There are flaws in this book, and in the review of this book. For instance, looking at the S&P 500, FCF to equity was positive for every year from 1960 onward. During the 1960's through to today, the dividends paid were less than both net income and FCFE. Since the author's data analysis appears flawed, the conclusions that he reaches have to be questioned.

Something else, MM didn't advocate for or against dividends. Their work simply laid out what might make dividends (and capital structure) relevant. Their theory told us that investors who value dividends can create their own homemade dividends, whether the company pays one or not, suggesting that dividends are irrelevant. However, the assumptions of their model also helped to provide the context of when dividends might well matter. For example, as a means of removing excess cash from management in order to impose financial discipline on them, or as a signalling mechanism.