2 ms·
I'm still missing something here. A stock is an instrument of potential income and control, but I've never seen a price that was anywhere close to correlated wi
by bandrami 9y ago
I'm still missing something here. A stock is an instrument of potential income and control, but I've never seen a price that was anywhere close to correlated with that. In fact, if anything there seems to be a discount given to high-dividend stocks (for which I, as an income investor, am grateful to all you baseball card traders that I don't understand).
To put it another way: the actual value of a no-dividend no-vote stock is precisely zero. The price is whatever the buyer and seller agree on, right? So how can one price be more "accurate" than another?
- kshitijl 9y agoIn the event of liquidation, shareholders are on the list of those owed a portion of the proceeds. In fact they are last on the list, after creditors (those who have loaned the company money directly), bondholders (bonds are a form of debt), and holders of preferred stock. That right is the ultimate determinant of the value of a no-dividend no-vote stock: fractional ownership of the right to proceeds in the event of liquidation, after those above have had theirs. As a higher-risk asset, it produces greater returns, since otherwise there is an arbitrage: buy bonds issued by the same company instead. This arbitrage lasts until the bond becomes "expensive", and therefore produces worse returns (since its payout is independent of its price).