even with growth, what have you got? growth is over-rated and poorly understood.
a long time ago there was an investment philosophy that stated that taking a risk on a growth stock (which currently did not pay dividends), over investing in a value stock which paid a decent dividend, was worth it, based on the assumption that one day, the growth stock would eventually pay BIG dividends once it matured, and started rewarding investors for their patience. the "value" of the growth stock was based on its future dividend paying potential.
nowadays, people don't even factor that into their "investment" philosophy. they don't care about dividends or potential for dividends. they own a piece of paper which pays no interest, no dividends. they pay money to own a tulip which pays them nothing, has no value, except what the next sucker is willing to pay for it.
an asset which provides you no income for your investment and has no intrinsic value, is worth nothing unless you can find another sucker to buy it from you. just because that asset represents "ownership" in a company that grows to infinity, it can still be worthless if this ownership grants you no priveleges.
almost all of the income and cash flow created by most publicly traded companies goes to the people who don't even "own" it... executives & bondholders. ironic isn't it that bondholders who are paid a steady rate of return, have claims to a companies assets that are SENIOR to stock(bag)holders. even executives who are granted ownership in companies for FREE through options, know better than to hold onto it. they sell it. for INCOME.
i'd rather invest my money in dividend paying stocks who have the ability to grow their...excuse me... MY dividends over time, than risk it buying the LU's and AAPL's of the future. |
