Okay, someone help me understand this.
Why does Walmart pay dividend when it could reinvest that money into it's employees and stores to reshape its brand image?
Walmart is essentially laughed at by everybody everywhere as being the dirtiest, ugliest, least helpful store ever. Yes, it is cheap and has lots of available items and I myself shop there, but I would be much more inclined to shop there more often if they:
>had better employees
>had cleaner stores
>had even slightly higher quality meats and other products
Why then does Walmart pay out dividends to shareholders when it could likely make more money by competing more on Publix's level? I just don't get it...
Because you keep shopping there and so does every other holier than thou wal-mart hater.
They don't have to change anything to keep getting business
>>1248753
True, but I don't shop there very often and most of my larger purchases are done at Publix. Nearly everyone I know does this too (though I live in a wealthy area down south so that could play into it).
But even if what you said is true, wouldn't they still receive a better outcome over the long term by reinvesting that money into their stores than paying it out as dividends?
That money is better spent on share holders than employees with a two year 98% turnover
>>1248742
>Walmart is essentially laughed at by everybody everywhere as being the dirtiest, ugliest, least helpful store ever.
Not in Canada, Walmart is fucking amazing. It's a one stop shop a whole variety of everyday stuff.
>>1248758
Why would anyone invest in a company like walmart if there wasn't dividends being paid out.
>>1248758
Because most people aren't rich and will put up with more bullshit for lower prices? You are a minority.
They also benefit from more people investing in there stocks.
>>1248742
> I shop there
> Why don't they improve things?
OP. You just answered your own question.
As for the question of dividends: Dividends make a stock much more attractive to investors. So more investors more money. And Walmart would grow at the speed of light if they could, so they need all the investment dollars they can possibly get.
>>1248742
Because dividends are attractive. Stocks like amazon have a high value in hopes that they give dividends in the future.
Of course walmart can re-invest money into their company but they give the choice of the investor/holder to put back those dividends and buy more stocks
I would rather have a stock that grows for 5-10 years without dividend than a company that gives dividend from day 1 because they grow faster. Walmarts been around for a while and can afford to keep its investors happy by giving nice dividends.
![biz_success_10rules_walton[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/oO79uAt.jpg "biz_success_10rules_walton[1].jpg")
>>1248742
OP don't be a dumb nigger, pick up a book and educate yourself about Samuel Walton, entrepreneur best known for founding the retailers Walmart and Sam's Club.
OP this is how it is
New company
>fast growth, no dividends
Old company
>slow growth, dividend
That's it. More money can't make walmart grow like a startup and a startup can't pay dividends.
