• These ASX dividend shares will help you beat low interest rates

    Luckily in this low interest rate environment, there are plenty of shares on the ASX paying generous dividends.

    Two which I think would be top options for income investors right now are listed below. Here’s why I like them:

    BHP Group Ltd (ASX: BHP)

    I think this mining giant is a great dividend share to buy. This is because the Big Australian looks well-positioned to generate strong free cash flows in FY 2020 and FY 2021 thanks to its low cost operations and favourable commodity prices.

    The latter is particularly the case for iron ore, which is currently trading at ~US$100 a tonne. This compares to the company’s full year cost guidance of just US$13-14 per tonne at its Western Australia Iron Ore operation. Based on the current BHP share price, I estimate that its shares offer investors a forward fully franked ~5% dividend yield.

    BWP Trust (ASX: BWP)

    Another dividend share that I would buy is this commercial property trust. BWP is the largest owner of Bunnings Warehouse sites in Australia with a total of 68 leases. While having such a reliance on a single customer can be a risk, in this case I see it as a strength. This is because Bunnings is owned by Wesfarmers Ltd (ASX: WES), which is also a major shareholder of BWP. I believe this means it is highly unlikely to do anything that would impact its investment.

    In addition to this, given the quality of the Bunnings business and its positive outlook, I feel the risk of rental defaults and mass closures is extremely low. All in all, I think this leaves BWP well-placed to grow its distribution at a modest rate each year for the foreseeable future. For now, based on the latest BWP share price, I estimate that it offers investors a 4.75% FY 2021 yield.

    Where to invest $1,000 right now

    When investing expert Scott Phillips has a stock tip, it can pay to listen. After all, the flagship Motley Fool Share Advisor newsletter he has run for more than eight years has provided thousands of paying members with stock picks that have doubled, tripled or even more.*

    Scott just revealed what he believes are the five best ASX stocks for investors to buy right now. These stocks are trading at dirt-cheap prices and Scott thinks they are great buys right now.

    *Returns as of June 30th

    More reading

    Motley Fool contributor James Mickleboro has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool Australia owns shares of Wesfarmers Limited. We Fools may not all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. This article contains general investment advice only (under AFSL 400691). Authorised by Scott Phillips.

    The post These ASX dividend shares will help you beat low interest rates appeared first on Motley Fool Australia.

    from Motley Fool Australia https://ift.tt/38ybm7t

  • Tesla is one of the best open-ended growth opportunities: Strategist

    Tesla is one of the best open-ended growth opportunities: StrategistWedbush Securities Chief Technology Strategist Brad Gastwirth joins Yahoo Finance’s Zack Guzman to discuss Elon Musk’s recent jab at Tesla short-sellers by listing “short shorts” on the company’s website.

