Disney Stock Price

[Sirwalterraleigh]

It was the dumbest comment of the thread by far

Dividends are the lifeblood of most accumulated wealth - not flipping.

And as usual…you didn’t READ the thread on a discussion board…just went into your echo chamber

 

[Trauma]

But why would the stock go up if you can’t get the money out of the company?

It becomes an NFT without dividends. It’s just kind of there and is only worth anything if people want it to be.

Why would I pay money for a share of a company that made $10 billion if I can’t get my hands on any of that $10 billion? It doesn’t make sense.

Are you asking this in good faith or do you just lack a basic understanding of how things work?

It it’s the latter I can point you towards some good resources that can help you learn the basics.

 

[Trauma]

You're right... employees shouldn't get paid salaries either. Instead, they should put all their effort in, and pray for appreciation and get a payout when they leave the company. If they're right, they win. If they're wrong, they lose.

Salaries are dumb.

What the heck do salaries of employees have to do with the stock of a company ?

 

[hopemax]

I’m of the opinion that the shareholder monster has become so big and hungry it is now impacting the ability of the core business of companies to function effectively. Which has a negative impact on shareholders. My new poster child for this is Southwest Airlines and the Christmas debacle. Which was only one of the multiple times in the last few years that they couldn’t even get their planes in the air. Shareholders may have got their 26% dividend growth in the 5 years pre-Covid, but now the company is facing an immediate and therefore more expensive replacement of technology that should have been done years ago, pilot issues and a trashed reputation. They were my go-to but until these issues are solved, I won't trust them, so our next flights are on United. Not my favorite, but we have the credit card and points for international travel.

We all know about Disney’s “invest in the core business” failures and deficiencies. And these are two companies with traditionally positive, conscientious business reputations. I don't believe they are the only ones.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I’m of the opinion that the shareholder monster has become so big and hungry it is now impacting the ability of the core business of companies to function effectively. Which has a negative impact on shareholders. My new poster child for this is Southwest Airlines and the Christmas debacle. Which was only one of the multiple times in the last few years that they couldn’t even get their planes in the air. Shareholders may have got their 26% dividend growth in the 5 years pre-Covid, but now the company is facing an immediate and therefore more expensive replacement of technology that should have been done years ago, pilot issues and a trashed reputation. They were my go-to but until these issues are solved, I won't trust them, so our next flights are on United. Not my favorite, but we have the credit card and points for international travel.

We all know about Disney’s “invest in the core business” failures and deficiencies. And these are two companies with traditionally positive, conscientious business reputations. I don't believe they are the only ones.

That is an excellent example

This is a more contentions subject than I would have guessed…”dividend virtue”…

I wonder if the opinions are breaking down by age/generation?

It seems like it

 

[Trauma]

That is an excellent example

This is a more contentions subject than I would have guessed…”dividend virtue”…

I wonder if the opinions are breaking down by age/generation?

It seems like it

As far as I’m concerned a stock, or more accurately a share is nothing more than fractional ownership of a business.

Owning a business entitles you to nothing accept the value of that business when sold.

Am I missing something?

 

[flynnibus]

What the heck do salaries of employees have to do with the stock of a company ?

The concept of retrieving gains as you work.. instead of banking solely on future appreciation.

The sale of stock to investors has always been about RETURNS and investing in the business. TRADING on the other hand is about profiting on the deltas of buys and sale. People simply TRADING are not giving any money to the business to work with, unlike investors. They are at best floating the prior investors by helping keep the asset's market value high.

You can focus on trading - but don't be a fool and argue dividends and INVESTING is wrong or broke.

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

As far as I’m concerned a stock, or more accurately a share is nothing more than fractional ownership of a business.

Owning a business entitles you to nothing accept the value of that business when sold.

Am I missing something?

So owners shouldn’t get paid until they sell the business?

If it takes 10 years to make it successful they don’t earn a penny of income during that time?

 

[Trauma]

The concept of retrieving gains as you work.. instead of banking solely on future appreciation.

The sale of stock to investors has always been about RETURNS and investing in the business. TRADING on the other hand is about profiting on the deltas of buys and sale. People simply TRADING are not giving any money to the business to work with, unlike investors. They are at best floating the prior investors by helping keep the asset's market value high.

You can focus on trading - but don't be a fool and argue dividends and INVESTING is wrong or broke.

Alphabet doesn’t pay dividends.

How is this hurting the investors ?

 

[Trauma]

So owners shouldn’t get paid until they sell the business?

If it takes 10 years to make it successful they don’t earn a penny of income during that time?

It’s certainly an option.

If we can start a business today and sell it in 3 years for 750 million would you be open to that idea?

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

It’s certainly an option.

If we can start a business today and sell it in 3 years for 750 million would you be open to that idea?

How many businesses does that describe though? Maybe .1%, the other 99.9% will be lucky to survive the first year and even luckier to survive 5. The failure rate is already a huge deterrent to starting a business, why would anyone even try if they knew they wouldn’t get paid a penny for their time while trying to make it successful?

