The Lemon Fool

csearle wrote:Ok so I meant "sole".

Dover Sole?


Ian

IanTHughes wrote:I did not say it (FTSE 100 yield) was irrelevant to everybody, only the HYP Strategy.
Ian

I thought the H in HYP stood for "high". If exceeding the dividend yield on the FTSE 100 isn't a relevant cut off, what is? You surely are not advocating the inclusion of Diageo or Unilever as new purchases, excellent dividend payers that they are?

Alaric wrote:

IanTHughes wrote:I did not say it (FTSE 100 yield) was irrelevant to everybody, only the HYP Strategy.

I thought the H in HYP stood for "high".

Of course it does, you win a cookie! The selection criteria for an HYP is the "Highest" sustainable yield at the time of purchase that conforms with the all important diversification criteria.

Alaric wrote: If exceeding the dividend yield on the FTSE 100 isn't a relevant cut off, what is?

Well surely that is obvious? The cut off is the yield that does not offer the "Highest" sustainable yield at the time of purchase that conforms with the all important diversification criteria. No cookie for you this time

Alaric wrote:You surely are not advocating the inclusion of Diageo or Unilever as new purchases, excellent dividend payers that they are?

Of course I am! Just so long as the purchase offers the "Highest" sustainable yield at the time of purchase that conforms with the all important diversification criteria. Again, I would have thought that that was obvious.


Ian

IanTHughes wrote:The cut off is the yield that does not offer the "Highest" sustainable yield at the time of purchase

Your definition of "sustainable" please. Do you mean non reducing?

If so then you are failing to notice that a dividend yield of a increasing at b is better than one of c increasing at d when (a+b) exceeds (c+d) even if a is less than c.

Alaric wrote:

IanTHughes wrote:The cut off is the yield that does not offer the "Highest" sustainable yield at the time of purchase

Your definition of "sustainable" please. Do you mean non reducing?

No when I say "sustainable", I mean "sustainable"!

Alaric wrote:If so then you are failing to notice that a dividend yield of a increasing at b is better than one of c increasing at d when (a+b) exceeds (c+d) even if a is less than c.

Not at all. I learned as much during elementary mathematics when aged 7.

Unfortunately I am entirely unable to foretell the future, unlike you obviously.


Ian

IanTHughes wrote:[
Unfortunately I am entirely unable to foretell the future

You expressed confidence that Vodafone would not cut their dividend. If you cannot spot the signs, don't advocate a strategy that needs such insights into Company behaviour. "Highest sustainable dividend" by its very nature implies an ability to read both Accounts and markets. How do you know otherwise?

Past performance is not a guide to the future is a mantra that works up to a point on a whole market basis. I doubt it has a reliable application at the level of individual Companies, given the for the most part, economic conditions, Company culture, trading profitability, management actions and attitudes don't vary much from one reporting period to the next.

Alaric wrote:

IanTHughes wrote:[
Unfortunately I am entirely unable to foretell the future

You expressed confidence that Vodafone would not cut their dividend.

I most certainly did not! All I determined, for my own benefit and no-one else's by the way, was that I was prepared to take the risk that Vodafone Group (VOD) would not cut its dividend! Seriously, if you are intent on finding fault with my offerings on this board, do at least make an effort to get what I said right! One way of course would be to ask me rather than making it all up!

Alaric wrote:If you cannot spot the signs, don't advocate a strategy that needs such insights into Company behaviour.

Unlike you, I do not "advocate" any strategy to anyone! Once again, please do not ascribe what I did not say to me!

Alaric wrote:"Highest sustainable dividend" by its very nature implies an ability to read both Accounts and markets. How do you know otherwise?

Wrong again! You are on a roll now! I thought I had made it clear that I look for: the "Highest" sustainable yield at the time of purchase that conforms with the all important diversification criteria. Obviously not clear enough for everyone!

But of course it requires an ability to read Accounts, I never said otherwise! Not in great detail, but one should at least be able to ascertain some information about Debt, Cash Flow, Earnings etc., how else can one make such a purchase decision?

Alaric wrote:Past performance is not a guide to the future is a mantra that works up to a point on a whole market basis. I doubt it has a reliable application at the level of individual Companies, given the for the most part, economic conditions, Company culture, trading profitability, management actions and attitudes don't vary much from one reporting period to the next.

If you believe that, so be it!


Ian

IanTHughes wrote:Unlike you, I do not "advocate" any strategy to anyone!

