SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : WDC/Sandisk Corporation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Trader X who wrote (18683)1/26/2001 5:02:59 PM
From: Zeev Hed  Respond to of 60323
 
It is not that simple, first you have to look at those companies that do pay dividends, you will find that their market cap is probably equal to 80% of the total market cap. Then you have to see what companies really do with the money they do not pay out, ys some of the companies reinvest that money in the business, but a good number of the larger companies (MSFT, INTC and even MRK) pour billions each year to buy back their shares, at premiums of 5 to 10 times book value. Sure there is a tax reason for that (when a company buys back shares they actually are paying dividends to existing stock holders that is tax free-they do the dividends reinvestment plan for you and no taxes are paid, a simple tax evasion scheme that sooner or later should closed, either by not taxing dividends, or taxing buy-backs). Thus, in reality, there is no difference in dividend payment policies between today and and 30 or even 70 years ago. Last, just five years ago, the total market capitalization was under one time GDP, and the dividend policies have not changed markedly in those last five years.

In the early 20' and actually, I believe even in the 70', the general "Graham and Dodds" philosophy was that companies should pay dividends that are higher than the then prevailing high grade bond rate, this since 'bonds are safer" then stocks. The lack of dividends in todays market is not an indication of good corporate governance, it is a simple reflection of faulty taxation.

And last, the capitalization of equities should really not be , on the average, much more that one to two time sales, except for companies with proven track records of continuous growth. If you assume that only half the GDP is actual end sales of listed companies (and I think that is quite generous), then .75 to 1.00 of GDP should be a "rational" market valuation. Bull markets creates "irrational exuberance and very high valuation, and just as spring follows winter, bear markets follow bull markets and bring with them excessive undervaluation and uncommon value. I believe that in August 1982 (not that far away), the total market cap was under 50% of the GDP.

Zeev