Yes, it is pretty much (with small caveat to follow) a moot point, and that is my point.
Some people keep trying to convince others that dividend paying stocks have advantages and characteristics that just don't stand up to scrutiny.
Well, if you like it, you like it! I hardly see any convenience factor. A balanced AA will provide most of a conservative WR with its somewhat lower dividends. I just have the divs deposited to that account, and I have an auto withdraw set up for $X,xxxx each month (an exact number, the same month after month unless I change it, known ahead of time, that I can plan on). If the balance is running low, I sell some of either/both Equity or Bond fund and rebalance at the same time. That's about once a year, I should be looking at least that often anyhow, so no real work.
And again (yes, this is beating a dead horse, but he keeps whimpering!) you will NOT be selling stocks at the worst possible moment! As I said, if stocks are down, you'll be selling from fixed. On average stocks are up, so on average it all works out anyhow.
Well, mine have grown in value, though I may have fewer shares. That's been shown in the graphs I linked. I'm having a little trouble assigning any importance to that. It's like saying ten $1 bills have more value than one $10 bill or vice versa? I don't pay my bills with 'shares', I pay with $.
Almost forgot the small caveat that others have mentioned - focusing on any subset of the market means you are less diversified. I'd bet that the higher-than-average div payers are concentrated in a few sectors. That may not be a big thing, but some day it might. I just can't see taking even that small risk, against the perceived advantages that just seem to be based on "I like", rather than anything tangible.
-ERD50