Woodside, page-484

@Fatshark@2sigma @randa22
@Fatshark
@2sigma

Would have thought @Fatshark understood the defining issue, but perhaps some mischief, if not disingenuity as well played a role.

There are two separate and discrete matters under discussion, with regards to WDS in this thread, but equally applicable to all dividend paying ASX listed stocks.

For many investors (irrespective of type ie individual, fundies, selfies and such) carry out a dividend analysis as to their particular objectives. In such cases, dividend franking may be predicted or assumed, as the final details (ie if franked and the amount of franking, 100% or lesser) are not available until market announcements. It is notable that some of the major banks, formerly the poster children of franking to investors, are now paying <100%. So far, so good, not downplaying the significance of franking to investing, on the contrary.

However, had some issue with the recycling of "broker speak" by inclusion of the impact franking credits into the reporting of actual dividend yield and stock performance for all investors, as a performance measure. Franking credits are not a direct investment outcome, but an EOFY tax transaction for most, but certainly not all investors. Franking credits were introduced by the then Hawke/Keating Labor Govts in the 1980's, as part of major market reforms to deal with double taxation.

Still there Fatshark?