Investors Should Not Pay 100% of their Earnings as Dividends to Maximize Shareholders’ Revenue

With the mounting figure of baby boomers at, or close to retirement, the desire for present revenue on no account has been superior. Presently, in low-production setting, investors may not desire to depend on fixed revenue to achieve their needed income. In essence, investors can uncover other means to generate revenue, like analysing dividend-paying stocks. This, certainly, deduces the aptness of equities for a shareholder, as the trade-off entails heightening more greatly loaded fixed revenue portfolio’s threat that could wear away input in the process (Flint et al., 2010, p.44). Dividend output exhibits how much an organisation pays out in dividends annually in relation to its share value. According to Rizvi and Khare (2011), as investors search for possible intensification in the equity market, they can as well benefit from the stock’s dividend yields and equity dividends can present a more eye-catching yield contrary to other fixed revenue investments, particularly, when the after-tax output is taken into account, although with extra investment threat. In an apparently comprehensive low yield setting for fixed revenue, the possible income equities as well has the possibility to augment demand for equities, which could assist sustain their prices. Arguably, Chang (2009) posit that because of the present high organisation cash balances and investors’ mounting penchant for revenue, the pendulum may dangle back toward organisations paying an enormous share of profits as dividends. Fundamentally, the majority of investors seek to achieve lasting investment objectives and the control of compounding is necessary to manage to meet those goals. Provided with the record of low interest rates at present, investors have further inducement to search for out this lasting dividend growth.

Essentially, a company’s pay-out ratio can disclose many things, in that a low ratio might show the organisation is utilizing much of its revenues to reinvest in the corporation with the intention of developing further. Equally, an extreme pay-out ratio can exhibit the company readiness to share more of its revenues with shareholders. Statistically, Flint et al. (2010) posit that large, slow-advancing corporations such as utilities or telecoms provide characteristically high pay-out ratios. In this regard, Flint et al. (2010) advice that shareholders should be cautious of over 100 percent pay-out ratios, as this denotes the organisation is paying out in excess of it is earning, which is an indefensible state. Still, there are some occurrences where payout ratios over 100 percent show a an organisation has high diminution costs, which are a non-cash charge that affect net revenue, but not cash accessible to pay shareholders. According to Rizvi and Khare (2011), the dividend pay-out ratio is different for distinct organisations in with dissimilar fiscal situations. Thus, shareholders should comprehend that not all firms’ dividend pay-out ratios should be analysed alike. Classically, big and older firms will tend to have an elevated pay-out ratio as they have the fiscal abilities to pay-out more to investors. In addition, some organisations, in particular the new ones would rather have an inferior dividend pay-out ratio with the intention of retaining earnings that can be used for future organisation advancement. According to Rizvi and Khare (2011), the more mature, and well-known companies do not concentrate on such advancement, so they will be more prepared to pay 100 percents dividends. Arguably, shareholder should be acquainted with possible investment in development stock or dividend stock to enhance proper comprehension of its dividend pay-out ratio.

(REITs) as they have an exclusive pecuniary makeup and are obliged to pay out most of their returns as dividends. Flint et al. (2010) posit that companies under these taxonomies for all time will pay a high percentage of their revenue towards dividends. In essence, it is up to the shareholder to come to a decision on what type of dividend pay-out ratio is most good-looking to definite investing requirements. According to Rizvi and Khare (2011), dividend-directed shareholder may require stable cash revenue for living expenditures, which indicates the shareholder’s investing precedence, are less disturbed with investment gains and this shareholder will be concentrate more on investment gains, so this shareholder will seek inferior dividend pay-out ratio with a viewpoint towards expansion.real estate investment trustss (MLP), Trusts, or Master limited partnershipChang (2009) believes that there are times when shareholders should pay no attention to dividend pay-out ratios, as specific companies for all time will have oddly high numbers. Furthermore, the pay-out ratio should not be used to


Chang, C. L., 2009. Dividend Payout Ratio, Investment opportunities, and the Pecking Order Theory: Evidence from Taiwan. The Business Review, Cambridge, vol. 13, no. 11, pp.304-12.

Flint, A., Tan, A. & Tian, G., 2010. Predicting Future Earnings Growth: A Test of the Dividend Payout Ratio in the Australian Market. International Journal of Business and Finance Research, vol. 4, no. 2, pp.43-58.

Rizvi, S. & Khare, S., 2011. Determinants of Dividend Payout Ratios—A Study of the Indian Banking Sector. Indian Journal of Finance, vol. 5, no. 2, pp.24-31.