Explanation: In order to be eligible for the dividend of $0.42/share, you had to be holding the stock on Friday at close. You would therefore normally expect the share price to drop $0.42 between Friday close and Monday open.
Looks like that accounts for about half of the "drop", which means KO lost less than 1% over the weekend. Hardly worth a news article.
Additionally, Pogba did the same with Heineken yesterday. Yet that stock (HEIA:AMS [0]) went up 1.39% today, without any other clear signals that would cause the stock to go up that much.
Correlated (maybe even caused by)? Who knows, it is the stock market after all, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.
wouldn't this be something already arbed out? Dividend dates are known -- one can make a quick buck shorting if one knows for sure the price will change.
No, because if you short at close on ex-dividend and buy back at open the next day, ceteris paribus you gain the stock price delta (which is exactly equal to the dividend), but you also owe the amount of the dividend to the person you borrowed the stock from. You end up netting nothing.
It is pretty visible in most instruments. If you're calculating a simple expected price of a stock at the open it's pretty normal to take the closing price from the prior trade day and adjust it based on any corporate actions (dividends, splits, ...).
Now whether or not this is actually the price that the instrument will trade at is a different story, but it's a good initial estimate. Market data and other activity will quickly inform you as to the actual price.
Sort of. There’s taxation différences that vary based on where the account holder is based, so the drop won’t exactly equal the dividend amount, even if it was paid immediately.
And with that, billions of people vote with their dollars and express their dislike of drinking Coca-Cola (and show Coke who is boss) instead by drinking Dasani, Smartwater, Topo Chico, and Aha.
I don't think so. Even if that were true, he knows is power and influence and how it works with sponsorship etc..
So he would have known it would have been interpreted one way and not the other.
Definitely moving a bottle of something aside he's not being paid for is rational in his part.
If he 'said the names' of the water companies he was not sponsored by, that would be odd as he knows not to do that, but if he just said 'water' then that would be normal.
I bet Coca Cola and Pepsi deeply fear tobacco style lawsuits.
If you think tobacco-caused disease is expensive to treat, wait until you see diabetes and obesity.
They’ve reduced the sugar of the Canadian version of coke (used to have more than US formulation). Bottles are all getting smaller (591 to 500) and smaller options than 355mL.
Coca-cola has started buying all the bottled water brands in Mexico to stave off any people who won't drink soda. Tap water is dangerous to drink in most of Latin America.
And I’m sure a company that found a way to still sell to the Nazis won’t adapt by having this guy sponsor their new water brand for soccer-focused countries.
Side note:
If you really think about the power Coke will amass in China, it feels staggering. Imagine having a quarter billion people (being conservative here) pay $1 for a can of soda. That’s $250m on a Monday. Do it again Tuesday, maybe have them buy two. It’s crazy money.
Everyone talks about how awesome Warren Buffet is, but nobody talks about how the vast majority of his fortune was acquired from owning Coca-Cola, selling sugar water to the masses, fueling the diabetes and obesity epidemic.
Buffett famously stated, "I'll tell you why I like the cigarette business. It costs a penny to make. Sell it for a dollar. It's addictive. And there's fantastic brand loyalty."
>"Basically, when you get to my age, you'll really measure your success in life by how many of the people you want to have love you actually do love you.
>I know people who have a lot of money, and they get testimonial dinners and they get hospital wings named after them. But the truth is that nobody in the world loves them. If you get to my age in life and nobody thinks well of you, I don't care how big your bank account is, your life is a disaster.
>That's the ultimate test of how you have lived your life.
There could be a confounding variable that led to massive demand for sugar water, of which Buffett was only capitalizing on, not necessarily contributing to.
> In part, the shift from using sucrose to HFCS was encouraged by extensive government subsidies of corn farmers, with a majority of U.S. farm policies focused on promoting increased production of inexpensive corn. One study showed that as a result of such subsidies, the consumer price of corn (and its byproducts) remained approximately 25%–30% below cost (of production) between 1997 and 2005 (19). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2746720/
> As nutrition debates raged in the 1960s, prominent Harvard nutritionists published two reviews in a top medical journal downplaying the role of sugar in coronary heart disease. Newly unearthed documents reveal what they didn’t say: A sugar industry trade group initiated and paid for the studies, examined drafts, and laid out a clear objective to protect sugar’s reputation in the public eye.
https://www.statnews.com/2016/09/12/sugar-industry-harvard-r...
