Why REIT Dividends Are Not A Mirage [View article]
Well, it's been fun, gentlemen. I am unclicking the follow. Feel free to come to my page for further accurate discussion. I'm not trying to sell you a book.
The 10K says: "Your ownership position will be diluted by the Merger of us and ARCT III. The Merger of us and ARCT III will dilute the ownership position of our stockholders."
Why REIT Dividends Are Not A Mirage [View article]
LOL I know they "return" cash. I've seen the cash show up in my account too. I just discount the yield when making a valuation call. It's a newbie mistake to get attached to the dividend yields without examining the real meat in the REIT.
You're not saying anything new or even anything I didn't already cover. It's REIT 101. I know the goal of the dilution is to ultimately increase shareholder value. But there are no promises except from SA members.
Why REIT Dividends Are Not A Mirage [View article]
Interesting evolution. I was told my article contained errors, was wrong, need a retraction, etc. Now when ARCP's 10K says almost verbatim what I stated, it's boilerplate and in all 10Ks?
Are you suggesting that all of these REITs are filing 10Ks that contain errors, are wrong, and need retractions?
I'm glad we're making progress. If you want to suggest that my article touches on subjects that are not of great concern, similar to boilerplate language in a 10K, that is your opinion and you may be 100% correct. And I may even actually agree with you.
The comments and articles in response don't even recognize this "boilerplate" as even existing, and are quite defense and insist things that are the exact opposite.
If you agree that my points are at least equal to the boilerplate language in "all 10Ks" then we've made great progress this evening.
There is no "next argument." I just want investors to think more responsibly when it comes to REITs. The dividend yield should have little to no influence in one's valuation of one REIT versus another going forward. It's not that simple to value them based on dividend yield and it's reckless to recommend them to low-risk dividend income-desiring retirees who don't understand the significant risks involved and this "fantastic yield" is often a mirage.
Why REIT Dividends Are Not A Mirage [View article]
I'm sorry, David, but you are still confused about my article. Here's another user that put it well. The dividends are a mirage in terms of proper, responsible valuation. From another:
disallusioned All the arguments about REITS having to distribute by law, are irrelevant to the point. The MIRAGE author was trying to change the way investor 'thought' about the distributions; how they used their 'understanding' of the distribution to develop a valuation, etc.
He was not trying to say the REITS should not pay the distributions.
=============
I understand that dividends are CALCULATED from profits. Makes the IRS happy. Doesn't help investors though who know how to do prpper valuations. It's reckless and irresponsible to take these dividend yields at face value while ignoring the dilution that comes with them in my 5 examples. It's even more reckless to tell peopel they should rely on 6.8% dividend yields as if it's risk-free money in the bank.
Not shocking though. It gets clicks and paperbacks sold so who cares. Those who can, do. Those can can't, write paperbacks.
American Realty Capital Properties Is No Mirage: It's Time To Back Up The Truck [View article]
A bright light in a dense fog posted by this guy (meanwhile, ARCP's own 10K filed on February 28, which clearly Brad failed to read, warns of dilution)
disallusioned All the arguments about REITS having to distribute by law, are irrelevant to the point. The MIRAGE author was trying to change the way investor 'thought' about the distributions; how they used their 'understanding' of the distribution to develop a valuation, etc.
He was not trying to say the REITS should not pay the distributions.
Why REIT Dividends Are Not A Mirage [View article]
I suggest you instead read ARCP's 10K especially on page 19 and 35 instead of relying on a game named "Brad" on the internet.
At least if you lose all your money relying on SEC filings, your family will be more forgiving than if you say "but honey, Brad on the internet told me it was a great idea so I didn't bother to read the company's own annual report."
Since Buffett's name keeps getting thrown around here -- does anybody think Buffett would recommend listening to "Brad" or to ARCP's own 10K? Why does Buffett read those pesky things when there's "Brad" he can listen to instead?
Why REIT Dividends Are Not A Mirage [View article]
The dividends are a mirage in term of valuation. disallusioned hit the nail directly on the head.
You didn't understand the article, David. Your headline alone immediately makes that crystal clear. It is reckless to insist readers should rely on such lofty dividend yields as if they are low risk. I think you know better.
