Seeking Alpha

Craig Lehman

View as an RSS Feed
View Craig Lehman's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Maybe The Banks Will Never Again Split Their Shares [View article]
    What on earth does your screed have to do with the CANADIAN banks which the article is about?
    Aug 30 11:09 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Target: What A 'Sit On Your Hands' Investment Looks Like [View article]
    Yahoo Finance has TGTs next-year earnings growing 20 (!) %: http://yhoo.it/15BNJVN. If that is anywhere near correct, the shares are deeply undervalued.
    Aug 29 05:24 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Are REITs A Good Dividend Growth Idea? [View article]
    I thought maybe you were going to put more emphasis on the fact that REITs generally aren't very good dividend *growth* stocks. If you look at the David Fish CCC list, not only do you see relatively few of them (for the reason you mentioned, the difficulty of reconciling absolutely consistent growth of the dividend with the 90% payout mandate.) But also, if you look at the growth rate columns of the CCC list, the numbers for REITs are often very low (printed in red when less than 2%.) E.g., Realty Income, often looked to as the gold standard for REITs, has 3- and 5- year DGRs of just 1.1 and 1.5. HCP is a little better at 2.8 and 2.4 (4.2 last year), but outside of the health care REITs, the DGRs are not that impressive (with occasional exceptions.) KO and PG are growing their dividends *much* faster than most REITs.

    So I would argue that in general, REITs are more pure dividend (income) stocks than dividend *growth* stocks. Of course, as you and Dr Kemalyan agree, that is not a reason not to own some of them in a blended portfolio. It's just that the idea that REITs are robust dividend *growth* stocks has to be taken with several grains of salt. It's my observation that many self-proclaimed Dividend Growth investors put much more emphasis on the first word than the second.
    Aug 27 12:28 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • My High Share Buyback And Dividend Growth Portfolio [View article]
    I would like to see documentation of the claim that simple index investing outperforms dividend-growth investing. Of course, DGI is not as simple a concept as index investing; it comes in many different flavors (e.g. minimum dividend and dividend growth requirements.) Do you look at total return, or just share price? Do you assume dividend reinvestment or not? Etc, etc.

    In any case, though, the question would be *risk-adjusted* returns. When you buy an S & P index fund, you are buying a basket that includes some very volatile stocks at nosebleed valuations, some companies in shaky financial condition, etc. Depending on how you construct your DG portfolio, you can have very low beta and income about as secure as anything on earth. Without getting into these issues, claims of outperformance or underperformance are basically meaningless.
    Aug 24 01:15 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Wal-Mart Dividend Stock Analysis [View article]
    Why I'm not enthused about WMT:
    http://bit.ly/1a95cZh

    I am with the INTC bulls, however. I note that by the way David Fish calculates his CCC ratings (each calendar year shows an increase over the previous), INTC remains a dividend growth stock.
    Aug 15 03:27 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • How Much Longer Until Stocks Fall Down? [View article]
    >A variety of asset classes, many of which have traditionally been highly correlated to the U.S. stock market, remain solidly below their May 22 levels.<

    Yes, but one thing that's been widely noted (including by you, I believe) is the way that QE has destroyed traditional market relationships. So I'm not sure how much the lack of correlation means, by itself. Not that I would judge the market healthy, but I would look more to the kinds of reasons cited by FishFryer above.
    Aug 10 01:47 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Real Reason To Sell Municipal Bonds [View article]
    >If you buy a bond, you must be prepared to hold it to maturity.<

    Point granted, but it does not apply to muni bond FUNDS, which have no maturity date. E.g., VCV has been hammered: http://on.mktw.net/11M...
    Aug 7 12:06 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Despite Sequester, Opportunities Exist In Defense Sector [View article]
    I thought I knew the defense contractors, but I had never heard of Huntington Ingalls. Thanks for the well-organized, useful information on both HII and GD. Counterintuitively, the defense stocks have been a great place to be this year; hopefully it continues.
    Jul 31 09:18 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • If History Means Anything, Aflac Stock Is Quite Cheap [View article]
    As I understand it, beta is the fluctuation of the stock, relative to the fluctuation of the market. If the stock is up or down 1% on days when the market (that is, the US market) is up or down 1%, its beta is one.