It's been noticed by other posters that you relentlessly attack those who warn of the risks in adopting what you term the "HYP Strategy", even if it seems difficult to pin down quite what you mean by this. The FTSE 100 contains a hundred stocks or more. Why choose Vodafone for a top up in preference to shares with a history of both increasing dividends and increasing share prices?

Alaric wrote:

IanTHughes wrote:Unlike you, I do not "advocate" any strategy to anyone!

It's been noticed by other posters that you relentlessly attack those who warn of the risks in adopting what you term the "HYP Strategy"

I do not at all! I merely draw attention to the facts when you and others use strawmen arguments to criticise the HYP Strategy as well as correcting the many errors that are made by you and others about what constitutes the HYP Strategy.

Alaric wrote:The FTSE 100 contains a hundred stocks or more. Why choose Vodafone for a top up in preference to shares with a history of both increasing dividends and increasing share prices?

Oh dear, do I have to repeat everything for you? I chose to top up Vodafone Group (VOD) because the yield was the highest available, without breaching my diversification rules, where I considered the dividend sustainable. I had decided to take the risk that VOD would not cut its dividend! Seriously, how can I make this explanation any simpler for you?


Ian

I for one am saddened that my opening post has been hijacked in this manner, with posters bickering etc. This happens all to often on this board.

To get back on topic, I hold BT.A, and shall be topping up on 22 Jul 19.

Ian, who wonders why he comes here at all nowadays?

The sort of silly childish exchanges on this thread contribute nothing to a helpful and co operative atmosphere and simply put people off posting, at least they do me. Mods need to get a grip.

Dod

Dod101 wrote:The sort of silly childish exchanges on this thread contribute nothing to a helpful and co operative atmosphere and simply put people off posting, at least they do me. Mods need to get a grip.

Dod

Agreed. But to be fair Chris tried yesterday. I pm’d him to thank him for his efforts.
Either way, we’re all adults, so let’s behave for the good of this board, and TLF.

Ian.

Why do people who obviously dislike HYP regularly post on this board? If you don't like HYP as a strategy then just don't post here.

BT are one of my HYP's larger contributors to income just ahead of BP, SSE and Taylor Wimpey but all are within my safety and diversification limits. This is the highest yield I've seen from BT for a while now but the dividend has also been static for a couple of years. Perhaps the detractors are here to protect us from ourselves as we do not know what we are doing by investing in a diversified portfolio of high yield, large cap shares for income so thanks for that.

kempiejon wrote:BT are one of my HYP's larger contributors to income just ahead of BP, SSE and Taylor Wimpey but all are within my safety and diversification limits. This is the highest yield I've seen from BT for a while now but the dividend has also been static for a couple of years. Perhaps the detractors are here to protect us from ourselves as we do not know what we are doing by investing in a diversified portfolio of high yield, large cap shares for income so thanks for that.

They are now next in line on the top up list, waiting for sufficient dividends to trigger a 'buy'. Having a picker over whether to veto them on grounds of debt+Pension deficit+future capital investment requirements knocking them out on dividend sustainability grounds.

The new CEO of BT bought just over £1m of shares a few weeks ago, presumably he wouldn't have if the divi was at risk

onslow wrote:The new CEO of BT bought just over £1m of shares a few weeks ago, presumably he wouldn't have if the divi was at risk

What makes you think that? Not everyone is a dividend junkie.

Dod

kempiejon wrote:BT are one of my HYP's larger contributors to income just ahead of BP, SSE and Taylor Wimpey but all are within my safety and diversification limits. This is the highest yield I've seen from BT for a while now but the dividend has also been static for a couple of years. Perhaps the detractors are here to protect us from ourselves as we do not know what we are doing by investing in a diversified portfolio of high yield, large cap shares for income so thanks for that.

Do you not think in the current environment though that there is an argument that " diversified portfolio of high yield large cap shares" could also be phrased something like "conviction portfolio of large cap high yield shares with significant company specific business risks"

With regard the latter surely it is healthy to discuss the merits of the individual shares

onslow wrote:The new CEO of BT bought just over £1m of shares a few weeks ago, presumably he wouldn't have if the divi was at risk

https://www.ft.com/content/68878c24-a2f ... 1c6ab5efd1


"Jan du Plessis, chairman of BT, told investors at the company’s annual meeting in London that it remains confident it can meet this year’s payment.
But he added that a “year or two in the future” BT “ will also consider reducing the dividend” as one way of funding its plans to connect 15m homes to full fibre broadband by the middle of the next decade."

Well, he does say "consider" but I'd say "heads up - here's the warning".