Member Info for ade2a

No question about quaantity but how?

Zac

But no no-one is allowed to question the income side of the fund?

motorbikez

Finally a long term holder.

What do you think of the 'new' management?

Zac

Now you have actually made a comment yes we can agree to disagree.
"Not only that but as capital is wittled away the dividend or 24p of earnings will be at risk . . ." - I don't see the correlation. The amount paid out per share, 23.80p (24.00p now), remains static

That is where we disagree.
Regardless as this post says the underlying assets must now return 10% + to maintain the 24p earnings and maintain the 250p capital base.

As you have correctly mentioned other very high yielding assets have not performed significantly better than HFEL.

I have always credited that comment.

I have discussed this with you Zac you just tell me "the managers report says the earnings are 24p".

I am afraid the outsized yield is connected to the poor capital performance.
Not only that but as capital is wittled away the dividend or 24p of earnings will be at risk.

Alternatively returns from assets may exceed the 10% or so required to save the dividend.
What do you place your money on??

NalaKapala1

Not content at all. The original company was also Henderson Far East Income.
The company changed managers in 2007 and moved to Jersey.

I am not happy with the management style, capital and yes even income performance.

I have taken plenty of critism on this board for my opinions.
If you are at all interested you can check my posts since 2021 i think.

NalaKapala1
Have held the predecessor to HFEL from around 1995

If we ignore any disagreements on how income is generated.
Yield on assets 24/276 = 8.7% add management fees of 1% does the assets of the fund need to produce a return of 9.7% to maintain the 276 asset price and the 24p income?

As Zac pointed out some other high income investment have not performed significantly better than HFEL

Damienmoore
I would argue the following information is or has been available in public:
1. Fund turnover which was reported at around 100%
2. Top 10 holdings snapshot every month
3. Yield on any known holding from a variety of sources
4. Changes in the top 10 holdings can be followed to determine if or not stocks are sold xd.
5. A contributor to this board did in fact follow a holding of Rio Tinto and the stock was indeed sold xd.

More information is available in the Manager’s report but they only come out every 6 months.

Actual values cannot be determined but I would argue enough information is available to make a respectable estimate.

Not only that, funds can be compared across the sector. Why not compare with AAIF and SOI which have similar objectives and invest in the same geographical region?

Surely it is your money you should be the best custodian of it.

Damienmore,

Unfortunately those clamoring for transparency on the issue being discussed are not going to get it.
It is not seen as a value enhancing method of producing dividemds, so why do they do it?
The high yield that the fund attracts helps it to trade close to NAV if not at a premium this protects the fund from a takeover and allows them to issue new shares and expand the size of the Trust. As the fund grows the manager fees increase as they are a percentage of the Aeet value.

It is the HFEL board that should hold the manager accountable failing that it really is up to the investor to do their due diligence as best they can. Though not explicit there is sufficient information in public for a diligent investor to determine how the fund is managed.

There was a change in management, style and a step increadse in dividends in 2007 when the current managers took over.

Unfortunately Longtimeinvestor and Zac are choosing to be polarisimg rather than discussing fundamentals which is how I started my discussions on this board.

There are no camps as far as I am concerned.

Let us say all dividends are from income the way you think about it.

Not finally always.

Actuary63

I should mention that the unit trust verson of HFEL (Janus Henderson Asian Div), also managed by Kerley, has provided a lower dividend yield of 6% from its last 4 distributions.

Very salient point. I think you will find many here do not understand the fundamentals as you do.

Zac

I believe dividend income received covers the vast majority, if not all, of income required for payouts.

Not only 'believe' it does do so according to the reports. How many times and how naby ways and over how many years do I have to agree with you.

i suppose you still disagree or have a difference of opinion as you call it now.

Zac

You don't even agree with me when I agree with you word for word.

Zac

The income recieved by the fund is not short as you say and as I agree the reported earnings cover the dividend I have agreed for years.

Actuary63

There was a nod to such with the manager saying the fund was dividend aware with it's purchases it may have been in the Edisson report some time ago.

Mr Guitarsolo you can contact me in private I will not post the reply on this board. If you will discuss with me the answer you received in private I will discuss it with you in private.

Zac

The income recieved by the fund is not short as you say and as I agree the reported earnings cover the dividend I have agreed for years.

Given the fervent disagreement I think I will reserve the right to post private information.