Discussion about this post

User's avatar
harryeagar's avatar

Abbvie is pretty close to being a dividend aristocrat. If you paid $11,500 for 100 shares you could expect to get $520 over the next year. Very good compared to a CD but hardly extravagant. If you lent your brother-in-law $11,500 and he promised to pay it back at the rate of $520 a year would you think you had found El Dorado, especially if there was a fairish chance that he'd stop paying after a few years?

Porter started at 2013. 100 shares then would have cost you $4,000 and the price appreciated slowly but steadily till about 2019 when it had doubled. I haven't calculated the total dividend but it would have been much less than $4,000.

Not bad but you won't be buying any yachts on that.

And you had some risk. Stock buybacks, at $2 billion a year, don't look extravagant for a $200 billion company ($150 billion or so as a long average).

As I said, I think companies should pay dividends. How much? Abbvie is on the high side, not unreasonably considering how uncertain drug development is.

If Abbvie paid close to its sector average its dividend payout would be about half what is has been. That would have allowed it to double its R&D and come out a wash.

I think Porter was pulling a fast one.

Expand full comment
harryeagar's avatar

News publishing companies get paid zilch for 'scoops' by other publishers. This is a blog and I cannot explain news finance here but you have a completely imaginary idea of it. The short of it is that revenue comes from advertisements and (a long way back) subscriptions.

Expand full comment
310 more comments...

No posts