10-18-2013, 06:20 PM
I like Tim's stuff a lot as well. His articles can get a little (a lot) repetitive, but I forgive it because the message is pretty good. One thing that irks me a bit is that he relies a lot on past performance as indicative or future results. Looking back at incredible dividend growth investments that you could have made in the 70s, 80s, and 90s and showing the astounding results is fun, and those very same stocks (KO, JNJ, XOM, etc.) can indeed still be considered excellent dividend growth stocks, but -- in my opinion -- KO simply cannot perform over the next 25 years the way it did over the last 25 years. Yes, it can still be a pillar of my portfolio, but I won't be a "KO millionaire" in 20 years. So as encouraging as I find his writing to be, I wish he would focus a bit more on finding younger stocks with younger streaks that are likely, or at least have a chance to, enjoy global growth while they establish themselves as dividend champs.