    from Yahoo Finance https://ift.tt/3iFmbcy

  • It Took a Pandemic to Settle Bayer’s Roundup Suits

    It Took a Pandemic to Settle Bayer’s Roundup Suits(Bloomberg Opinion) — In late June, Bayer AG agreed to pay $9.5 billion to settle about 100,000 lawsuits that accused Roundup, the popular herbicide it acquired when it bought Monsanto in 2018, of causing non-Hodgkin lymphoma. The settlement came about even though Bayer adamantly insists that glyphosate, the core chemical in Roundup, is not a cancer agent, a position also taken by the Environmental Protection Agency and other regulators around the world. It also came about after the plaintiffs won the first three cases that went to trial, including one last year in which a jury awarded $2 billion to a California couple. The plaintiffs’ lawyers had hoped to leverage those victories to extract $20 billion or even $30 billion from Bayer to settle the litigation.And the settlement came about even though we’re in the middle of a pandemic. Or perhaps it’s more accurate to say that it came about because we’re in the middle of a pandemic. “There were no juries and no trials,” said Ken Feinberg, who, as the court-appointed special master, was assigned the task of trying to resolve the litigation. You see, without trials, there wasn’t much else either side could do besides settle.When plaintiffs’ lawyers join forces to gin up a mass tort, they have two forms of leverage. One is their ability to accumulate not just hundreds of lawsuits, but tens of thousands of them. That’s why whenever an allegedly faulty product comes under scrutiny by the plaintiffs’ bar, the lawyers advertise heavily, searching for clients who can claim to be hurt by the product. Once upon a time, this was called “ambulance chasing,” but now it’s simply seen as part of a sophisticated legal business model.The second form of leverage are the trials themselves, especially in plaintiff-friendly jurisdictions like St. Louis, Missouri, or Madison County, Illinois. Juries do not need much in the way of evidence to award billions of dollars to sympathetic plaintiffs who are dying of cancer. Sometimes they don’t need any evidence at all — the mere implication of corporate misconduct is all it takes. And even though these awards are invariably lowered by the trial judge — and sometimes overturned on appeal —thousands of more cases are stacked up right behind them. It’s fair to say that Bayer, a German corporation, miscalculated when it bought Monsanto. Indeed, there are those who believe that had Bayer’s executives better understood how the American legal system works (or doesn’t work, depending on your perspective), it would have never completed the deal. By May 2019, less than a year after the Monsanto deal was completed — and after those first three juries had sided with the plaintiffs — Bayer’s stock had dropped 44%. During the ensuing months, it took steps to mitigate the damage. It cut 12,000 jobs. It dumped its animal health business. It sold two of its best-known brands, Coppertone and Dr. Scholl’s. Nothing seemed to help. By late March this year, Bayer’s market cap was less than the $63 billion it had paid for Monsanto. Which is right around the time the pandemic shut down much of the U.S., including its court system.The legal system didn’t completely grind to a halt, of course. Status hearings and depositions can be done using a platform like Zoom; several lawyers have told me they actually prefer to conduct depositions virtually because the process is so much more efficient. But a full-fledged trial can’t take place on Zoom. Too many aspects simply require everyone to be in a courtroom.At the urging of U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria in San Francisco, who was overseeing the Roundup litigation, the two sides began settlement talks in the spring of 2019, with Feinberg brought in as mediator. They had not gone well. The lead lawyers for the plaintiffs were asking for an amount — upwards of $30 billion — that Bayer thought was not only unjustified but far in excess of what the company, which was carrying $38 billion in debt, could afford. Still, with a handful trials scheduled for 2020, including one in St. Louis, the plaintiffs’ lawyers felt they had the upper hand.In early 2020, Bayer sought a delay in the St. Louis trial so the negotiations could continue. Feinberg agreed. But progress remained slow, with the two sides adamant about their positions. Elizabeth Cabraser, a prominent plaintiffs’ attorney, would later tell the court that “each side threatened to walk away at multiple points, and the mediator’s direct resolution of disputes was required, at times, to prevent the discussions from collapsing altogether.”“What broke the logjam was the pandemic,” Feinberg told me.The virus created a new kind of uncertainty. Who could say how long the pandemic would last? Years, perhaps, if a vaccine wasn’t developed quickly.  And thus, who could say how long it would be before trials might be able to resume? The plaintiffs’ lawyers had clients who were sick and eager to get some money. And, of course, the lawyers themselves didn’t want to wait forever to be paid. Suddenly, despite not having won any trials, Bayer had some leverage.Scott Partridge, a Monsanto veteran who became Bayer’s general counsel after the deal was completed, decided to sidestep the lead plaintiffs’ lawyers (they’re called the plaintiffs steering committee), and open negotiations with dozens of other lawyers with large numbers of Roundup cases. Sure enough, with the pandemic having put everything on hold, they wanted to do a deal.Suddenly this intractable litigation gave way to progress, as one law firm after another signed on to a settlement outline that Feinberg and others helped craft. By April, Feinberg felt certain that a deal was close. And while it took two more months to get to the finish line, he was right. The final terms called for Bayer to pay about $9.5 billion to settle about 100,000 cases, with $1.5 billion more or so to handle various other issues, including future claimants.That still means 25,000 lawsuits haven’t accepted the terms, but Feinberg told the New York Times he “would be surprised if there are any future trials.” Besides, as part of the settlement, a five-member scientific panel will be established to examine causation — that is, does glyphosate truly cause cancer? Its conclusion will be binding, which means that the holdouts could get nothing if the panel rules that Roundup is benign, as Bayer believes it will. The settlement was announced June 24. The German company — like many foreign companies caught up in a mass tort — will never stop believing that the process was irrational and its product is safe. And they may well be right. But investors didn’t care. Despite the enormous sum the company has agreed to shell out to the plaintiffs, Bayer’s market cap, at $69.5 billion, is once again larger than the amount it paid for Monsanto.This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.Joe Nocera is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering business. He has written business columns for Esquire, GQ and the New York Times, and is the former editorial director of Fortune. His latest project is the Bloomberg-Wondery podcast "The Shrink Next Door."For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinionSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.