    Now, this is only a guess, but my hunch is that AFL tends not to fluctuate so much with the (domestic) market, as with events in the Japanese or European markets (at least lately.) Those events are not necessarily in synch with fluctuations in the US market. So because it shows larger divergences with the US market, its beta is larger.

    JUST a guess.
    Jul 27 05:55 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Team Alpha Retirement Portfolio: What To Do When You Don't Know What To Do [View article]
    The original question was about writing a put on KO at a point where it yields 3%. Writing consecutively higher puts at 40, 43 etc would probably not meet the 3% condition, at least until KO increased its dividend a couple times.

    I guess the way I look at it is that 2.75% is a lot better than my broker will pay me to hold cash, and getting KO at 37.5 is a pretty good deal if the stock dips. Not something that I would allocate ALL my cash to, and there may well be better opportunities out there, but it seems like ONE relatively conservative way to earn a little income.
    Jul 26 08:49 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Does Microsoft Get The Message Yet? [View article]
    Ashraf,

    I don't always agree with your analyses (disagreements are why we have a market), but you have certainly nailed it from the git-go about RT. Like Mr. Blair, I am waiting with bated breath for a thin, fast, hi-res Haswell convertible that runs uncrippled Windows 8.1.
    Jul 19 02:17 PM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • IBM And The Media Attempt To Obscure Its Declining Business Results [View article]
    Not to completely disagree with your thesis, but you ignore the rather massive share buybacks. IBM is an incredibly rich company, and can afford to offset the so-so operating results with a reduction in share count which still leaves stockholders rewarded.
    Jul 18 02:32 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Team Alpha Retirement Portfolio: What To Do When You Don't Know What To Do [View article]
    I was going to say, you aren't going to make much money selling puts on KO going to the point of 3% yield (37.33 as I calculate it.) Then I looked, and the January 37.50's are at 1.03. That seems pretty attractive.
    Jul 16 01:43 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Retired Investors: Is It Time To Consider A New Investment Strategy? - Part 3 [View article]
    >It seems you are concerned about each position's value as much as its income.<

    Yes, I consider both. Depending on how you measure, studies say that at least half of total return comes from dividends, so of course I pay a lot of attention to dividend income and its growth. But I also draw some income from periodic "shaving" of capital gains, so I pay attention to price as well.

    Thanks for the excellent Wikipedia link, Cake. I am familiar with Rob Arnott and have parked funds in PRF over the years, but the article provides a lot more theoretical background.
    Jul 14 12:39 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Retired Investors: Is It Time To Consider A New Investment Strategy? - Part 3 [View article]
    Cake,

    Thanks, that clarifies it somewhat. If I understand you correctly, you start out thinking that each of 50 positions should produce about 2% of income, and then adjust from there on the basis of fundamentals.

    Doesn't seem unreasonable with stocks like NLY; I might be willing to take a flyer and devote <1% of my capital if it earned me > 3% of my income, as it would, at least until the point (if and when) it crashes and burns. But on the other end of the spectrum, an income-weighting formula would force me to put a lot MORE of my capital into the low-yield but high-dividend-growth stocks which I like, say CHD, CVS, UNP, VFC. Offhand I like dividend-weighting more on the high end than the low, and would prefer to spread my bets on the low end.

    The issue needs more research. Contributor RichJoy has expressed the view that if you want to weight portfolios, it should be done on a basis of a certain percentage of high-yield low-growth, medium-yield medium-growth, and low-yield high-growth (though he hasn't put it quite that way and I may be distorting his view.) This all needs to be worked out in models but I think I intuitively agree more with that view -- without doing the work to verify it. Just a hunch.
    Jul 14 12:30 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
346 Comments
605 Likes