The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
aims to provide a high level of dividend as well as capital appreciation from a diversified portfolio
Find out MoreLondon South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
The only thing we can all agree on is that we’re not happy with the SP!
I can’t imagine the fund managers are either.
Looking at similar investments in AAIF, JCGI etc gives me some comfort that’s it’s not just us.
The only thing I’ve noticed over the last few months that’s changed is the premium to nav has become a discount to nav and just wondered what fellow holders think of that?
LTI
You just repost the statement and insist it is correct.
Anyone can do that with any statement.
Anyone who bought Lloyds in the last year will not have earned a double digit return.
Buy backs do not contribute directly to share holder return they reduce the number of shares floated and the number eligible for a dividend. If a company buys back shares and the price falls shareholders would not get a capital return from the buy back they may get a marginally higher dividend.
I am sure you will say you are right.
In any event what does this have to do with HFEL?
There is only one dividend yield for hfel.
https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/quote/HFEL.L?p=HFEL.L&.tsrc=fin-srch
Ad
''You refer to the actual yield of HFEL.''
and?
the yield produced from HFEL income is about 12%
THIS IS CORRECT
Lloyds bank are able to make double digit total returns at the moment, due to the low market valuation.
THIS IS CORRECT
projected 2023 total dividend of 2.76p plus £2 Billion buyback worth 3.14p at the current market cap,making a total of 5.9p which represents a total return at current price of about 14%.
still waiting for incorrect statements.
LTI
Lloyds bank are able to make double digit totals returns at the moment, due to the low market valuation.
Lloyds is a single share not a trust so not sure how that is relevant?
Lloyds currently has a dividend yield of 5.99%.
1 year share price 'flat' and add dividends.
https://www.google.com/search?q=lloyds+dividend+yield&oq=lloyds++yield&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUqCAgBEAAYFhgeMgcIABAAGIAEMggIARAAGBYYHjIICAIQABgWGB4yCAgDEAAYFhgeMggIBBAAGBYYHjIICAUQABgWGB4yCAgGEAAYFhgeMggIBxAAGBYYHjIICAgQABgWGB4yCAgJEAAYFhge0gEKMTQwMjhqMGoxNagCALACAA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
You should see Mr Guitarsolo about what is yield.
''They are led to believe that the fund produces a natural yield of 12%, including some options income.''
Yes , correct- they are currently paying 6.1p per quarter which is about 12% based on the current price. Of course that will not be the case if underlying assets/market improve on asset values from the recent slump.
Damienmore refers to a "natural yield". You deliberately left out the word natural in your description of yield which makes your statement correct but does not make Damienmores's statement incorrect as you imply.
Both statements do not refer t the same yield. You refer to the actual yield of HFEL.
There was also the one I posted some time ago but I do not want to repeat the same posts.
Ade
what incorrect statements would they be?
LTI
You have posted a lot f incorrect statements though you suggest you are some kind of moderator.
I think deliberately incorrect.
GS
''around the time of the Great Financial Crash (as far as I can make out)..... Make of that what you will about him.''
and yet another complete and utter LIE.
You are simply another one to add to the list that goes down this route.
Gs
''Boasts regularly''
and in addition comes out with a complete and utter LIE (you do yourself no favours)
Gs
normal response as usual from someone not liking the simple facts
Bott
Give all the waffle a rest.
HFEL is what it says on the tin.
lti does seem to suffer from a form of verbal diarrhoea, having posted ten of the 14 posts since my last. it would be nice if he or she contributed to what could be a serious debate about what mike kerley is doing, but even when he or she states, “i am simply having to point out the facts,” he or she doesn’t. assertions are not facts.
lti wrote, “hfel issue shares at a premium when there is a demand – end of”, but has shied away from attempting to show, in actual money terms, how this benefits existing investors, even though he repeatedly asserts that it does. if he or she is so certain of this, it should have been a simple matter to do what i asked and provide us with the figures, but lti’s posts are barren of facts.
the last directors’ report tells us that 3,855,000 new shares were issued for a net £11.0mn. that’s an average of 285.34 pps. the downward sloping share price graph in 2021/22 was fairly smooth, so it might not be unreasonable to assume an average price from the starting point (301.5) to the finish (281.0). that average is 291.25, or 292.25 if one allows 1pps for the offer price being above the mid price. this is actually 7p greater than the average price at which the new shares were sold, suggesting a deficit rather than a premium. we should politely assume that mk did better than that, but was it more than 12 pps better? if it wasn’t, there was no gain at all from the so-called premium and we have all been fooled.
as my last post revealed, the increase in ‘other expenses’ in 2021/22 was £196,000. that is equivalent to 5 pence for each of the new 3,855,000 shares issued that year. so to break even, so to speak, on the issue of new shares, mk needed an extra 7pps to equal the average in the market and another 5pps to cover the extra costs. that would have been a price of 297.34, raising another £462k, just to break even. it should be noted, of course, that whereas the supposed premium from the sale of the new shares would have been a one-off, the increased expenses will occur every year.
lti has also written, sarcastically no doubt, “i tend to make investments knowing what the investment is.” we’d all like to think that, but how can lti know what the investment is when he seemingly focuses solely on the dividend yield and not only ignores other matters but refuses even to consider the issues that others are raising, preferring to **** them off? very disappointing, especially in someone who is supposedly a long term investor.
we will soon have a new annual report to consider. i can’t be alone in hoping that lti will study it carefully, before launching into another grandstanding performance.
