Like property sometimes the value isn't in the income earned but the capital growth. You can have shares that have great growth with no/minimal dividends paid.
You ask if a share that doesn't pay you anything is it actually worth anything, would you say a share that increases 30% on your investment is worthless even if no dividends are paid?
This is a very personal thing relating to each investors personal circumstances. Somebody in their peak earning years possibly doesn't need the income/cash now and a high growth share portfolio that typically pays lower dividends may be the go. Alternately somebody retired needing to live off their income will need higher yield stocks such as the big banks (although I think they are a horrible investment now) or woolworths et-al.
Of course there is middle ground such as BKW or SOL which have both good growth and yield. Then there are markets such as the USA which typically pay far lower dividends than Australia. Looking at the chart for ASX:VTS which is an ETF which more or less tracks the entire US market and it has gone berserk. Year on year since inception 2009 (?) has hovered around 15% which is not bad over 15 years.
Sadly there is a 'cost' for whatever you choose.
The only reason you get capital growth in shares if they don’t pay a dividend is because someone is willing to pay more for those shares than you did, in the hope they can subsequently offload them to someone else at a higher price.
There is a *lot* more to it than that. Growth and potential have a lot to do with it. The last 30 years have been all about established industry disruptors - new tech or ways of doing things which have stayed more or less the same over 50 or 100+ years. Online commerce such as Amazon which changed how many bought and consumed books initially before branching out to broader retailing. Closer to home the likes of REA group and CarSales have completely changed how we look for cars and property for sale causing the traditional newspapers no end of grief in their wake. Other examples such as Pro Medicus have forever changed how medical imaging is done. All of these companies and no end of others like them all started at a few cents each and have made many people very rich. Yes there is a bit of hope by those early investors but they made a calculated bet on weather a business will deliver a tangible product which will take it's particular niche by storm.
These sorts of companies are very much in the spec end of investment and totally a numbers game - make a heap of small investments on potential suitors in the knowledge that (at best) 7/10 won't do anything or go broke whilst a few will do ok and maybe 1 or 2 in 100 will take your $0.03 share and fly up to $120 making the whole strategy worth while (hopefully)
This is a lot different to (say) crypto which I still see no logical sense to - it has no real tangible use aside from buying arms, drugs and money laundering. Yes I think all of those 'coins' perceived value to be nothing more than the greater fool theory on the next bloke thinking these electrons being worth more down the track because..... ummmm not sure on what basis there is other than hope. Group them with those fools that bought the jpegs of a monkey with a stupid cap a couple of years ago.
If you get capital growth on a house at least you actually own the house, hypothetically even if the price crashes to zero you still physically have a house.
You physically have the ownership of part of whatever company you invest in too assuming you go via a chess sponsored broker. USA is a little different as you don't directly own the shares but the broker holds them in trust for you. I don't think this as good as the Aus system but then again I've never heard of a broker, even those that shut up shop/went broke where the trust wasn't distributed to another broker on behalf of the consumer to effectively carry on.
If a companies shares go to zero you physically own nothing. Technically you own a ”portion” of the company along with the other million or more shareholders but good luck trying to exert your ownership rights over your portion of the company.
With the exception of the speccies I described above, very few large companies on the ASX actually go bust and when they do there are usually a lot of red flags along the way. Other markets have it happen from time to time but the incidence is still very low. I personally stay away from China and some of the Gucci 'emerging markets' as their risk profile, more so govco seizing the company if it gets too successful or other interference doesn't sit well with me.
Like everything, make sure you understand what you are investing in, objectively evaluate the risks and enjoy the ride
