hello all
From Foundation
“I like the price/dividend ratio myself, by price/earnings (PE) is commonly accepted. Your point being?”My point is all of these ‘share experts’ quote wonderful sure fire figures , yet less than 1% could explain how their anlysis is calculated , so what does that mean?
For example the ASX 100 is based on the top 100 performing companies. If a company under performs then it is dropped off the list and the next best company will then appear into the figures. The average is then used to calculate the yield across the top 100 listed companies in Australia.
Imagine if we had the APX 100 the yields would be in the 1000’s of percents. This is why i get annoyed when i see comparisons of property vs shares , and the ‘expert’ still cannot explain the figures.
So this how we draw a comparison :
Property median capital growth (centre point) , this counts every piece of crap on planet Australia inside the metrpolitan arc vs the top 100 companies in Australia. Sounds like a reasonable judgement dont you think crashy?
Thats right boys and girls a loss does not count !!
These figures are a little bit misleading then?
Originally posted by tony wpb:hello all
From Foundation
“I like the price/dividend ratio myself, by price/earnings (PE) is commonly accepted. Your point being?”My point is all of these ‘share experts’ quote wonderful sure fire figures , yet less than 1% could explain how their anlysis is calculated , so what does that mean?
For example the ASX 100 is based on the top 100 performing companies. If a company under performs then it is dropped off the list and the next best company will then appear into the figures. The average is then used to calculate the yield across the top 100 listed companies in Australia.
Imagine if we had the APX 100 the yields would be in the 1000’s of percents. This is why i get annoyed when i see comparisons of property vs shares , and the ‘expert’ still cannot explain the figures.
So this how we draw a comparison :
Property median capital growth (centre point) , this counts every piece of crap on planet Australia inside the metrpolitan arc vs the top 100 companies in Australia. Sounds like a reasonable judgement dont you think crashy?
Thats right boys and girls a loss does not count !!
These figures are a little bit misleading then?
Hi tony wpb,
You are wrong about the ASX100 being the best performance, that is completely incorrect. They are a selection of the 100 most representative companies in the sharemarket and even if they do not perform well they stay in the index, who says they are drop?
Check the example of Telstra, Telstra is like a investment property right now, it keeps going down and the goverment is trying to pull it up (In investment property who tries to pull it up are the real state agents and people with investment on it), anyway, telstra has been in the index since day one and will continue to be there even if it drops another 50% or more (as property could do
)Clones
************************
The net result is not so much lies, damn lies and statistics but rather vendor dreaming, buyer wishing and agent glossing.Originally posted by Dazzling:
[What I can’t understand for the life of me, is the amount of people who need or want glorification based on some prediction of what may happen based on their obvious and considerable knowledge.
The other thing I don’t understand, is if someone feels that strongly about something and are sure it (whatever it is) is going to happen, how they never seem to put that “knowledge” to it’s best use and profit from it.
People, stop worrying about what people say / predict……and get busy doing !!!!!!!!!!Dazzling…..Sentiments here that I agree with. Well said. Very well. (Congrats on the API article too……if that is/was you?)
Depreciator, they are some good figures and helpful comments too to put things in perspective. Thanks. [headphone]
Once again thanks for your insight into information that is utter crap.
So these figures below are all wrong are they. The share price does not reflect profit , but being an expert you would know this.
(2004)Telstra shareholders will receive the first instalment of the promised three-year $4.5 billion capital return through an off-market share buyback and a special 6¢ dividend.
(2005)The telco yesterday posted a record net profit of $4.12 billion for the year ending June 30, slightly below analysts’ forecasts of $4.18 billion, on flat underlying sales revenue of $20.7 billion.
Telstra has reported an 8 per cent increase in annual profit to $4.447 billion, slightly higher than market forecasts.
Analysts had been tipping $4.39 billion.
No share experts out there can still explain the calculations…keep googling[blink]
)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. If you don't have an account, you can register here.
