My interpretation is Yes, they would get the dividend because they bought before the ex-div date and held through the date. However, that is all talking about a CASH dividend
With GMDP, we are talking about distribution of shares of another company in which the ex-div date is handled differently according to this article.
What makes your (Chambers') interpretation so hard to be completely sure that it will be necessary to hold through June is this part of the article: "The ex-dividend date is set the first business day after the stock dividend is paid (and is also after the record date)."
Now, the question comes into play in the fact that GMDP, or the exchange, set an actual ex-dividend date of March 3, which was 2 days before the record date. This is totally contrary to what this article states as to when the ex-div date is to be set.
So, the question really is, did they have the right to set the ex-div date as March 3? Or were they out of line, thus making that date invalid due to them being noncompliant with the regulations in doing such. If this is the case, then the rule in the article would be in effect, and the ex-div date is actually the day in June (1 day after distribution of the dividend), and the date published by the company or the exchange is in error and they should correct such so that we know where we stand.
That is how I read it. Now someone needs to have the company address this discrepency directly. Were they noncompliant or are there some exceptions that they are allowed in setting the date? If so, what are the exceptions they applied, and reassure us that the date they published is the actual ex-dividend date in which we are entitled to the shares, free and clear, without any IOUs or due bills.
