Why wouldn't you just buy a stock right before dividends

because the stock price goes down the same amount when the company gives out a specific number of money per share

>>1652098

/thread

>>1652098
>because the stock price goes down the same amount
Actually the price tends to go down by the amount of dividend less the marginal tax cost of the dividend. But you're close enough for 4chan. 8/10, B+.

>>1652093

I actually asked my Finance lecturer this exact question last week

He gave me the answer of >>1652098


What I have thought of since, is, If I am able to time investing into the company right BEFORE they announce dividends, and then hold until the day before the dividends are paid out, would I be able to make money this way?

This is something we have all thought of, not a stupid question.

>>1652093
It's such an obvious strategy that it isn't profitable.

>>1652172
>If I am able to time investing into the company right BEFORE they announce dividends, and then hold until the day before the dividends are paid out, would I be able to make money this way?
No, because there are two key dates for dividend payments: the ex-dividend date, which is the date you must own the stock to get the dividend, and the payment date, which is when the dividend is actually distributed to holders as of the ex-dividend date. Both dates are announced in advance.

The date the dividend is announced is irrelevant.

no, there are ways to do this. buy on announcement of dividends, preferably "special" dividends, which is rare. and they report the amount before the ex dividend date. everyone usually does it too and the stock soars, then sell when your in a profit. BUT ONLY if you get in early enough. I could have done it with PPC, pilgrims pride, a year? ago, but I stayed in. note: I owned stock before they announced, THEN shot up when special divvy announced. which was like $5

>>1652297
>they report the amount before the ex dividend date. everyone usually does it too and the stock soars, then sell when your in a profit. BUT ONLY if you get in early enough
You do realize that when you sell before the ex-dividend date, you're not getting the dividend? And if you simply held the stock, then you'd get the dividend, which is going to equate to the price increase. So there is literally zero profit opportunity, other than the fact that you happen to own a good stock.

>>1652093
Ex-dividend dates

>>1652301
no, buy on news early enough, sell before date. gain "dividend" without risk of holding

>>1652303
download stock twit. and I understand if I sell before I don't receive dividend.

Why doesn't everyone just short the day before a dividend then? You know it's going to go down.

>>1652303
cool story, just looked up PPC news, and learned they were price fixing, and involved in a class action.i get MORE money from them now

>>1652352
have to have A LOT of money to scrape away with $100. like having thousands on regular quarterly dividends

>>1652352
If you are shorting a stock at the time it pays a dividend, you are responsible for paying that amount.

To oversimplify; when you short a stock, you borrow and sell it, but need to pretend you didn't sell it. So any payments you would have received from the stock, have to be passed on to the owner from whom you are borrowing.

>>1652310
>>1652313
All you're trying to do is front run good news. For your strategy, the dividend doesn't matter -- it could be any positive announcement, such as earnings or sales.

If you think you can beat the market (let alone the market makers) on good news, you're a fool. Whatever you read where ever you read it, someone else already had that news before you.

>>1652521
I don't think you understand...

>>1652540
Says the guy who thinks he's smarter than the market...

>Falling for the dividend meme

>>1652540
>I don't think you understand
What's there to understand? You already spelled it out.
>buy on news early enough
Like >>1652521
said, you're simply trying to front run "good news".
This has zero to do with dividend capture, since you're not capturing any dividends.

>>1652545
You're a fucking idiot, dividends are the only way to get rich. Taxes on capital gains are much higher than dividends. Buy a quality stock at a fair price and if you never sell it, you never pay capital gains tax. Meanwhile you receive a dividend that you can reinvest as you see fit. You are not missing out at all by having an unrealized gain: Because the dividend will be a good yield in terms of the stock price, so it would be the same as if you did sell and bought a different stock with the money. When you decide to retire and live the NEET life just stop re-investing and let the dividend payouts roll in.

>>1653125
>Taxes on capital gains are much higher than dividends.
Capital gains and dividends are taxed at the exact same rates. Therefore your premise is entirely false.

Dividends are indeed a meme. It's a terrible strategy for anyone under the age of 65.