2018 activity

[CryptoPlankton]

Given all the apparent concern expressed hereabouts, I thought I should take stock:

Dividends per share paid into account:

Jan 2 SBRY 3.1p (3.6)
Jan 12 GSK 19p (19)
Jan 12 NG. 15.49p (15.17)
Feb 1 UU. 13.24p (12.95)
Feb 2 VOD 4.24p (4.05)
Feb 5 BT 4.85p (4.85)
Feb 9 BLND 7.52p (7.3)

Four increased, two held and one cut. No discernible threat to reserves.

Purchases: None

Sales: None

FTSE 100 down a little over 5% since New Year, but still up 20% over the last 20 months.

Conclusion: Go back to sleep... zzzzzzzz

[idpickering]

Given all the apparent concern expressed hereabouts, I thought I should take stock:

Dividends per share paid into account:

Jan 2 SBRY 3.1p (3.6)
Jan 12 GSK 19p (19)
Jan 12 NG. 15.49p (15.17)
Feb 1 UU. 13.24p (12.95)
Feb 2 VOD 4.24p (4.05)
Feb 5 BT 4.85p (4.85)
Feb 9 BLND 7.52p (7.3)

Four increased, two held and one cut. No discernible threat to reserves.

Purchases: None

Sales: None

FTSE 100 down a little over 5% since New Year, but still up 20% over the last 20 months.

Conclusion: Go back to sleep... zzzzzzzz

Thanks for your common sense post Crypto, and a good reminder of why we frequent this board, it's about the income.

Ian.

[Gengulphus]

Dividends per share paid into account:

Jan 2 SBRY 3.1p (3.6)
Jan 12 GSK 19p (19)
Jan 12 NG. 15.49p (15.17)
Feb 1 UU. 13.24p (12.95)
Feb 2 VOD 4.24p (4.05)
Feb 5 BT 4.85p (4.85)
Feb 9 BLND 7.52p (7.3)

Four increased, two held and one cut. No discernible threat to reserves.

I don't want to pour too much cold water over that, but I feel I've got to point out that that method of collecting data suffers from survivorship bias: dividends that didn't survive won't have any data collected about them. As (assuming an unchanged portfolio) such dividends have all resulted from the worst type of dividend cut (i.e. complete cancellation) or something equivalent like the company going bust, that will bias the data collected by that method towards buys and holds and away from cuts. So such data will tend to give a somewhat rose-tinted view of the situation.

Note that's a criticism of the data collection method, not necessarily of any particular set of data collected by it. For example, anyone who had Carillion in their HYP and who used the method regularly would have failed to count its cut last November and will similarly fail this June, but those would be the only two months affected by the non-survival of Carillion's dividend.

Gengulphus

[CryptoPlankton]

Dividends per share paid into account:

Jan 2 SBRY 3.1p (3.6)
Jan 12 GSK 19p (19)
Jan 12 NG. 15.49p (15.17)
Feb 1 UU. 13.24p (12.95)
Feb 2 VOD 4.24p (4.05)
Feb 5 BT 4.85p (4.85)
Feb 9 BLND 7.52p (7.3)

Four increased, two held and one cut. No discernible threat to reserves.

I don't want to pour too much cold water over that, but I feel I've got to point out that that method of collecting data suffers from survivorship bias: dividends that didn't survive won't have any data collected about them. As (assuming an unchanged portfolio) such dividends have all resulted from the worst type of dividend cut (i.e. complete cancellation) or something equivalent like the company going bust, that will bias the data collected by that method towards buys and holds and away from cuts. So such data will tend to give a somewhat rose-tinted view of the situation.

Note that's a criticism of the data collection method, not necessarily of any particular set of data collected by it. For example, anyone who had Carillion in their HYP and who used the method regularly would have failed to count its cut last November and will similarly fail this June, but those would be the only two months affected by the non-survival of Carillion's dividend.

