What does a Dividend “will not be quoted ex” mean?
"The ex indicator is meant to be a help for market participants.  On the ex-day orders will go into a different order book, the ex order book, which at the start of the ex day will be totally empty, i.e. no orders from the non-ex day book have been copied over. Why does this help?  Well imagine you had a long-standing buy order in the book, well below the current price, and now the share price halves due to a 2-for-1 split, would you want to see your order executed? If so, your order should have gone into the ex-book which is only active on the ex-day (and orders in the ex book are usually copied over to the normal book on the day after the ex-day but this is exchange-specific). Think of it as an additional safety net to tell the exchange: ""I know what I'm doing: I want to buy this stock totally overpriced after the 2-for-1 split"". Now some exchanges and/or some securities (mostly derivatives) linked with the security in question don't have this notion of ex or the ex-book, and they will tell you by ""will not be quoted ex"" or ""the ex indicator is missing"". In your case (SNE) it is a sponsored ADR, the ex-date was Mar 28 2016, one day before the ex date of the Japanese original.  According to my understanding of NYSE rules, there is no specific rule for or against omitting the ex-indicator.  It seems to be a decision on a case by case basis.  Looking through the dividends of other Japanese ADRs I drew the conclusion none of them have an ex-book and so all of them are announced as: ""Will not be quoted ex by the exchange"".  Again, this is based on my observations." "One occastion where ""will not be quoted ex"" is used is when a corporate action is occurring such as a spin-off.  In such a case, the rights to, and the spin-off itself may be quoted separately on the home country exchange.  However, if the company is based abroad, it may not be worth the expense for them to have an additional securities listing on the local (US) exchange. For example:  In November 2016, Yamana Gold (TSX: YRI, NYSE: AUY) announced it will have an initial public offering of a spin-off (Brio Gold, to be listed on TSX as BRIO).  Existing shareholders received a right to one share of the spin-off for every 16 shares they held of YRI (or AUY).  These rights were separately traded in advance of the IPO of the spin-off on TSX under ""YRI.RT"", but the prospectus they stated that the rights ""will not be quoted ex"" on NYSE, i.e. there was no separate listing on NYSE for these rights. The wording seems counter-intuitive, but I suspect that is the attorneys who were preparing the prospectus used those specific words as they may have a very specific meaning (e.g. from a statute or previous case)."
you asked for strategies which use deep in the money options:  dividend mispricing can use deep in the money options, basically its an arbitrage play on ex-dividend dates. and any kind of spread can use deep in the money options, depending on how wide you want your spread to be The main reason, as far as I can see, is that the dividends are payments with which the shareholders may do what they want. Capital that the company has no use for does not make a significant positive return on investment, as you pointed out, yes the company could accrue interest, but that is not going to make the company large sums of cash. While the company may be great at making shoes - maybe even the best in the world - doesn't mean they are good investors. Sure they could dabble at using their capital to invest in other equities, but they don't, because they just want to focus on making shoes. If the dividend goes to the investors, they can do what they wish, be it reinvest in the company, or invest elsewhere. Other companies that may make good use of the capital, and create significant returns on it are one such example. That is the rational answer, beyond that, one of the main reasons is that people like the feeling of receiving dividends - it might not be the answer you are looking for, but many people prefer companies that pay dividends for no rational reason over companies which grow their asset value. "Investopedia explains how a stock split impacts the stock's options: Each option contract is typically in control of 100 shares of an underlying security at a predetermined strike price. To find the new coverage of the option, take the split ratio and multiply by the old coverage (normally 100 shares). To find the new strike price, take the old strike price and divide by the split ratio. Say, for example, you own a call for 100 shares of XYZ with a strike price of $75. Now, if XYZ had a stock split of 2 for 1, then the option would now be for 200 shares with a strike price of $37.50. If, on the other hand, the stock split was 3 for 2, then the option would be for 150 shares with a strike price of $50. So, yes, a 2 for 1 stock split would halve the option strike prices.  Also, in case the Investopedia article isn't clear, after a split the options still control 100 shares per contract. Regarding how a dividend affects option prices, I found an article with a good explanation: As mentioned above, dividends payment could reduce the price of a stock due to reduction of the company's assets. It becomes intuitive to know that if a stock is expected to go down, its call options will drop in extrinsic value while its put options will gain in extrinsic value before it happens. Indeed, dividends deflate the extrinsic value of call options and inflate the extrinsic value of put options weeks or even months before an expected dividend payment.  