The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring Jeremy Skillington, CEO of Poolbeg Pharma has just been released. Listen 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.
Everyone likes to have these little gripes with me what about HFEL, Investment funds, investing theories people?
TOD
Inconsistent does not mean the same as (does not mean the same)
They are different.
I was referring to page 7 of
https://cdn.janushenderson.com/webdocs/Far+East+Annual+Report+Web+SECURED.pdf
Last paragraph. A year out of date, but recommended reading for some here. Let’s trust they take their time to digest the contents.
Ade2a did not use the word “inconsistent”, but I did.
Although stupid does indeed mean stupid and would be the “same” in more ways than one.
@ Temple of Doom
But such is speculation for the future and nothing to do with the utter balderdash written by some of the posters here the past few days.
Yes because many comments are now becoming personal actually they were always personal but previously I did not respond in kind.
Temple of Doom,
I did not say inconsistent.
I said not the same.
LTI
You are the dipstick
You post two different comments with different meanings and claim they are the same.
China 20.54% as at 30 Sept (cannot be bothered to see if there is an even more up to date figure)
https://www.janushenderson.com/en-gb/investor/product/henderson-far-east-income-limited/#country_exposures
Re FT - it says as at May 2023, but dated today on top, therefore previous post can be ignored
''Australia is now the country with the largest HFEL holding''
it looks from this that the China exposure has been increased recently.
https://markets.ft.com/data/investment-trust/tearsheet/holdings?s=HFEL:LSE
I suspect the dividend will be cut here looking at the change in holdings …. Australia is now the country with the largest HFEL holding from recent newsletters with China and especially Taiwan holdings reduced and comforting if not a no brainer.
But such is speculation for the future and nothing to do with the utter balderdash written by some of the posters here the past few days.
Ad
'''Have a policy' is not the same as 'can'.''
what do you not understand dipstick?
can only ,because HFEL has not been set up to pay out from borrowings or from capital.
Dividends are FULLY covered from income and in addition there is a dividend reserve fund.
If dividends were not fully covered and the reserve was also depleted then the dividend would be cut.
Ip == up.
“Not the same statements while the latter may be true they do not have to pay dividends from earned income.
'Have a policy' is not the same as 'can'.”
Not the same doesn't mean “ inconsistent with” either.
So no point made.
Did you vote for Brexit: The above cruddy logic is one reason why the UK is in a mess and hedge funds are having a field “decade” with anything valued in £’s ….
… to paraphrase quotes thrown at the idiot Johnson … some people on this board have the “wrong skill set” for investing and should shut ip.
Bott
Will you be interested in taking questions since the Managers have promised to answer your queries?
LTI
"how often do you expect an increase FFS"
Is this a question for me?
LTI
''you are clearly indicating you think the dividend will be maintained or increased''
really? -maybe you should clear your hazy brain.
WTF don/t you agree with.
LTI
Stop being pathetic
"HFEL can only distribute from income generated - they do not control what the underlying companies wish to do regarding dividend payments in the future."
"HFEL do not have a policy whereby dividends can be paid from borrowings or capital returns - the dividends are currently fully covered from income. If there is a shortfall then they have the dividend reserve available as a backup."
Not the same statements while the latter may be true they do not have to pay dividends from earned income.
'Have a policy' is not the same as 'can'.
HFEL do not have a policy whereby dividends can be paid from borrowings or capital returns - the dividends are currently fully covered from income. If there is a shortfall then they have the dividend reserve available as a backup.
HFEL has had about 15 years of consecutive dividend increases, but as I have said I would be happy with the current level, for the next 5 years , as I have made purchases at low levels with double digit yields.
Ad
stop being pathetic.
money that HFEL pays in dividends comes from generated income
"HFEL can only distribute from income generated - they do not control what the underlying companies wish to do regarding dividend payments in the future."
This statement is not correct in isolation.
An Investment Trust can distribute more than the earnings on its equity holdings OEIC or open ended funds cannot.
LTI
You should clear your lazy brain.
Many thanks!
Thanks for the info Bott et al.
A question was put to Ronald Gould, via Janus Henderson. Mike Kerley responded.
This was the question.
Last year’s dividend cost £36mn. The cash flow statement shows that this was principally paid for by “profit” of £11.5mn and “losses” of £22.6mn. I don’t understand how income sheet losses convert to positive cash flows, but have to assume that this is because of my indequate accountancy knowledge. The more interesting figures though, also taken from the cash flow statement, are the £449.6mn from the sale of investments and the £447.6mn used to buy investments. As the balance sheet shows investments valued at £438.5mn, it appears that there was a roughly 100 per cent turnover of the company’s assets in the space of one year. Why?
This is Mike Kerley's response.
The dividend cost of £36m is paid for by income from the dividends from the companies we invest in plus option premium. This is reflected in the consolidated cash flow statement in the report and accounts. The Company’s profit and loss includes these receipts but is also impacted by market movements.
The portfolio turnover in FY 22 was approximately 100% as you correctly state. We are not buy and hold investors irrespective of valuation and tend to change the portfolio when companies are fully valued, when circumstances change or when better opportunities present themselves. We also top up holdings into ex-dividend dates to ensure maximum revenue generation which in recent years has been more prevalent as Asia’s dividend growth has been below expectations, mainly due to Covid-19. Additional turnover is also created should some of our options get exercised, although this is relatively small. Finally, the investment of monies received from share issuance is included in these turnover numbers. These are invested into existing positions with a focus on companies about to go ex dividend to ensure existing shareholders revenue is not diluted. This combination of style, revenue maximisation and share issuance is responsible for the relatively high turnover.
The numbers quoted above relate to the financial year ending in August 22. We are about to release our 2023 results in the coming weeks and I will be more than happy to answer any questions you may have regarding these should you require.
Regards, Mike Kerley