Gengulphus

To be fair, I think if anything it was more of a flaw in the data reporting than in the data collection method, which wasn't described in my post. In truth, I pay enough regular attention to my investments (and the business news) to know if companies in my portfolio cancel their dividend or go bust (and whether either of those things have become likely) but that wouldn't have chimed with the narrative of my post - the main thrust of which was to encourage more of a "Keep Calm And Carry On" (in a "hands-off" kind of way) mentality in the face of what appears to have been a mild epidemic of the jitters in these parts.

All seven of the companies that have paid me dividends this year have been criticised recently on this board (possibly, with the exception of Vodafone?), with several recommendations to avoid them and even some to sell. Yet only one has cut its dividend (and it has a clear policy to pay out at a cover of 2 so will only stop paying if it becomes unprofitable). I have no intention of worrying about what might or might not happen and my post was just a light-hearted response to all the HYPochondria. However, I fully accept that it was lacking in academic rigour and I will try to do better in future...

[tjh290633]

Apropos of nothing in particular, this stimulated me to look at my anticipated income for the first quarter of this year, as all dividends have now been declared, although conversions to GBp have yet to come.

In terms of cash expected, this year is 23% ahead of last year. In terms of dividends per share, this year is 10% ahead.

However, this is affected by BATS moving to quarterly dividends and by S32 paying their final and special dividends on 5th April this year. So there are 3 more dividends this year. Eliminating those, the figures change to 12% ahead and 1% behind, largely due to currency rate changes.

The cash increase is down to reinvested income providing more shares.

TJH

[Wizard]

Apropos of nothing in particular, this stimulated me to look at my anticipated income for the first quarter of this year, as all dividends have now been declared, although conversions to GBp have yet to come.

In terms of cash expected, this year is 23% ahead of last year. In terms of dividends per share, this year is 10% ahead.

However, this is affected by BATS moving to quarterly dividends and by S32 paying their final and special dividends on 5th April this year. So there are 3 more dividends this year. Eliminating those, the figures change to 12% ahead and 1% behind, largely due to currency rate changes.

The cash increase is down to reinvested income providing more shares.

TJH

So, just to be clear TJH, the like-for-like change (for want of a better description) is a 1% fall in GBP terms, i.e. near as damn it flat? What would it be at constant exchange rates, from what you say I am guessing a rise.

Terry.

[tjh290633]

Correct, Wizard. There are several dividends from Companies which report in USD, and the exchange rate has pulled all of them back. BP., RDSB, AZN, BLT and RIO from memory.

TJH

[Gengulphus]

I don't want to pour too much cold water over that, but I feel I've got to point out that that method of collecting data suffers from survivorship bias: dividends that didn't survive won't have any data collected about them. As (assuming an unchanged portfolio) such dividends have all resulted from the worst type of dividend cut (i.e. complete cancellation) or something equivalent like the company going bust, that will bias the data collected by that method towards buys and holds and away from cuts. So such data will tend to give a somewhat rose-tinted view of the situation.

Note that's a criticism of the data collection method, not necessarily of any particular set of data collected by it. For example, anyone who had Carillion in their HYP and who used the method regularly would have failed to count its cut last November and will similarly fail this June, but those would be the only two months affected by the non-survival of Carillion's dividend.

To be fair, I think if anything it was more of a flaw in the data reporting than in the data collection method, which wasn't described in my post. In truth, I pay enough regular attention to my investments (and the business news) to know if companies in my portfolio cancel their dividend or go bust (and whether either of those things have become likely) ...

But also to be fair, when people read what you wrote, they could very easily think "interesting - I'll try doing the same" and do what you clearly indicated you had done - i.e. look at the dividends paid this year and how they compared with the corresponding dividends last year - without also doing the things you had in fact done but hadn't said you had done. I.e. the audience I intended for my comment was both you and everyone else here who might feel like following your example - had I intended it for just you yourself, I would have used a private message.

... but that wouldn't have chimed with the narrative of my post - the main thrust of which was to encourage more of a "Keep Calm And Carry On" (in a "hands-off" kind of way) mentality in the face of what appears to have been a mild epidemic of the jitters in these parts.

Agreed with all of that - with the qualification that IMHO your characterisation of the epidemic as "mild" is a fine example of the art of understatement!