    from Yahoo Finance https://ift.tt/3iEaJxx

  • Limit your losses by using these 3 investment diversification methods

    Trading a specific asset, be it a Forex pair, stock, or precious metal is always dangerous and associated with high risks. On the one hand, you might find yourself in a favorable market trend, which yields significant profits; on the other hand, however, the same trade may go against you and inflict serious damage to Read More…

    The post Limit your losses by using these 3 investment diversification methods appeared first on Wall Street Survivor.

    source https://blog.wallstreetsurvivor.com/2020/07/06/limit-your-losses-by-using-these-3-investment-diversification-methods/

  • Loss-Making Tilray, Inc. (NASDAQ:TLRY) Expected To Breakeven

    Loss-Making Tilray, Inc. (NASDAQ:TLRY) Expected To BreakevenTilray, Inc.'s (NASDAQ:TLRY): Tilray, Inc. engages in the research, cultivation, processing, and distribution of…

    from Yahoo Finance https://ift.tt/3fgp2WU

  • ‘We have to defeat trump to rebirth the Republican Party’: Anthony Scaramucci

    'We have to defeat trump to rebirth the Republican Party': Anthony ScaramucciSkyBridge Founder and Managing Partner Anthony Scaramucci joined Yahoo Finance’s On The Move to discuss the upcoming 2020 presidential election and the outlook for the Republican party.

    from Yahoo Finance https://ift.tt/2Z3gVYb

  • Why Apple (AAPL) Stock is a Compelling Investment Case

    Why Apple (AAPL) Stock is a Compelling Investment CaseIf you are looking for the best ideas for your portfolio you may want to consider some of Mott Capital's top stock picks. Mott Capital, an investment management firm, is bullish on Apple Inc. (NASDAQ:AAPL) stock. In its Q4 2019 investor letter – you can download a copy here – the firm discussed its investment […]

    from Yahoo Finance https://ift.tt/2ZKLfWz

  • Why Tesla (TSLA) Stock is a Compelling Investment Case

    Why Tesla (TSLA) Stock is a Compelling Investment CaseIf you are looking for the best ideas for your portfolio you may want to consider some of Mott Capital's top stock picks. Mott Capital, an investment management firm, is bullish on Tesla Inc. (NASDAQ:TSLA) stock. In its Q4 2019 investor letter – you can download a copy here – the firm discussed its investment […]

