Bio not provided
@frfrizzo381 when reporting taxes, if you have sold a position that you have reinvested dividends over time, you have the option for all stock that you've owned over 1 year to report the holding period as "various, over 1 year" to eliminate this problem. Thus, only dividends reinvested within a year of you selling will have to be reported as short-term, so it really isn't that complicated unless your broker doesn't track that information for you. I've done this numerous times, and I have been with Fidelity over 10 years.
1 week, 4 days ago on Pooling Dividends Vs. Automatic Reinvesting: Which Is Right For You?
I'm in the "do both" camp. I've got stuff like KMI, MCD, and DLR in my Roth, as well as stuff like AMBA and UA. Trying to barbell some good growth companies with some higher dividends. The end result is a decent blended yield with a pretty nice forward growth rate. So far, so good.
1 month, 2 weeks ago on Roth IRA Investments: Do You Want High Dividends Or Rapid Growth?
@Clarkaroo You can use the long-term capital losses to offset any long-term capital gains you may have upon selling other shares. Any unused capital losses can be carried forward to be used in future years, and I believe you can even use up to $3k to offset income; I don't know how this works with a trust though, so of course you should check with your adviser. BP is a good source of income and is back on the DGI path, but you should at least diversify a little bit. KMI seems like a nice choice, based on their consolidation and intentions to deliver nice dividend growth. The rest of it would be personal preferences, so I won't try to advise you there. It's definitely hard to go wrong with stuff like MO, KO/PEP, JNJ, T, XOM and most of the others you mention. SDRL gives me pause because of their massive debt and the way they keep shifting assets around, but it could be perfectly fine. Good luck
1 month, 3 weeks ago on Citigroup Stock Pre-2008: When Investors Can Never Truly Recover
Tim, I wouldn't necessarily be terrified if someone compliments you or thanks you for "causing" them to buy something. Perhaps they mean "thank you for bringing this company to my attention that I wouldn't have otherwise known about; I researched it and liked what I saw, so I bought it." If it helps you sleep better at night, that's how you should view it.
2 months, 1 week ago on Dividend Growth Investing Right Now In 2014
With the exception of speculative (mostly tech or biotech positions), the only massive P/E stock I've bought is Under Armour. I bought the company when it was around a $7b market cap company with the idea that in the next 20-30 years, it is reasonable to believe it could be a $60-70b company. You see the brand everywhere, and they're slowly and deliberately expanding their offerings. They now have something like 16-17 straight quarters of better than 20% revenue growth. Obviously they won't be able to keep up that pace of sales growth forever, but they are really executing well. I wouldn't buy it at this price, but I did add to my position when it dipped to $50. I presume at some point in the future (probably after a few more stock splits), they may even start to pay a dividend. Either way, I don't think that company is going to be lower by the time I retire than it is now, so I am happy that I bought it whenever I did -- which I feared was overpaying at around 48x earnings, if I recall
2 months, 1 week ago on A Growth Stock Investing Lesson From Noodles & Company
@Thunderbuzzy Absolutely. Part of the reason I want him to get this kind of recognition is that he took such a beating during and after last year's playoffs. All of our guys have improved, and as long as we continue to minimize our mistakes and continue to scrap on defense, we have a great chance of playing a lot more games. By the way, it's nice to hear from others who are similarly optimistic, yet realistic at the same time. Cheers
2 years, 5 months ago on Thunder Player Power Rankings: First Round Edition
@Thunderbuzzy @Seviay31 I stand by the sentiment I expressed above, solely as the case for making WB #1 and KD #2, not to diminish any other players' contributions. We're splitting hairs, and I love them all, but I think WB should get credit where it's due.
I'd argue that WB should be #1, because this would be a very different series without his clutch buckets and free throws -- in games 1-3, especially. Without those, OKC might have been heading to Dallas down 0-2 or dealing with an 0-3 or 1-2 record after 3 games.