Or that he took Gov handouts/bailouts and always says he wants to pay more taxes but never does. I guess you can't get to where he is being honest. A recent example was the fuckery he tried to pull with Texas and building new Generation Plants. Man is a shit bag...
He talks about his investment in Coca-Cola all the time, and is often drinking coke during his interviews and shareholder updates. He's pretty upfront about it.
While I don't know if the drop is related to this incident or not, the video was wildly spread through social networks (at least in Europe) and even becoming a meme now. Even some news commented on it (local). Still no idea if it really affected the stock price, but it is 2 days now and people are still talking about it in these necks of the woods.
Drop was something like $1 per share which from ~$56 to ~$55.
Where 3 months ago Coca Cola was trading around $50, year ago Coca Cola was trading for ~$45 per share.
That was totally meaningless event, it did not drop in a way I would start buying. There is no real consequences for Coca Cola, maybe some day traders lost money selling for $56 before that event.
Take a look at the company's stock price over the last year (KO). This sort of drop is indistinguishable from random market fluctuations as far as I can tell.
Huh yeah... you can see unhealthy people put away a 2 litre bottle of something like Coca-Cola without thinking twice, but that would seem like an obscene quantity of orange juice or something to almost anyone I think.
Turns out people will drink more of something if you make it a little addictive. Hell, the drug of choice has changed but it's even baked into the name.
Toss a big warning from the Surgeon General on there. People are blind to it now, but when they first did it for cigarettes most people weren't aware of the severity of related health issues.
We need a big "soda can make you obese and diabetic" campaign — we haven't even begun to approach the level of fervor that cut down on smoking... and we're fatter and unhealthier than ever.
I generally agree that bans go too far, but I love publicly funded advocacy.
Thank you for the recommendation. It's surprising how easily we're getting manipulated by taste buds and old instincts and how often our brain function is out of the picture!
There is a 100% chance that if he was sponsored by Coke, the he would have done the opposite.
There's so much discussion on this board about 'water' vs 'coke' - that is not it. This is a businessman who makes his money from sponsorship. They know what they are doing and how it will be interpreted.
The decision to 'move a bottle of something you're not sponsoring off camera' is inevitably a business decision and normal frankly.
There is a 0% chance that he would ever accept that sponsorship. We're talking about someone who is obsessed with health and performance, and the third most well paid athlete in the world.
He even said recently that he is 36 years old, has been playing professionally for 20 years, and doesn't really care any more.
There's 44g of sugar in a can of coke. The recommended daily amount of sugar is 24g. Although I take issue that there would be any amount of sugar that should be recommended since it's entirely unnecessary to consume.
But Pogba did the same with Heineken [1] (most likely because he is muslim) yet Heineken's stock price is rising? [2] So either Ronaldo has more influence than Pogba or the whole thing (Coke's stock) has nothing to do with Ronaldo.
I am not even a soccer fan, and I know who Ronaldo is. This is the first time I have even heard of Pogba. So likely Ronaldo has more influence than Pogba.
Just a fun little aside - Heineken introduced Heineken 0.0 a few years back, and as non-alcoholic beers go, it's the only one that doesn't taste "off".
Even Athletic Brewing Company, as nice as it is to have non-alcoholic stouts and IPAs, hasn't nailed what Heineken has.
(Incidentally, it was a 0.0 that Pogba removed from the table, so perhaps it wasn't the alcohol that bothered him)
FWIW, someone poured me a can of Heineken 0.0 a few weeks back, telling me it was a Heineken and I immediately thought something was off about it. I just assumed it was really old or something (I was at a family member's place who doesn't drink and just keeps some beer around for guests), but when I actually looked at the can and saw what I was drinking, I realized why.
> Alcohol-free beer does contain a small amount of alcohol (up to 0.05% ABV). This is because some alcohol naturally forms as part of the brewing process.
I normally don't have strong brand opinions but I have to say Athletic Brewing make the best non-alc hazy ipa and lager I've ever had. Before them I'd only have non-alc beer at events where people drink, now I'll have a few at home weekly.
Ronaldo is the number one by followers in instagram, I would also suspect has 10x the ad appearances and so on.
(and again, not saying it affected the price, Ronaldo actually dissed Coke by saying 'Water', while Pogba did it mostly because of his faith, which carries a different weight)
Readit News
[1] https://ycharts.com/companies/KO/dividend
Looks like that accounts for about half of the "drop", which means KO lost less than 1% over the weekend. Hardly worth a news article.