But while I agree that it would have been hard to make it chime with that narrative (*), I do think we need to take care to encourage people to take as objective a view of their HYPs as possible, and that basically means a warts-and-all view rather than a rose-tinted one that conceals the worst warts. Especially on this board, whose prohibition of discussing other strategies and therefore of any sort of 'advocacy' of them IMHO carries the flip-side obligation not to post 'advocacy' of HYP strategies either...

(*) I think the best way to keep the non-chiming to a minimum is a footnote - which I'm saying in this footnote to provide a practical example: the "(*)" above interferes as little as possible with the flow of the sentence it's in, while still getting a point I feel I should make into the post.

... all the HYPochondria. ...

Wish I'd thought of that excellent description! Its only flaw IMHO is that I'll have to take considerable care not to use it in ways that people are liable to take as (mildly) insulting... ;-}

Gengulphus

[CryptoPlankton]

To be fair, I think if anything it was more of a flaw in the data reporting than in the data collection method, which wasn't described in my post. In truth, I pay enough regular attention to my investments (and the business news) to know if companies in my portfolio cancel their dividend or go bust (and whether either of those things have become likely) ...

But also to be fair, when people read what you wrote, they could very easily think "interesting - I'll try doing the same" and do what you clearly indicated you had done - i.e. look at the dividends paid this year and how they compared with the corresponding dividends last year - without also doing the things you had in fact done but hadn't said you had done. I.e. the audience I intended for my comment was both you and everyone else here who might feel like following your example - had I intended it for just you yourself, I would have used a private message.

I fully accept that. I hope that people who read my post took it for what it was: a simple, slightly playful, call for calm. But, for the avoidance of any doubt, I'll state that it definitely wasn't intended as a suggestion for a method to properly assess the health of a HYP.

[idpickering]

To be fair, I think if anything it was more of a flaw in the data reporting than in the data collection method, which wasn't described in my post. In truth, I pay enough regular attention to my investments (and the business news) to know if companies in my portfolio cancel their dividend or go bust (and whether either of those things have become likely) ...

But also to be fair, when people read what you wrote, they could very easily think "interesting - I'll try doing the same" and do what you clearly indicated you had done - i.e. look at the dividends paid this year and how they compared with the corresponding dividends last year - without also doing the things you had in fact done but hadn't said you had done. I.e. the audience I intended for my comment was both you and everyone else here who might feel like following your example - had I intended it for just you yourself, I would have used a private message.

I fully accept that. I hope that people who read my post took it for what it was: a simple, slightly playful, call for calm. But, for the avoidance of any doubt, I'll state that it definitely wasn't intended as a suggestion for a method to properly assess the health of a HYP.

That's how I took your message CrytoPlankton, hence my comment

Thanks for your common sense post Crypto, and a good reminder of why we frequent this board, it's about the income.

You did fine, so don't be disheartened by other's views on your efforts.

Ian.

[CryptoPlankton]

But also to be fair, when people read what you wrote, they could very easily think "interesting - I'll try doing the same" and do what you clearly indicated you had done - i.e. look at the dividends paid this year and how they compared with the corresponding dividends last year - without also doing the things you had in fact done but hadn't said you had done. I.e. the audience I intended for my comment was both you and everyone else here who might feel like following your example - had I intended it for just you yourself, I would have used a private message.

I fully accept that. I hope that people who read my post took it for what it was: a simple, slightly playful, call for calm. But, for the avoidance of any doubt, I'll state that it definitely wasn't intended as a suggestion for a method to properly assess the health of a HYP.

That's how I took your message CrytoPlankton, hence my comment

Thanks for your common sense post Crypto, and a good reminder of why we frequent this board, it's about the income.

You did fine, so don't be disheartened by other's views on your efforts.

Ian.

Thanks Ian, I appreciate that, but don't worry - I'm not disheartened! Although I'd like to credit people with a little more independence of thought, I do think Gengulphus made a valid point and I wouldn't want to be responsible for misleading even one person into "wrong thinking" about the assessment of their HYP performance. I just think it's important to keep some perspective and not overcomplicate something that should be a fairly straightforward means to an end - not the end in itself. It's a lovely afternoon and, after catching up on a few more posts, I'm off out to enjoy it...