Forum Archive Index - October 2000

[Brian Gale <brigale@i4free.co.nz>]

Glad you liked the idea Phil.  You are more than welcome to use the
spreadsheets which provide a start point, and your grading 1-3 makes
sense. As to dividends I am doubtful that a NZ company should be
downgraded on that score. We had some debate about this a while ago and I
think one factor that differs between US and NZ stocks is that there is a
different tax rates in the US for capital gains and dividends - with
dividends being higher, this could have a bearing on Buffet's logic in
that regard,  although the basic argument is reinvestment of funds
to add to growth.  It's a tricky one 

Good luck with your exams and the project.

Regards
Brian
  
At 13:47 11-10-00 +1300, you wrote:

Brian,
 
You are full of good ideas and I like this one a lot.
 
I must say that I was flabbergasted at some suggestions at what were Buffet stocks and I must conclude that there is a difference in option as to the criteria. I have Pathology exams coming up so I will have to concentrate on those but after the 27th roll on with the analysis.
If you do not mind I will use your spreadsheets that you kindy supplied and modify them, so as well as Buffet criteria we can then look at there one year price performance and try to draw conclusions/ or look for patterns with certain Buffet criteria. Although I must say with the high dividends some companies are paying they will loose serious marks for that. Also since some of the criteria are on a continuum them I may set up a 1,2 or 3 system as far a management goes as levels of dividends because having a point or no point system is a little blunt, what do you think?
 
Cheers
Phil

----- Original Message -----
From: Brian Gale
To: sharechat@sharechat.co.nz
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2000 12:11 PM
Subject: Re: [sharechat] Re: Buffett

Hi Phil
        As a suggestion if you are keen to continue with your project

        Set up a table with your 10 Buffet criteria along the top and then list all the Top40 coys (as a start) and award 1 point for each of the positive criteria. Then see who gets top points.

        Quite an exercise but I think this is the only way to produce a list of  worthwhile candidates for your final list rather than just pulling names at random.

        Having done the Top40 you could go on to the SCI Index.

Regards
Brian


At 20:26 08-10-00 +1300, you wrote:

Well if we are casting our votes for the top four mine would be: SKC, WHS, WAM and BCH. AIA lost by a whisker to WAM.
 
Phil

----- Original Message -----
From: Brian Brakenridge
To: sharechat@sharechat.co.nz
Sent: Sunday, October 08, 2000 7:32 PM
Subject: Re: [sharechat] Re: Buffett

Thanks Krypt but I don't think I mentioned SKC, RBD or TRH. If I'm to make a call it's AIA (maybe cos they've got some big time capex coming up soon), BCH, WHS and WAM. And yes I agree having had a quick look at MHI I'd maybe consider them again. Still I favour a portfolio with 4 cos max.