High yields from blue chip shares
- Thread starter MTR
- Start date
The yields I posted are only a few stocks I picked from 15 on this list. Information was sourced from AFR Smart Investor.
Aegis put these blue chips through a series of tests based on historical and forecast growth in div. per share.
To make the grade the company has to be a genuine enterprise that makes real profits and treats shareholders like real owners, through regularly rising dividends.
Much more information on each share is outlined in April's issue, for anyone who may be interested.
Cheers, MTR
Aegis put these blue chips through a series of tests based on historical and forecast growth in div. per share.
To make the grade the company has to be a genuine enterprise that makes real profits and treats shareholders like real owners, through regularly rising dividends.
Much more information on each share is outlined in April's issue, for anyone who may be interested.
Cheers, MTR
Last edited:
Hi MTR,
Just had a look at the shares you have listed above, and have noticed the following:
BBI - (Babcock and Brown Infrastructure Group). Has taken a large hit this year (down 31%). The yield seems attractive at 12.5% but I notice that it is not Franked at all and the tax adjusted dividend yield is 6.7%.
DUE - (Duet Group). This share isn't franked either. The tax adjusted dividend yield is 4.7%.
MCG - No franking either. Tax adjusted yield is 5.9% as opposed to 10.6%
AMP - 85% franking and the tax adjusted yield is 4.5%
CEU - 100% franked, and the tax adjusted yield is 5.3%.
All information is from comsec.
Just checked commsec... CER- Centro Retail Group- is down 23% today, trading at 0.35.
The last dividend was of 6.4 cents paid in Aug 07, representing a 29.1% yield.
Usually, with a high yield you will have less capital growth. There is more risk involved with CER due to its recent history.
A good site for share questions is
www.invested.com.au
can you retards stop comparing last years dividends with todays share price to calculate yields, centro will never be paying any of you asshats a 29% yield nor will you recieve a 10% dividend from the banks or any other bluechip or whatever the hell you nutcases are claiming.
Last edited:
im sparticus [sic]
Calm down, take a deep breath and have a cup of tea or another schooner of VB... your post time gives you away
Let me explain:
No-one is advocating that last years yield will represent this years If you read up this post, you will see an example of that with ZFX-Zinifex- where the dividend has recently halved.
Also, if you read my post carefully, you will see that it states that CER is "high risk". Personally, I would not speculate on on it nor would I advise anyone else to. However, this is your decision and I am not a financial advisor.
I don't care what the dividends are as mine are all set on dividend reinvestment plans
Can you please provide a quote from someone who is:
Calm down, take a deep breath and have a cup of tea or another schooner of VB... your post time gives you away
Let me explain:
No-one is advocating that last years yield will represent this years
If you read up this post, you will see an example of that with ZFX-Zinifex- where the dividend has recently halved.Also, if you read my post carefully, you will see that it states that CER is "high risk". Personally, I would not speculate on on it nor would I advise anyone else to. However, this is your decision and I am not a financial advisor.
I don't care what the dividends are as mine are all set on dividend reinvestment plans
Can you please provide a quote from someone who is:
If not, then maybe you should see a counsellor or just tune into Dr Phil 12.00; Mon-Fri 12 noon; Ch 10.
LOL... You really need to check out the Dr Phil link
All I was insinuating, was that buying high yield shares like that = higher risk, as has happened to CER- not part of my plans.
Maybe CommSec can't count because it was a quote from their website. However, the figures relate to "August 2007" so, I assume, were correct at the time. They are not a forecast for future dividends, so you can't put 6.4/35 because they are the old figures
All I was insinuating, was that buying high yield shares like that = higher risk, as has happened to CER- not part of my plans.
Maybe CommSec can't count because it was a quote from their website. However, the figures relate to "August 2007" so, I assume, were correct at the time. They are not a forecast for future dividends, so you can't put 6.4/35 because they are the old figures
LOL... You really need to check out the Dr Phil link
Maybe CommSec can't count because it was a quote from their website. However, the figures relate to "August 2007" so, I assume, were correct at the time. They are not a forecast for future dividends, so you can't put 6.4/35 because they are the old figures
so what your telling me is in august of 07 if you baught cer before a day before it went ex dividend or there abouts it would have returned a 29% dividend? based on that fact and the 6.4c aug07 dividend cer should have been trading at 22c around that time..
sound ridiculous?? can you feel my pain yet!
you really need to stop being so delusional and start making more sence with your posts
Last edited:
That is what is stated on the CommSec site... Maybe it is wrong, maybe it is right? I really don't care because I didn't buy any. InvestSmart have the yield at 36.3% for 2007
The only point I am making is to take care with the higher dividend companies. Have a plan in place to manage the increased risk.InvestSmart said:
BTW: Buy = Bought; Bring = Brought... make sense?
How can you make a blanket statement that you will not receive a 10% yld from banks or any other bluechip.
For starters you need to look at the difference between CFPS and EPS against DPS to look for a decent buffer. If that buffer is there, although earnings go down, DPS may well be maintained or even increased
And further if you can look outside the box you can invest in other securities apart from the mother share. I recently bought some preference shares in a stock that WILL pay a net yld of 9.2% fully franked, so long as the mother shares pay ANY dividend. In addition the difference between the face value and market value has created a margin of safety where the value of the mother common share has to fall by 55% before i have any exposure to a loss situation.
In addition i will be able to convert the preference shares into ordinary shares at a fixed profit of more than 30% in a few years time, once again with a margin of safety of the mother common share falling less than 55%.
Please dont ask me for details of this because its a relatively unliquid position, and i am trying to increase my exposure.
I mention this merely to highlight that you always must look outside the square.
Higher retern equates to a higher risk
The investors who looked outside the box and invested through Opes Prime have descended into an abyss.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/04/02/2205593.htm
They too were looking for a higher return but forgot the maxim higher return equates to a higher risk.
It amuses me the number of people who like to drop into a property forum like SS and prophecise about the superior returns with shares. Most punters who put their money in the share market are traders not investors and have no clue of the difference.
If you want to argue this point explain to me how it was that these "investors in opes prime" were unaware that they did not hold title over their shares. Many of these punters had considerable amounts of money "invested" in opes prime.
I made the point on this site a number of months ago that with property banks are much happier to lend with the property as security and there is no margin recall like with shares. Another sooth-sayer shot back that you could get a similar deal with margin lending
The investors who looked outside the box and invested through Opes Prime have descended into an abyss.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/04/02/2205593.htm
They too were looking for a higher return but forgot the maxim higher return equates to a higher risk.
It amuses me the number of people who like to drop into a property forum like SS and prophecise about the superior returns with shares. Most punters who put their money in the share market are traders not investors and have no clue of the difference.
If you want to argue this point explain to me how it was that these "investors in opes prime" were unaware that they did not hold title over their shares. Many of these punters had considerable amounts of money "invested" in opes prime.
I made the point on this site a number of months ago that with property banks are much happier to lend with the property as security and there is no margin recall like with shares. Another sooth-sayer shot back that you could get a similar deal with margin lending
Probably because they thought they were entering a standard margin loan agreement. I have to admit that I dont actually know the legalities of my IP mortgage with CBA. I'm very much "inside the box" but if you asked me who owns title on my mortgaged property I could not tell you with 100% suerty.
However its not just these investors who did not know they did not hold title. Nobody did. If they did not hold title then by default someone else did. That would either be Opes Prime of the banks that funded them. Some of the companies had more than 5% held by Opes prime. Yet they (the companies) did not know, the ASX did not know (not declared as a significant interest), the share registry did not know.
Lastly whether an investor fully understands their investment is an entirely different matter from the level of risk they are taking.
