Here is my question. The current annual dividend per share is 1.75. Three years ago the dividend was 1.35. The stock is trading for $50 / share. If I am requiring 12% compunded annually to invest in the stock. What is the stock intrinsic value?
207889
You can use the Dividend Growth Model to value your investment based on the current dividend, estimated growth in the dividend and your required return.\n\nThe current dividend is 1.75 and based on 3 yr history (assuming this growth will continue) your dividend is growing at 9.04%. Your required return is 12%. \n\nThe stock will return 12% if you were to buy it at no greater than $64.37.\n\nValue = (Current Dividend x (1+ dividend growth)) / (Required Return - Dividend Growth)\n\nBut this value is only loosely in line with the concept of "intrinsic value". Instead of explaining the concept of "intrinsic value" here, let me point you to the definitive source on intrinsic value - Warren Buffett.\n\nsee pp 77-78 of the attached link
49181
Well the PF that is deducted is paid in 2 tranches, check if you got both your tranches also.\n\nYou should ideally get your share + Company share + interest
223175
You want to make all your fractions have the same denominator, so, say we pick 90. 40 x 2.25=90, so 1/40 is the same as 2.25/90 (for B).\nDoing the same thing with C 12 x 7.5 = 90, so 1/12= 7.5/90.\n\nNow, you can relate the workers. A= 1/90, B= 2.25/90 and C= 7.5/90.\nThat means that A gets one share, B 2.25 shares and C gets 7.5 shares. So, set Rs 360 equal to the total number of shares, which is 1 + 2.25 + 7.5 or 10.75. Divide 360 by 10.75 to get the 'value' of a share. 360/10.75 = 33.488.\nThat means A gets 33.488, B gets 2.25 x 33.488 = 75.35 and C gets 7.5 x 33.488 = 251.16\n\nSo, your answer is D.
588935
a. 10.9\n\n\nusing Gordon's dividend growht discount model, which is Dividends / (discount rate - growth), we see that:\n\n$1.80 (10.9% - 7%) = $46.15.\n\nof course, you have to use algebra to back into x, which was the 10.9%.
458050
They cannot charge you 30% when your shares are STT paid.  It is only 10% flat.  It comes U/s 111A.  \n\nEven I have filed the returns for F.Y 2005-06 with the same income and paid only 10% flat. (5 assessments for my family with same income u/s 111A.)\n\nFor your information I am giving you a web link.  Also google your question - income tax 111A short term capital gains - You will find number of answers.\n\nhttp://sify.com/finance/tax/fullstory.php?id=13570054
283192
Dividends are the primary reason, but everyone counts on capital gains that's why dividend yields are so low. If you're just counting on capital gains, that's not tax efficient because the value of the stock goes up just because of inflation, yet you're taxed on that (even though the real value has stayed the same).\n\nPeople here is the main reason why capital gains cannot be the primary reason... because it depends on somebody else buying it after you at a higher price? And then someone has to buy it after them. That's not sustainable. The primary reason should be dividends because the company is making money with the money you "lent" them... not keeping it all for themselves (if they don't pay dividends).
263436
You can go to sharebuilder and put some in monthly.  If you pick a company that is known to be stable and pay good dividends then you can reinvest the dividends, it becomes sort of like compound interest, where the interest starts earning interest.\n\nDiversification is nice, so low cost Exchange Traded Funds are an important consideration.  I like the Dow Jones Select Dividend Index Fund (DVY).  It is about $62 a share right now and is within pennies of its Net Asset Value, the worth of the stocks inside the fund.  It has a distribution yield of about 3.60 which is a pretty good rate of return compared to if you left the money in the bank.  Every share you buy is getting a slice of some 114 very profitable companies that share part of their profits (dividends) with you the stockholder.\n\nGood luck, whatever you do.
179504
I was checking this out the other day, but bought PTEN instead.  This stock is fundamentally unsound, the only positive is the 31% quarterly revenue growth, undoubtedly due to the increase in gold prices.  Technically, it's another story; all indicators are Very Bullish in the Short, Mid and Long terms and the stock seems to be forming a solid base finding support at 5.94.  Personally, I'd buy this stock if I weren't currently in another issue, though I rarely get involved with an issue that is fundamentally weak because it makes very little sense.  \n\nHaving said that, if I get stopped out of PTEN and KRY is still in it's base, my play will be to get in as close to 5.75 as possible with a fixed stop loss at $4.90 because volatility could push it to it's previous resistance at 4.91.  If it closes below 5.25 I'll be keeping a close eye on it, and will consider cutting my losses, depending on indicators.  If it stops me out before I can react I'll just take my loss and move on, but it will be a much larger loss than I normally take, because I usually set an 8-10% stop loss, so I would consider this a risky play.  However, if the stock breaks it's resistance at 6.14 and closes higher than it's previous high of 6.25 I'll change my stop loss to a trailing stop of 10% and just hold on, because I can see this stock easily moving to 9-12 before it's next pull back.\n\nWhatever you do, protect your downside.