    from Yahoo Finance https://ift.tt/2BAGHdH

  • Dakota Access Oil Line to Be Shut by Court in Blow for Trump

    Dakota Access Oil Line to Be Shut by Court in Blow for Trump(Bloomberg) — The Dakota Access pipeline must shut down by Aug. 5, a district court ruled Monday in a stunning defeat for the Trump administration and the oil industry.The decision, which shuts the pipeline during a court-ordered environmental review that’s expected to extend into 2021, is a momentous win for American Indian tribes that have opposed the Energy Transfer LP project for years. It comes just a day after Dominion Energy Inc. and Duke Energy Corp. scuttled another project, the Atlantic Coast natural gas pipeline, after years of legal delays.Environmentalists have increasingly used the courts to try to block additional investment in fossil fuel infrastructure while they push for a clean energy transition. Tribes, landowners, and other project opponents have also complained about local impacts from construction and potential spills on or near their land.The sophisticated legal onslaught has led to delays and disruptions for numerous other proposed and operational pipelines, including Keystone XL. But Monday’s court order, if upheld on appeal, marks the first time a major, in-service oil pipeline will be forced to shutter because of environmental concerns.‘Historic Day’The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia said a crucial federal permit for Dakota Access fell too far short of National Environmental Policy Act requirements to allow the pipeline to continue operating while regulators conduct a broader analysis the court ordered in a previous decision.The ruling scraps a critical permit from the Army Corps of Engineers, and requires the pipeline to end its three-year run of delivering oil from North Dakota shale fields to an Illinois oil hub. Judge James E. Boasberg said Dakota Access must shut down the pipeline and empty it of oil by Aug. 5.“Today is a historic day for the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and the many people who have supported us in the fight against the pipeline,” tribal Chairman Mike Faith said in a statement. “This pipeline should have never been built here. We told them that from the beginning.”The Army Corps referred questions about the ruling to the Justice Department, which didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment, including on whether it intends to appeal the ruling.Energy Transfer also didn’t immediately respond. The company’s shares fell as much as 7.7% on Monday while most other pipeline operators rose.Continental Resources Inc., the shale producer founded by Harold Hamm, another prominent Trump supporter, also fell on the decision, as did Hess Corp. Both companies have significant operations in the Bakken shale field, and a shutdown of Dakota Access will make it harder for them to pipe their crude out of the basin.“The decision is likely to be enormously disruptive,” said Katie Bays, co-founder of Washington-based Sandhill Strategy LLC. The Army Corps’ 18-month timeline for addressing flaws in its environmental review makes Energy Transfer “vulnerable to a change in administration and a more draconian policy towards oil pipelines,” she said.Southern Methodist University law professor James Coleman said the ruling “just totally overturns that conventional wisdom” that courts will never force in-service pipelines to shut down.Years of OppositionBoasberg’s decision comes after four years of litigation from tribes opposed to Dakota Access’ route across Lake Oahe, a dammed section of the Missouri River just a half-mile from the Standing Rock Indian Reservation in the Dakotas.The Standing Rock Sioux, Cheyenne River Sioux, and others sued the Army Corps for approving the water crossing in 2016, saying it put tribal water supplies and cultural resources at risk.Their frustrations triggered an outpouring of support from fellow tribes, indigenous advocates, and environmentalists from across the country. Thousands of pipeline opponents camped out in North Dakota for months to show their opposition.The Obama administration responded by withholding a final permit and committing to a new consultation process, but President Donald Trump quickly put Dakota Access back on track after taking office in 2017.Kelcy Warren, the billionaire chief executive officer of Energy Transfer, has long been a Trump fan. He recently hosted a fundraiser for the president’s re-election campaign at his private Dallas home.“My God, this is going to be refreshing,” Warren told investors two days after Trump won the last election.Despite high-profile opposition to Dakota Access, including from celebrities and some of Warren’s favorite musicians, the Energy Transfer founder has stood by the project, going so far as to say he talks about Dakota Access “like I talk about my son” earlier this year.“I’m so proud of that project,” he said.Trouble in CourtBut the district court in Washington found flaws in the government’s pipeline approval process. Boasberg ordered the Army Corps to conduct additional environmental review in mid-2017, but allowed the pipeline to remain in service during that time.Earlier this year, the court again identified shortcomings in the Army Corps’ review, concluding that the agency didn’t fully consider expert disagreement over the risk of an oil spill in Lake Oahe. The Army Corps must do an in-depth environmental impact statement for Dakota Access, the judge said.Boasberg issued the opinion in March and ordered both sides to submit new briefs explaining whether the pipeline should shut down in light of the decision.The default consequence for an agency violation of the National Environmental Policy Act is invalidation of the permit at issue, but legal precedent allows courts to balance that outcome against other factors, including how disruptive nixing a permit would be, and how likely an agency is to support its original decision after additional analysis.The Army Corps has said it expects to finish the court-ordered analysis in mid-2021.The case is Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. Army Corps of Engineers, D.D.C., No. 1:16-cv-01534, 7/6/20.To contact the reporter on this story: Ellen M. Gilmer (Bloomberg Law) in Washington at egilmer@bloombergindustry.com and Rachel Adams-Heard (Bloomberg News) in Houston at in Houston at radamsheard@bloomberg.netTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Gregory Henderson at ghenderson@bloombergindustry.com; Chuck McCutcheon at cmccutcheon@bloombergenvironment.com; Anna Yukhananov at ayukhananov@bloombergindustry.com(Additional reporting throughout.)For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.comSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.

    from Yahoo Finance https://ift.tt/2ZG1Gnf

  • Are Institutions Heavily Invested In Cloudera, Inc.’s (NYSE:CLDR) Shares?

    Are Institutions Heavily Invested In Cloudera, Inc.'s (NYSE:CLDR) Shares?Every investor in Cloudera, Inc. (NYSE:CLDR) should be aware of the most powerful shareholder groups. Large companies…

    from Yahoo Finance https://ift.tt/2NWPXLy