Journalist narratives behind stock price action are almost always wrong or misleading.
Correlated (maybe even caused by)? Who knows, it is the stock market after all, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.
[0]: https://live.euronext.com/en/product/equities/NL0000009165-X...
Now whether or not this is actually the price that the instrument will trade at is a different story, but it's a good initial estimate. Market data and other activity will quickly inform you as to the actual price.
Deleted Comment
So he would have known it would have been interpreted one way and not the other.
Definitely moving a bottle of something aside he's not being paid for is rational in his part.
If he 'said the names' of the water companies he was not sponsored by, that would be odd as he knows not to do that, but if he just said 'water' then that would be normal.
Why assume it's a rejection of the Coca-Cola corporation vs soda as a choice of beverages?
These are 'businessmen athletes' who are intimately familiar with issues around sponsorship.
If you think tobacco-caused disease is expensive to treat, wait until you see diabetes and obesity.
They’ve reduced the sugar of the Canadian version of coke (used to have more than US formulation). Bottles are all getting smaller (591 to 500) and smaller options than 355mL.
And the obvious push toward low/no-sugar options.
Deleted Comment
Side note: If you really think about the power Coke will amass in China, it feels staggering. Imagine having a quarter billion people (being conservative here) pay $1 for a can of soda. That’s $250m on a Monday. Do it again Tuesday, maybe have them buy two. It’s crazy money.
source: https://www.investopedia.com/articles/stocks/08/buffett-best...
>"Basically, when you get to my age, you'll really measure your success in life by how many of the people you want to have love you actually do love you.
>I know people who have a lot of money, and they get testimonial dinners and they get hospital wings named after them. But the truth is that nobody in the world loves them. If you get to my age in life and nobody thinks well of you, I don't care how big your bank account is, your life is a disaster.
>That's the ultimate test of how you have lived your life.
> In part, the shift from using sucrose to HFCS was encouraged by extensive government subsidies of corn farmers, with a majority of U.S. farm policies focused on promoting increased production of inexpensive corn. One study showed that as a result of such subsidies, the consumer price of corn (and its byproducts) remained approximately 25%–30% below cost (of production) between 1997 and 2005 (19). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2746720/
> As nutrition debates raged in the 1960s, prominent Harvard nutritionists published two reviews in a top medical journal downplaying the role of sugar in coronary heart disease. Newly unearthed documents reveal what they didn’t say: A sugar industry trade group initiated and paid for the studies, examined drafts, and laid out a clear objective to protect sugar’s reputation in the public eye. https://www.statnews.com/2016/09/12/sugar-industry-harvard-r...
As has been similarly said, it costs $100 to make, sells for $1000 and its addictive. What’s not to like about investing in it.
Still not clear where the smart money was.
"change the world for the better, right? right?"
Deleted Comment
Where 3 months ago Coca Cola was trading around $50, year ago Coca Cola was trading for ~$45 per share.
That was totally meaningless event, it did not drop in a way I would start buying. There is no real consequences for Coca Cola, maybe some day traders lost money selling for $56 before that event.
We need a big "soda can make you obese and diabetic" campaign — we haven't even begun to approach the level of fervor that cut down on smoking... and we're fatter and unhealthier than ever.
I generally agree that bans go too far, but I love publicly funded advocacy.
Dead Comment
There's so much discussion on this board about 'water' vs 'coke' - that is not it. This is a businessman who makes his money from sponsorship. They know what they are doing and how it will be interpreted.
The decision to 'move a bottle of something you're not sponsoring off camera' is inevitably a business decision and normal frankly.
whole fruits are extremely positive on any day
1, https://twitter.com/goal/status/1405076977514582018
2, https://www.google.com/finance/quote/HEIA:AMS
I am not even a soccer fan, and I know who Ronaldo is. This is the first time I have even heard of Pogba. So likely Ronaldo has more influence than Pogba.
Even Athletic Brewing Company, as nice as it is to have non-alcoholic stouts and IPAs, hasn't nailed what Heineken has.
(Incidentally, it was a 0.0 that Pogba removed from the table, so perhaps it wasn't the alcohol that bothered him)
https://www.drinkaware.co.uk/facts/alcoholic-drinks-and-unit...
(and again, not saying it affected the price, Ronaldo actually dissed Coke by saying 'Water', while Pogba did it mostly because of his faith, which carries a different weight)
Deleted Comment
Definitely does not have to be an either/or thing in this scenario. I'd say both/and are likely true. :)