutually exclusive "Income" and the undefined "TR", and stop seeing conflict when it doesn't "always" exist between users across the majority of Boards, nor specifically "there".

[MDW1954]

I think it's accepted that HYSS is about income from equities, but more broadly so than HYP-P. That was basically what we had in mind when formulating the guidelines.

The point you raise is an interesting one, and the mistake that you made probably lies in asking it directly! It's perfectly within the scope of that board to sell shares which have risen in price, thereby creating a bankable profit. Of course, that isn't explicitly out of scope for HYP-P, either, except for the fact that those HYP investors who do it, eg TJH, then recycle the proceeds into other stocks.

Extensive meta-discussions (eg "what is a board for?") are probably best on Biscuit Bar, where (as you will have seen) if there's sufficient strength of opinion, things get changed. But I at least am content to see this thread continue for a little longer.

But to stress: while HYSS is generally about income, it seems silly to deny that higher yielding shares don't have an element of value investing about them.

Finally, I do disagree with what you say about none of the four letters of "pyad" being about income or dividends.

MDW1954

[dealtn]

I think it's accepted that HYSS is about income from equities, but more broadly so than HYP-P. That was basically what we had in mind when formulating the guidelines.

The point you raise is an interesting one, and the mistake that you made probably lies in asking it directly! It's perfectly within the scope of that board to sell shares which have risen in price, thereby creating a bankable profit. Of course, that isn't explicitly out of scope for HYP-P, either, except for the fact that those HYP investors who do it, eg TJH, then recycle the proceeds into other stocks.

Extensive meta-discussions (eg "what is a board for?") are probably best on Biscuit Bar, where (as you will have seen) if there's sufficient strength of opinion, things get changed. But I at least am content to see this thread continue for a little longer.

But to stress: while HYSS is generally about income, it seems silly to deny that higher yielding shares don't have an element of value investing about them.

Finally, I do disagree with what you say about none of the four letters of "pyad" being about income or dividends.

MDW1954

Thank you.

And I don't think I want any guidelines to be changed either, perhaps clarified at most.

What I would like to change, though, are certain behaviours where for some it seems at the slightest deviation from pure Income/dividend investing, a minority will go on the "TR is off-topic charge" which is completely unnecessary, both as a behaviour, and also as in the majority of cases it isn't even against Board guidelines.

There appears to have been a noticeable improvement in behaviours and posts on HYP-P recently, since the guidelines were amended and clarified. It would be nice to see that change in behaviour, and general acceptance that not everyone follows the same strategy, reflected on other Boards too. The vast majority of site users, and those on all Investment Boards, are tolerant and accepting of other's investing styles and methods, its a shame that like in life generally there are a few that would rather adopt provocation than be open-minded to others from whom it is even possible they might occasionally learn something.

[1nvest]

Investment Strategies board - and a thread about "Is this board exclusively about dividends" ??

Looks like this thread is misplaced and should be elsewhere. Or is my interpretation of Boards and Threads misplaced and what I'd classify as the entire site is being declared as for being about Dividends only?

[dealtn]

Investment Strategies board - and a thread about "Is this board exclusively about dividends" ??

Looks like this thread is misplaced and should be elsewhere. Or is my interpretation of Boards and Threads misplaced and what I'd classify as the entire site is being declared as for being about Dividends only?

It was (strangely?) moved here.

It wasn't about "here" or specifically about an "investment strategy".

Instead of further derailing an existing strategy on HYS&S I quoted something on that thread and started a new one "there" to seek clarification about behaviours "there" that appeared, at least to me, to be against that place's guidelines.

A more generic discussion is taking place on Biscuit Bar, where perhaps in hindsight this initial thread should have commenced.

[MDW1954]

Investment Strategies board - and a thread about "Is this board exclusively about dividends" ??

Looks like this thread is misplaced and should be elsewhere. Or is my interpretation of Boards and Threads misplaced and what I'd classify as the entire site is being declared as for being about Dividends only?

It was moved here deliberately by moderator dspp. I think he tried to explain it by stressing the word "here", and his explanatory text (scroll up), but perhaps it wasn't clear enough.

MDW1954

[G3lc]

Why are do the nit-pickers get so nit-picky. This site costs us nothing, so enjoy, express and learn............

[terminal7]

Why are do the nit-pickers get so nit-picky

Idle keyboard warriors?

T7

ps I don't agree every time with the moderators - then who likes the referee? However, without the ref - chaos.