364425
The dividends are significantly higher with Northwestern as well as the cash values when compared to Met life.  I own Northwestern and I was looking at Met as well this year when I was purchasing a policy and I know Northwestern's dividend this year is 7.5% and has averaged in the past 20 years I think around 8.25%.  Met's divided rate this year is 6.25% but don't know the average but do know its lower.  My agent spead sheeted my the illustrations and it was a pretty no brainer once I saw the difference.  He explained when buying a cash value policy you want to buy from a mutual company.  When you buy from a mutual company you essentially become an owner of the company.  The being because Northwestern has no stockholders so all the excess premiums and investment income is given back in the form of a dividend.  When you look at Met their a stock company and they basically have another mouth to feed since they have stockholders and policyholders.  So which one would give you the best value?  A mutual company.  Also you might want to reference and article I found by an actuary (James H. Hunt) with the consumer federation of america its titled evaluating cash value life insurance polices www.consumerfed.org/pdfs/evalins.PDF (if the link does not work yahoo search his name and you will find it) he notes that you should stay away from demutualized insurers like met life and prudential and go with a mutual company because you will get the best value.  I hope this helps.\nZack\nI could refer you to my insurance guy.  Let me know
585284
On the ex-dividend date, shares are bought or sold without the dividend. So if you buy them on or after that date, you do NOT receive the dividend.\n\nTata's press releases and website do not seem to specify the ex-dividend date. To get that specific information, contact the investor relations person at the email address listed below.
561577
You can also check here.  This is free, but its only a partial list:\n\nhttp://www.earnings.com/dividend.asp?date=20060313&client=cb
131740
It's been so long since I did ratios, I don't know if I remember them exactly...but I think current ratio is 2.5 ($40,000 current assets / $16,000 current liabilities), debt to equity would be 0.75 (Current liabs plus long term liabs = $60,000 / $80,000 equity), return on equity would be 9% ($7,200 / $80,000).  Hope you are just using these as check figures!!!
75388
When a stock goes "ex Dividend" it means that it "excludes" the dividend entitlement.\n\nYou must have bought the stock on the trading day BEFORE the ex dividend date to receive the dividend.\n\nThere are other dividend dates (such as payable date - which is when you get paid the dividend) and also the record date (which is the date by which you need to be on the reigster of shareholders). \n\nIf you buy before the ex date, you'll be on the register by the time the record date comes around. The record date is more of a "back office" administrative date that shareholders need not worry about.
142654
I really doubt it.  No company has that much cash on hand to waste.  The 1B is probably referring to the increase in the value of some stock options, which might or might not be a big deal depending on the structure of the company.  If he founded the company and kept a big part of the company's stock over the years, what's the big deal?  No one complains that Warren Buffett's "annual incomes" (really unrealized gains but that's going to be the same as the CEO here) have totaled 40+ billion over the years?
658319
Well, you are right, if over time they don't go up or down, and there is little to no dividend pay out, you don't make a profit or suffer a loss.\n\nRemember, investing does not come with any guarantees and any investment can go up or down or stay level.\n\nHowever, and this is where the words "over time" become important, the stock market has always risen.  Yes, over shorter time periods you can watch it go down, or zig zag (and btw..dollar cost averaging in a zig zag market can make a good profit), but over longer periods of time is rises.\n\nTake a good look at a DOW or S&P chart and you can see this for yourself (I know info is out there that actually details this but I can't offer up a link without investing a ton of time).\n\nAnd as to whether or not you should have pulled it in year 1 instead of waiting 4 more years?   Well that's a big DUH!  Because if we could PREDICT the future, investing would be perfectly safe for everyone wouldn't it?\n\nYou can't predict the future so you are in effect placing a bet.  You bet your investment grew more than it would have if you'd just bought a CD instead, on the day you intend to cash it out.  Depending on the investment, the date in and the date out, your answer will vary.\n\nIf you do figure out how to know in advance that your stock will be worth exactly the same on future dates, let me know.  I think I could get rich with that one.
369057
(my assumed numbers are for residential, non commercial, and casual investing)\n\nif you have a small investment in this stock, i cant really provide you with much good information (small can go from 1 to maybe 35/40 shares in this case)\n\nassuming a more medium investment of 50-120 or even up to 150 existing shares, there are two options i see as viable.\n#1. if the stock may split in a year or less, hold on to what you have, and then after the split, hold on just long enough for the post-split rise to end, and pull out all the extra shares you gained that you did not originally have, thus making profit.\n#2. pull out and invest in something you predict will do a similar thing in the near future, and keep riding the short-term market until you lose your momentum.\n\nif you have a larger investment, you might consider the previous plan on #1 or, you can take the time to do some math. take $ you have in stock, subtract $ in stock you had at start, and sell enough shares to equal that difference (your profit) as close as you can. that way, you have the same commitment as before in terms of money, but not shares. However, in the event that the stock splits, you will increase those shares and have the opportunity to sell those extra shares again for even more money. even if it does not split, the money you made pulling out the profit will support another endeavor into a similar situation or allow you to do whatever it is you want with it.\n\nThat’s the short term scheme of things anyway! (im more of a long-term investor) Good luck.
568454
while investing always aim for long term, and by opting dividend reinvestment mode you will be having more number of units in you name and there by more chances of dividends etc., in future., btw dividends are exempt from income tax