Extrinsic value of Call Options are deflated due to dividends not only because of an expected reduction in the price of the stock but also due to the fact that call options buyers do not get paid the dividends that the stock buyers do. This makes call options of dividend paying stocks less attractive to own than the stocks itself, thereby depressing its extrinsic value. How much the value of call options drop due to dividends is really a function of its moneyness. In the money call options with high delta would be expected to drop the most on ex-date while out of the money call options with lower delta would be least affected. If a stock is expected to drop by a certain amount, that drop would already have been priced into the extrinsic value of its put options way beforehand. This is what happens to put options of dividend paying stocks. This effect is again a function of options moneyness but this time, in the money put options raise in extrinsic value more than out of the money put options. This is because in the money put options with delta of close to -1 would gain almost dollar or dollar on the drop of a stock. As such, in the money put options would rise in extrinsic value almost as much as the dividend rate itself while out of the money put options may not experience any changes since the dividend effect may not be strong enough to bring the stock down to take those out of the money put options in the money. So, no, a dividend of $1 will not necessarily decrease an option's price by $1 on the ex-dividend date.  It depends on whether it's a call or put option, and whether the option is ""in the money"" or ""out of the money"" and by how much." The ex-dividend date is the first date on which you may sell without losing your dividend.  In this case that date is August 5th (thanks, Victor).  The price opens on the ex-dividend date lower than it closed on the previous day (by the amount of the dividend). Therefore you may sell any time on August 5th (including during pre-market trading) and still get the dividend. You must be the owner of the stock as of the end of after-hours trading on the 4th (and therefore overnight) in order to get the dividend. Intel's Dividend Dates The record date isn't important to your trading decision. "An answer can be found in my book, ""A Modern Approach to Graham and Dodd Investing,"" p. 89 http://www.amazon.com/Modern-Approach-Graham-Investing-Finance/dp/0471584150/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1321628992&sr=1-1 ""If a company has no sustained cash flow over time, it has no value...If a company has positive cash flow but economic earnings are zero or less, it has a value less than book value and is a wasting asset. There is enough cash to pay interim dividends, bu the net present value of the dividend stream is less than book value."" A company with a stock trading below book value is believed to be ""impaired,"" perhaps because assets are overstated. Depending on the situation, it may or may not be a bankruptcy candidate." Remember that long term appreciation has tax advantages over short-term dividends. If you buy shares of a company, never earn any dividends, and then sell the stock for a profit in 20 years, you've essentially deferred all of the capital gains taxes (and thus your money has compounded faster) for a 20 year period. For this reason, I tend to favor non-dividend stocks, because I want to maximize my long-term gain. Another example, in estate planning, is something called a step-up basis: "This question had better be asked of the 401k plan administrator rather than here. The plan document that you received when you began participating undoubtedly has a page or more of definitions of the terms used in the contract, and especially so if the meanings are nonstandard. For example, one would expect that a Final Distribution leaves a balance of $0 in the 401k account and so a ""per distribution"" fee is meaningless in the context of Final Distribution. As the post by mbhunter indicates, withdrawal and distribution seem to be used interchangeably in IRS documents, and so there probably is a nonstandard meaning assigned to these terms in the 401k document. Three possible nonstandard meanings of these two words come to mind. Withdrawal = at the request of the participant, and Distribution = as required by law, e.g. required minimum distribution Withdrawal = anything before age 59.5 or before termination of employment and Distribution =  anything after age 59.5 or after termination of employment Withdrawal = anything on which the 10% excise tax for premature distributions must be paid, or anything that is not eligible for rollover into another tax-deferred account and Distribution = anything on which the 10% excise tax does not need to be paid. But all the above is just idle speculation, and what matters is the plan   document's definitions of these terms, and that can be determined only   if you read your 401k plan document yourself. Reliance on the answers given   by the employer's HR department, or the plan administrator, as to what   the plan document says might or might not be advisable: even the IRS   has been known to give out incorrect information. In general, money cannot be withdrawn from a 401k plan and rolled over (or transferred via a trustee-to-trustee transfer) into another tax-deferred plan  while the participant is still employed by the sponsor of the 401k plan. Since most 401k plans have poor investment choices and excessive administrator fees, reflect that absent this prohibition, most people would with roll over money from their 401ks into their IRAs as often as feasible. You can withdraw money from a 401k account without paying the 10% excise tax for several reasons (including financial needs of various specified kinds), but you cannot then change your mind and put that money into your IRA, telling the IRA custodian that it is a rollover from the 401k. To do so will not just trigger the 10% excise tax on premature distributions from a 401k account, but you will also need to pay penalties for excess contributions to your IRA." When dividend is announced the stock and option price may react to that news, but the actual payout of the dividend on the ex-dividend date is what you probably are referring to. The dividend payout affects the stock price on the ex-dividend date as the stock price will drop by the amount of paid out dividend (not taking into account other factors). This in turn drives the prices of all options.  The amount of change in the option price for this event is not only dependent the dividend payout, but also on how far these are in our out of the money and what there time to expiration is. The price of a call option that is far out of the money would react less than the price of a put that would be far in the money. Therefore I would argue that these two will not necessarily offset each other.