Wouldn't a dividend cut only crash the share price if it's a surprise? At this point I don't think it should be a surprise that XOM could the dividend.
That's not a good analogy. The proper analogy would be contributing to IRA vs. investing the amount in skills or material to earn more at a later date.JustPanda said:
It's also the Gordon growth model - when a dividend is assumed to grow consistently with no cuts as part of the intrinsic value, it doesn't matter the degree (it does but factor analysis shows it's not the driving factor) any cut kills the value because the perpetual cash flows are then drastically less. It's compounding. It's like not investing in a young child's Roth IRA one year if they technically have the earned income. Yes, it's sequentially the same as the years around it, however those years across time represent a larger window to maximize exponential growth. Thus, if you skip even 1 year before 18, it will have a massive effect on the total value at 67. Thats why they will borrow to pay it. Look at kinder Morgan, you cut and you're out. Wall st won't trust you unless it's systematic and not a leadership issue.
JustPanda said:
The company themselves came out and declared the dividend safe not 3 months ago. That's it. That's all. That's the end of the road if they cut it. If they cut, the stock will go into the **** tank and take years to retrace.
I sold out at $52 and I wouldn't touch it with a 30ft pole. So many better options to deploy capital.
"Exxon Senior Vice President Neil Chapman said on the company's late-July earnings call that the energy giant is planning to reduce operating costs further and defer expenses where it can, and by doing so that 'will enable us to maintain the dividend and hold debt at its current level.'"
AgAE said:
Sold out yesterday. Better investments out there for dividends.
FOgre09 said:AgAE said:
Sold out yesterday. Better investments out there for dividends.
Where?
These are claims that would have to be based on evidence. What evidence do you have?JustPanda said:
I hate to say you're wrong, but that's 1980s thinking. O&G is on a decline. US and China are past peak oil. It's a fact not a theory.
JustPanda said:
I hate to say you're wrong, but that's 1980s thinking. O&G is on a decline. US and China are past peak oil. It's a fact not a theory.
How are you proposing to power motor vehicles?JustPanda said:
I hate to say you're wrong, but that's 1980s thinking. O&G is on a decline. US and China are past peak oil. It's a fact not a theory.
Ubitag said:
Double your money if you park your Exxon investment and forget about it
Green energy is not going to replace oil.
The world will get back on its feet, soon after the American election.
Exxon is not Enron
Aside from air travel, most automobile manufacturers are moving heavily towards an all electric fleet. I think it'll be 30 years before we see a country where 90% of the cars on the road are electric, but I think within 20 years we'll probably have at least 50% of vehicles on the road be all electric or some sort of hybrid.YouBet said:How are you proposing to power motor vehicles?JustPanda said:
I hate to say you're wrong, but that's 1980s thinking. O&G is on a decline. US and China are past peak oil. It's a fact not a theory.
cjsag94 said:Ubitag said:
Double your money if you park your Exxon investment and forget about it
Green energy is not going to replace oil.
The world will get back on its feet, soon after the American election.
Exxon is not Enron
Then why has Exxon been such a dog for the last decade?
tv1113 said:
In regards to demand, what % of the US workforce will viably remain work from home long term because of this even past the pandemic?
If productivity is equivalent without needing larger office spaces and resources, what's the point?