Dam
''Investors have been misled.''
No they haven't - I knew what I was buying
''They are led to believe that the fund produces a natural yield of 12%, including seme options income.''
Yes , correct- they are currently paying 6.1p per quarter which is about 12% based on the current price. Of course that will not be the case if underlying assets/market improve on asset values from the recent slump.
Lloyds bank are able to make double digit totals returns at the moment, due to the low market valuation.
''The managers churn the portfolio''
They have stated that they are not a buy and hold fund - I knew that before I purchased.
hfel
'' tend to change the portfolio when companies are fully valued, when circumstances change or when better opportunities present themselves''
btw - you are whinging about your HFEL investment decision.
Long Time Investor, You are an odious cretin with the graces of a rat. What your really simple obnoxious brain doesn't understand is that it's not just a case of investors selling their shares and fking off if they are not happy. Investors have been misled. They are led to believe that the fund produces a natural yield of 12%, including seme options income. It does not do this. The managers churn the portfolio to produce the outsized yield, and they obfuscate the degree to which they do so. They never mention this strategy in the annual report and the contribution to income.
If you're tired of repeating yourself, then don't - just fk off and stop whinging about others expressing their views.
Currently at 213p, so HFEL trading at a good discount
Gs
?
is was advice ''if they no longer like it''
No point keeping an investment you do not like - better to leave and find something more palatable
GS
you are getting rattled - cannot accept the clear facts.
''So in your own words, WHAT DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND ABOUT THIS? ''
I understand that HFEL ARE AN INCOME FUND
''That is what he wrote''
and?
HFEL ARE AN INCOME FUND - monies from sale proceeds are invested to produce INCOME and not into a growth company paying Zero in dividends.
hfel
'' tend to change the portfolio when companies are fully valued, when circumstances change or when better opportunities present themselves''
If get very tiresome repeating -
Investors had a choice whether to invest or not - if they no longer like it, sell and fk off.
When i make an investment, I know what I am buying.
Gs
''Are you saying ALL the funds that are invested into stock about to go ex-dividend come from new issuance?''
Did I say that?
HFEL are an INCOME FUND
HFEL
''' tend to change the portfolio when companies are fully valued, when circumstances change or when better opportunities present themselves''
When referring to the turnover of already owned stock MK wrote: "We also top up holdings into ex-dividend dates to ensure maximum revenue generation".
So in your own words, WHAT DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND ABOUT THIS? You claim to have been some bigwig in HSBC with your £xx,xxx,xxx portfolio, so this should be simple for you. MK is not referring to funds from new issuance because he refers to that later. He is referring to funds from the sale of already held stock, which is then invested in soon to go ex-dividend stock. That is what he wrote.
Are you saying ALL the funds that are invested into stock about to go ex-dividend come from new issuance?
Because that is not what MK has wrote.
So where has the money come from?
And you don't get to tell me what I can and can't do. Stop being so obnoxious.
If you are not happy with hfel , sell and fk off. it is far more preferably than the endless whinging.
Gs
''Monies from new shares ''are invested into existing positions with a focus on companies about to go ex dividend TO ENSURE EXISTING SHAREHOLDERS REVENUE IS NOT DILUTED'''
what do you not understand from this?
Gs
''NO NEED TO MAKE STUFF UP.''
''So if stock is sold to invest in other shares that will soon go ex-dividend, and then sold again afterwards, rinse and repeat, what would you call that?''
THAT IS MAKING THINGS UP.
Hfel
'''' tend to change the portfolio when companies are fully valued, when circumstances change or when better opportunities present themselves''
what do you not understand from this?
Bott
''This will no doubt help the sale of new shares, but please explain how we benefit from the premium at which they are sold. ''
This is obvious and has been gone through already. HFEL issue shares at a premium when there is demand - End of.
People can go through as many figures as they like.
People can come up with as many conspiracy theories as they like.
People can make as many whinges as they like .
The bottom line is that investors have a choice whether or not to invest in HFEL.
If an investor for some reason after knowing the type of investment that has been made, is no longer happy with the investment, there is a sell button.
I tend to make investments knowing what the investment is