Dod101 wrote:To Arb, YeeWo et al, the background I found for my post timed at 5.10 pm made me revise my earlier comments about the dividends being dearly bought, as I hoped I had made clear (that is once I had taken a good look at the share price and dividends over a longish period)
When I use the expression 'dearly bought' I mean if you are buying a good yield at the expense of capital value that is surely 'dearly bought' As anyone who reads my ramblings knows I am not a pure HYPer in that I think that capital does matter.
Dod
I'm still a little confused about what your posts really mean
I can see that what you meant might have been: "anyone who bought at £55 would have paid dearly for the dividend because the share price has dropped since". That would be true, except that a HYPer would probably not have bought at that time because BATs yield then, would have been unlikely to have put the company in the buy or topup zone for most of us. Only someone like yourself who buys lower yields might have done that. So your phrase "dearly bought" might apply to a specific time when the yield was low and the price high.
But then you've used the phrase "as I have said many times" and here, perhaps I fell into the trap of making an assumption. That phrase doesn't sound like it referred to a particular period of time, so I thought you meant "as I have said many times" referring to a period of some years. That, BATs, in other words, over a HYPer's perspective has been a poor investment because the capital price hasn't increased enough to compensate for the dividends withdrawn. In response, I suggested that BATs had been a very satisfactory investment - very much odds with your apparent opinion that the dividend has been dearly bought, as you claim to have warned us many times.
I apologise if I misinterpreted, but I plead that what you wrote was not clear and left some ambiguity.
Arb.
