This is not a topic for hyp practical. This discussion ran its course before. Please read the guidelines and keep topics relevant. Raptor.
In a recent thread, it was asserted by Aleric that I "rejected" Unilever PLC (ULVR) as an HYP share.
Alaric wrote:I didn't imagine it.idpickering"/"Arborbridge wrote:Unilever and Diageo have never been "rejected" by HYPers except in your imagination
viewtopic.php?f=15&t=14274&p=175134&hilit=unilever#p175134
in whichIanTHughes wrote:
...do not try to persuade me that ULVR is a choice for an HYP. It is not and never has been, at least not since 2012 when I started my HYP.
The actual post that I wrote was: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=14274&hilit=unilever&start=20#p175089
The full quote from the above post is as follows:
IanTHughes wrote:I am happy that it works for you, but please, do not try to persuade me that ULVR is a choice for an HYP. It is not and never has been, at least not since 2012 when I started my HYP.
Aleric, you went to a lot of trouble to find the above quote and according to the search criteria you used, must surely have read through the whole thread in order to find it. In which case the first of my contributions that you would have seen was the following: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=14274&hilit=unilever&start=20#p175028
In which I stated:
IanTHughes wrote:The problem is, in order to select as low a yield as is offered by Unilever PLC (ULVR), one first of all has to reject the many "Quality" shares with higher yields on offer. So what you are actually suggesting is the "Rejection of Quality" not its selection, and I will not do that.
Next you would have read this post: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=14274&hilit=unilever&start=20#p175062
In which I stated:
IanTHughes wrote:My HYP is not a stamp collection, I do not need to hold everything. But the fact remains that in order to select Unilever PLC (ULVR), I would have to "reject" investing in a perfectly suitable higher yield share. Why would I do that?
Followed by: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=14274&hilit=unilever&start=20#p175083
in which I stated:
IanTHughes wrote:ULVR has never qualified for my HYP since start up in 2012 and it still does not qualify. Why has it never qualified? Because it is not and never has been high yield. High Yield is an essential for my High Yield Portfolio (HYP).
Finally, after the post from which you extracted the partial quote, I posted this: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=14274&hilit=unilever&start=20#p175110
In which I stated:
IanTHughes wrote:Of course there are folks that will have ULVR in their HYP, I have no problem with that. I certainly do not agree that it is a share that "should not be discussed" on this the HYP Practical board. What I do say is that at the moment, and for the last 6 years, an HYPer would only select ULVR if he/she first of all "rejected" other perfectly acceptable higher yield shares.
Now, some people will say that "the higher historical dividend growth rate" makes it an acceptable choice. To that argument I was pointing out that the time period for "catching up" a higher starting yield may be rather longer than an HYPer might want. There are also others that say "an HYP should always include shares like ULVR". That is of course an asinine argument so it does not need a response.
But yes, ULVR is on my watchlist. If it does become high yield, it will be in my HYP, but bought at "High Yield".
Please could you tell me, and indeed this board, at what point during this series of posts, which you must surely have read, did you come to believe that I “rejected” Unilever PLC (ULVR) as an HYP share?
I should also like to know why it is that you feel the need to mislead people in this way?
Ian