"This was all in response to my highlighting the fact Fortescue's current (i.e.the most recent 12 months, NOT, future projections) dividends were more than double comparable companies,"
Well, given listed equities are valued on the basis that excludes entitlement to historical dividends, referencing historical dividends in a manner to suggest one stock is preferable investment to another - as you did - is totally meaningless.
Then this bit of tortured logic:
"As for your quoting institutional financial projections, I feel nothing but utter contempt for them. They are nothing but useless exercises in arrogant hubris, exercises of futility.The "experts" are nothing more than glorified tea leaf readers. How many of them predicted the pandemic? How many predicted the Russian invasion of The Ukraine? How many predicted Hamas's brutalising concert goers, and consequent revenge atrocities? How much more misery will climate change inflict in the coming decade? How much green steel will India's rapid transformational growth require? All these factors are powerful parameters essential in any meaningful future projections equations. All the "experts' " projections have been rendered useless, irrelevant by the events I've mentioned. What does the future hold? File projections under BS!"
Amazing.
It requires a unique brand of mental plasticity to equate someone using an Excel spreadsheet, based on observable inputs, to estimate future dividends, with predicting pandemics, wars and natural disasters.
And gaslighting others by implying differences of investment style is a total red herring that deflect from the facts. Those facts being that, despite your unbridled cheerleading, FMG's dividend yield, an input on which the stock is valued, is not the 12% trailing yield which you bandy about.
(PS. Not stalking you; merely replying to your post... in keeping with the raison d'etre of stock discussion forum, remember?)
.
Expand
(20min delay)