Thanks for your comment. Ask you shall receive:

http://seekingalpha.co...

I hope that helps, all the best. ]]>

Thanks for your comment. Ask you shall receive:

http://seekingalpha.co...

I hope that helps, all the best. ]]>

In the case of this article's illustration, I assumed 5% yearly dividend growth with a 3% dividend yield. So for every $100 invested, this equates to starting with $3 worth of dividends. In the following year, you would anticipate receiving $3.15 in dividend payments (a 5% increase). If the price remained the same, this results in a yield-on-cost of 3.15%. Alternatively, if you presume the dividend yield remains at 3%, this requires a price of $105, or a 5% increase. Once more it should be noted that anything can actually happen, but for long-term illustration such an example works fine. As the years go on, the pattern continues. I hope that helps, all the best. ]]>

In the case of this article's illustration, I assumed 5% yearly dividend growth with a 3% dividend yield. So for every $100 invested, this equates to starting with $3 worth of dividends. In the following year, you would anticipate receiving $3.15 in dividend payments (a 5% increase). If the price remained the same, this results in a yield-on-cost of 3.15%. Alternatively, if you presume the dividend yield remains at 3%, this requires a price of $105, or a 5% increase. Once more it should be noted that anything can actually happen, but for long-term illustration such an example works fine. As the years go on, the pattern continues. I hope that helps, all the best. ]]>

Ask and you shall receive, here's a look at CNI and CP:

http://seekingalpha.co...

I hope that helps, all the best. ]]>

Ask and you shall receive, here's a look at CNI and CP:

http://seekingalpha.co...

I hope that helps, all the best. ]]>

Thanks for your comment. As indicated numerous times before, a company need not grow its payout by a given rate every single year in order for the dividend to compound at the average rate. For instance, in the past three years Apple has increased its dividend by 15%, 7.9% and 10.6% - already failing your criteria. Yet the company would only need to grow its payout by 8.6% per year for the next 17 years to reach a compound rate of 9% over 20 years.

Moreover, that lower rate does not need to be met every year either, for a company to reach an average compound rate. There's a large difference between a minimum annual growth rate and an average compound growth rate. Note that while a certain rate is used for modeling, it does not follow that a minimum rate is required. Increases are necessarily finicky. I hope that helps, all the best. ]]>

Thanks for your comment. As indicated numerous times before, a company need not grow its payout by a given rate every single year in order for the dividend to compound at the average rate. For instance, in the past three years Apple has increased its dividend by 15%, 7.9% and 10.6% - already failing your criteria. Yet the company would only need to grow its payout by 8.6% per year for the next 17 years to reach a compound rate of 9% over 20 years.

Moreover, that lower rate does not need to be met every year either, for a company to reach an average compound rate. There's a large difference between a minimum annual growth rate and an average compound growth rate. Note that while a certain rate is used for modeling, it does not follow that a minimum rate is required. Increases are necessarily finicky. I hope that helps, all the best. ]]>

http://seekingalpha.co...

In essence, compounding math is such that you have to think about things in exponential rather than linear terms. In the above linked article, I detail this specifically with Verizon as an example. Instead of adding or subtracting compound returns (which are over years) you have to think about the return components individually if you want to figure out what percentage might be attributable to each.

In this example share price appreciation (fueled by underlying profit growth) still makes up the majority of the return, but not as much as you might suppose from the above information. Moreover, dividends play an ever important role as your time frame lengthens or you begin reinvesting. I hope that helps. All the best. ]]>

http://seekingalpha.co...

In essence, compounding math is such that you have to think about things in exponential rather than linear terms. In the above linked article, I detail this specifically with Verizon as an example. Instead of adding or subtracting compound returns (which are over years) you have to think about the return components individually if you want to figure out what percentage might be attributable to each.

In this example share price appreciation (fueled by underlying profit growth) still makes up the majority of the return, but not as much as you might suppose from the above information. Moreover, dividends play an ever important role as your time frame lengthens or you begin reinvesting. I hope that helps. All the best. ]]>

http://seekingalpha.co...

Hopefully this gives a bit of insight. All the best. ]]>

http://seekingalpha.co...

Hopefully this gives a bit of insight. All the best. ]]>