Why REIT Dividends Are Not A Mirage [View article]
Why REIT Dividends Are Not A Mirage [View article]
This article http://bit.ly/13GedWb said:
"the merger was accretive to shareholders"
The 10K says:
"Your ownership position will be diluted by the Merger of us and ARCT III.
The Merger of us and ARCT III will dilute the ownership position of our stockholders."
Boilerplate? No.
Why REIT Dividends Are Not A Mirage [View article]
Why REIT Dividends Are Not A Mirage [View article]
You're not saying anything new or even anything I didn't already cover. It's REIT 101. I know the goal of the dilution is to ultimately increase shareholder value. But there are no promises except from SA members.
Why REIT Dividends Are Not A Mirage [View article]
Are you suggesting that all of these REITs are filing 10Ks that contain errors, are wrong, and need retractions?
I'm glad we're making progress. If you want to suggest that my article touches on subjects that are not of great concern, similar to boilerplate language in a 10K, that is your opinion and you may be 100% correct. And I may even actually agree with you.
The comments and articles in response don't even recognize this "boilerplate" as even existing, and are quite defense and insist things that are the exact opposite.
If you agree that my points are at least equal to the boilerplate language in "all 10Ks" then we've made great progress this evening.
There is no "next argument." I just want investors to think more responsibly when it comes to REITs. The dividend yield should have little to no influence in one's valuation of one REIT versus another going forward. It's not that simple to value them based on dividend yield and it's reckless to recommend them to low-risk dividend income-desiring retirees who don't understand the significant risks involved and this "fantastic yield" is often a mirage.
Why REIT Dividends Are Not A Mirage [View article]
disallusioned
All the arguments about REITS having to distribute by law, are irrelevant to the point. The MIRAGE author was trying to change the way investor 'thought' about the distributions; how they used their 'understanding' of the distribution to develop a valuation, etc.
He was not trying to say the REITS should not pay the distributions.
=============
I understand that dividends are CALCULATED from profits. Makes the IRS happy. Doesn't help investors though who know how to do prpper valuations. It's reckless and irresponsible to take these dividend yields at face value while ignoring the dilution that comes with them in my 5 examples. It's even more reckless to tell peopel they should rely on 6.8% dividend yields as if it's risk-free money in the bank.
Not shocking though. It gets clicks and paperbacks sold so who cares. Those who can, do. Those can can't, write paperbacks.
Amarin's Descent To $5 [View article]
Amarin's Descent To $5 [View article]
REITs: Why The Dividends Are A Mirage [View article]
In that context, all it means is that there are no options or warrants or convertible debt in-the-money outstanding. Nothing more, nothing less.
Why REIT Dividends Are Not A Mirage [View article]
Nobody in his right mind would disagree with you on that.
Do you have a point you're trying to make to go with that?
There is only one universal truth that is not an "assumption" when it comes to an equity raise: it is absolutely dilutive.
Why REIT Dividends Are Not A Mirage [View article]
No idea who he is but clearly he is quite intelligent, experienced, and informed.
A breath of fresh air.
American Realty Capital Properties Is No Mirage: It's Time To Back Up The Truck [View article]
disallusioned
All the arguments about REITS having to distribute by law, are irrelevant to the point. The MIRAGE author was trying to change the way investor 'thought' about the distributions; how they used their 'understanding' of the distribution to develop a valuation, etc.
He was not trying to say the REITS should not pay the distributions.
Why REIT Dividends Are Not A Mirage [View article]
ARCP warns up and down left and right about the very dilution you say doesn't exist.
Why REIT Dividends Are Not A Mirage [View article]
At least if you lose all your money relying on SEC filings, your family will be more forgiving than if you say "but honey, Brad on the internet told me it was a great idea so I didn't bother to read the company's own annual report."
Since Buffett's name keeps getting thrown around here -- does anybody think Buffett would recommend listening to "Brad" or to ARCP's own 10K? Why does Buffett read those pesky things when there's "Brad" he can listen to instead?
Food for thought. Eat.
Why REIT Dividends Are Not A Mirage [View article]
You didn't understand the article, David. Your headline alone immediately makes that crystal clear. It is reckless to insist readers should rely on such lofty dividend yields as if they are low risk. I think you know better.