 

[TP2000]

The market has now closed for the week. Disney stock dropped slightly today, 0.3%, after yesterday's 8.7% drop.

For the week, DIS was down 9.7%. But at least... thank God it's Friday! Someone get Mr. Iger a Bud Light, please. He deserves it.

 

[Trauma]

How many businesses does that describe though? Maybe .1%, the other 99.9% will be lucky to survive the first year and even luckier to survive 5. The failure rate is already a huge deterrent to starting a business, why would anyone even try if they knew they wouldn’t get paid a penny for their time while trying to make it successful?

It’s your business you can do as you see fit.

However every $$$ that you pay yourself is not getting reinvested in growing revenue.

Owning a business is HARD that’s why they fail.

I didn’t pay myself for 3 years and 4 months.

In that time I was able to 9x my revenue and I’m a freaking moron.

 

[flynnibus]

Alphabet doesn’t pay dividends.

How is this hurting the investors ?

Can you find in my post where I said 'hurting the investors'?

 

[flynnibus]

How many businesses does that describe though? Maybe .1%, the other 99.9% will be lucky to survive the first year and even luckier to survive 5. The failure rate is already a huge deterrent to starting a business, why would anyone even try if they knew they wouldn’t get paid a penny for their time while trying to make it successful?

This is a bad analogy though... as most businesses won't be profitable in the start anyway. So debating dividends vs stock price is not really fair.

The real comparison is the classic model of blue chip vs growth stocks. The idea of perpetual growth makes it harder and harder on a business... while a business that can retain strong and healthy without relying on promoting future valuation as it's only value.

 

[Trauma]

This is a bad analogy though... as most businesses won't be profitable in the start anyway. So debating dividends vs stock price is not really fair.

The real comparison is the classic model of blue chip vs growth stocks. The idea of perpetual growth makes it harder and harder on a business... while a business that can retain strong and healthy without relying on promoting future valuation as it's only value.

Yes the classic model.

However marketplace dynamics shift so quickly that many companies should always be in growth mode.

I would assume that we are talking predominantly about Disney here, I don’t see how paying a dividend is conducive to achieving a strategy that makes sense over the next 20 years.

 

[HauntedPirate]

The market has now closed for the week. Disney stock dropped slightly today, 0.3%, after yesterday's 8.7% drop.

For the week, DIS was down 9.7%. But at least... thank God it's Friday! Someone get Mr. Iger a Bud Light, please. He deserves it.

View attachment 715912

I hear there's a lot of Bud Light available to sell. I bet he could pick some up pretty cheap.

 

[flynnibus]

Yes the classic model.

However marketplace dynamics shift so quickly that many companies should always be in growth mode.

I would assume that we are talking predominantly about Disney here, and I don’t see how paying a dividend is conducive to achieving a strategy that makes sense over the next 20 years.

A company at Disney's size likes stability - It's not in the market to raise money via IPO or new share issuance. The stable price plus dividends makes it attractive to portfolios. With a stable price, Disney can secure attractive financing when needed, and leverage it's own stock as a capital asset for purchases more predictably.

While Disney has segments that are in churn due to market shifts, it is also the established incumbent in many more. It is basically a conglomerate... its too big and entrenched to be able to offer the sexy upside other growth stocks would offer (teasing multiples).

Trying to be a growth stock means encouraging the company to expand into new fields that have huge upside... which also means higher risk with higher outlays.

 

[Trauma]

A company at Disney's size likes stability - It's not in the market to raise money via IPO or new share issuance. The stable price plus dividends makes it attractive to portfolios. With a stable price, Disney can secure attractive financing when needed, and leverage it's own stock as a capital asset for purchases more predictably.

While Disney has segments that are in churn due to market shifts, it is also the established incumbent in many more. It is basically a conglomerate... its too big and entrenched to be able to offer the sexy upside other growth stocks would offer (teasing multiples).

Trying to be a growth stock means encouraging the company to expand into new fields that have huge upside... which also means higher risk with higher outlays.

Like D+ ?

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

As far as I’m concerned a stock, or more accurately a share is nothing more than fractional ownership of a business.

Owning a business entitles you to nothing accept the value of that business when sold.

Am I missing something?

I’m not anti-stock…

I’m anti Disney being run to quarterlies…it doesn’t fit the product and will be the death of them…but different subject altogether

Stocks make sense. If I buy a share for $50…the company applies that “credit” through a variety of means to finance their production…to make more money. Pretty basic.
Then when I sell…I get the value over the purchase price as my “interest”/ reward for the time my original money was tied up.

Dividends…are not that. It’s the bankers delight: money paid on a schedule regardless of time or initial money invested.

Which means it’s dangerous. A reminder: the most powerful/destructive drug in the history of the world is the human thirst for the American dollar…
…until something worse comes along