Your $1m inheritance is locked for 10 years in one company, which one ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by winner69

Somebody mentioned compounding the eighth wonder of the world ...and reinvesting divies boosts returns heaps

Lets say our $1,00m worth of shares grow consistently at 10% pa and we collect a 5% divie along the way and we reinvest that divie into our holding. Essentially assumes earnings will grow at 10% and the divie increases as earnings grow.


At the end of the 10 years we will have about $4.0m (assuming we didn’t spend the divies)

If we had not reinvested our divies we would have $3.4m

Reinvesting the divies gives returns a decent boost eh

No gurantee numbers are right ...indicative only

Also highlights why the NZX50 outperforms the world with divies counted and reinvested

---

There's a well written article on the contribution of dividends to total return here: https://www.gurufocus.com/news/40253...y-surprise-you

Short version: in general, dividends' contribution to total return increases over longer time periods but there is considerable variation around this for individual stocks (which should not come as a surprise). See figure 3.

I haven't read a study focused on NZ (or Australian) stocks but would expect dividends to make up an even higher percentage of total return given our higher dividend yields.

My pick from the NZ listed companies would be OCA - plenty of scope to grow over the next 10 years, good ability to pay ongoing dividends, and with an ageing population a ready supply of consumers for their services.

If money was no object and I was already completely financially secure I would be tempted to take a punt on a company like BLT - I've used the product and it is extremely effective, I feel that natural health products have a big future ahead of them and BLT could be very successful if they can sort out their management and marketing.

OCA just hit an all time high. Plenty of love for the sector with SUM currently trading at an all time high as well and RYM, MET and ARV trading within a few cents of all time high's.

I'd be pretty conservative and put it in Mainfreight, or Ryman, or Ebos.
With a 10 year blind time frame I'd be prepared to pay for quality with a stronger expectation that it would stick around and continue to perform at least adequately and hopefully a lot better.
You need to be sure that it can meet challenges, and adapt. If it hasnt proven that - the risk is a lot higher it wont be around in 10 years. Hence OCA not a go for me in a blind trust like situation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CD_CHCH

My pick from the NZ listed companies would be OCA - plenty of scope to grow over the next 10 years, good ability to pay ongoing dividends, and with an ageing population a ready supply of consumers for their services.

If money was no object and I was already completely financially secure I would be tempted to take a punt on a company like BLT - I've used the product and it is extremely effective, I feel that natural health products have a big future ahead of them and BLT could be very successful if they can sort out their management and marketing.

---

It seems to me companies that deal in preventative medicine, BLT, PIL or testing like PEB get aggressively put in the sights of large drug companies who get them discredited and eventually wiped out. Prevention does not make money. Big pharma want us all on 5 pills a day and a cure for cancer will never come, too much money to loose.... Just sayin...
so personally Beagle, i wouldnt put my money there.
personally...THL SUM. or. ERD but that would be a punt.

The criteria is quite tricky, and the circumstances although possible for some, is unlikely for many? To have a $1m inheritance and be forced to invest it in one single company in the NZX for 10 years and not touch it.

Hmmm, I'm not sure that fits the investing strategy norms for most here but I could be wrong about that. Challenging for sure, as the multiple picks and uncertainty about a final decision for many posters seems to indicate.

I still reckon a fat bank, entrenched, making obscene profits with almost unlimited resources to defend their position and ensure their profitable longevity is a decent choice, and of them ANZ is the biggest. So I'm not changing my mind, even though I don't hold ANZ in my real portfolio.

The criteria imho also lends itself to speculative choices but 10 years is a long time and specs come and go, win big or lose everything, or make a survivable choice that lasts the distance and wins the comp.

Fortunately Beagle who started this will presumably be recording all these picks and reporting on it from time to time over the next ten years so that we know who wins in the end??

Maybe I'll buy a few ANZ and back myself. Or maybe not, I'm not sure that I wouldn't meddle in the share over a 10 year period. I hate capital losses, have most-times the skills to be nimble and enjoy SP upside while sometimes coinciding with dividends payouts (or not) but avoiding capital losses. Banks move around a lot. It's a weird feeling choosing something that doesn't fit ones MO or normal strategy.

This is messing with my mind.

Don't let it mess with you mind Baa Baa invest in Raz corp..only one person really going for wealth here not passively :-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baa_Baa

The criteria is quite tricky, and the circumstances although possible for some, is unlikely for many? To have a $1m inheritance and be forced to invest it in one single company in the NZX for 10 years and not touch it.

Hmmm, I'm not sure that fits the investing strategy norms for most here but I could be wrong about that. Challenging for sure, as the multiple picks and uncertainty about a final decision for many posters seems to indicate.

I still reckon a fat bank, entrenched, making obscene profits with almost unlimited resources to defend their position and ensure their profitable longevity is a decent choice, and of them ANZ is the biggest. So I'm not changing my mind, even though I don't hold ANZ in my real portfolio.

The criteria imho also lends itself to speculative choices but 10 years is a long time and specs come and go, win big or lose everything, or make a survivable choice that lasts the distance and wins the comp.

Fortunately Beagle who started this will presumably be recording all these picks and reporting on it from time to time over the next ten years so that we know who wins in the end??

Maybe I'll buy a few ANZ and back myself. Or maybe not, I'm not sure that I wouldn't meddle in the share over a 10 year period. I hate capital losses, have most-times the skills to be nimble and enjoy SP upside while sometimes coinciding with dividends payouts (or not) but avoiding capital losses. Banks move around a lot. It's a weird feeling choosing something that doesn't fit ones MO or normal strategy.

This is messing with my mind.

---

On what basis is ANZ the biggest ?
Approx $ AUD MCAP
CBA 128 Bio
WBC 99 Bio
ANZ 82 Bio
NAB 74 Bio
Macq 41 Bio
Suncorp 19 Bio

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stoploss

On what basis is ANZ the biggest ?

---

They're the biggest in NZ is the only explanation I can think of :cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raz

Don't let it mess with you mind Baa Baa invest in Raz corp..only one person really going for wealth here not passively :-)

---

How doe's one do that ???????




















how doe's