Member Info for Damienmoore

Hghotshot, my question for you would be, why are you asking this question when there is a much bigger question. The bigger question is how will they continue to pay any dividend when both the subsidies run out and the assets reach the end of their life? Surely the intent of the subsidies is to compensate investors for the sunk costs associated to the assets, but to also allow operators to aggregate anough capital over time to replace worn out assets. If FGEN keeps paying paying out most of its income as dividends, how will it replace assets to maintain an income?? It appears to me the managers are taking the view "let's hope it will be alright", while at the same time banking their fees.

In 5 to 10 years we'll look back on infrastructure investments as a disastrous example of investors jumping on to "a theme" and paying the price for not understanding the fundamentals/risk.

That's right. Petershill agreed to buy out free-float shareholders for a nice uplift, so we've all benefited from this. Thomas Moore is making good decisions with our money. Let's hope it's more by judgement than luck.

Chaps, no disrespect intended but if you don't understand this, perhaps complex investments like this aren't for you. Perhaps just stick your money in an index tracker? One last try: No one has lent or borrowed shares. No one is required to sell or buy shares. Saba has approached a shareholder (who already owns the shares) and entered in to a swap agreement. Saba has agreed with the shareholder that the shareholder will give Saba the total return of the GSF shares for the next 2 months. In return Saba have offered them something to form the "swap" - probably a fee.

This means Saba can be the beneficial owner of the shaes for the next 2 months without the cost and liquidity concerns involved in accumulating a large position.

Wow, bought in at an average of 71p and was feeling pretty pleased with myself. I never thought they would have such an extended period below 70p. Incredible, really.

Pip56, Saba do not have a direct interest in the shares. They have a swap derivative with someone who owns the shares. Saba have said to the shareholder," if you give to us the total return on your shares between now and 28th November we will pay you for this contract". The shareholder has agreed to this, as they believe the shares could go down during this period.

Guys, wake up. Saba have not borrowed shares. It clearly states they have entered in to a total return swap with a counterparty, expiring 28th November. This means they effectively get the return on the shares (or lack thereof) between yesterday and 28th November. They're hoping the recent outrage over fees non-disclosure will benefit sharholders and move the share price upwards.

Anna Seeley taking another 72k today. The signals here are obvious that these shares are cheap beyond logic.

I am beginning to really enjoy my decision to put my money here, and I didn't even catch it anywhere near the bottom. The income has been wonderful, and now I have some capital growth, too.

Afternoon GS, yes that's a good point about 10 year bund yields, which are below that of 10 year gilts (around 4.5%). Nevertheless, I remain more optimistic than concerned. CLS have demonstrated the property market (in prime city locations) is sufficiently liquid enough to execute their disposal strategy. There is £2 per share of NAV here and the discount remains a tremendous opportunity.

Non exec agrees with my comments below and has made a purchase today. So pleased she listened to me ;-)

Given the small net initial yield of 6.4%, the discount is understandable. The risk free rate (gilt yields) isn't much below this. This is a good sale that demonstrates liquidity and this company's prospects continues to excite me.

Hello Actuary63, that is correct. HFEL is appealing to income hungry investors, which explains the shares trading on premium to NAV. What makes it even more despicable is that many of these investors will be relying on the income to meet their living costs, which makes it completely unfair for HFEL not to be transparent that a portion of an investor's capital is being returned via dividend stripping. If capital values don't rise, the dividend risks being cut. The AAIF managers are not the same as HFEL. Yes, they have moved to a dividend policy which means the payouts may not be covered by the income received from the underlying companies, but at least they are honest and transparent about it!! Then investors can make an informed decision.

I have nothing to gain by writing these posts and sacrificing my own time. I am simply warning anyone who wants to listen, because it is the right thing to do.

LTI,

"you cannot get into a high position at HSBC without having mathematical abilities"

Not true - you worked your way up and made it in to the mail room. Anyone can work for HSBC if you did.

"exposed"

No. I am an anonymous person commenting on an internet forum. Please keep this up, it's so funny.

LTI,

"T osser"

Feral

"Moron"

Feral

Actuary63, As below I am not an investor here. I was, but sold at a significant loss. I would not have invested in the trust had I known they employ dividend stripping, but they do not explicitly declare as such within their reports or other literature. I am therefore angry and bitter, and rightfully so. My intention is to tell the truth in the hope that the managers are eventually punished for their opacity. I am also a holder of CTY and may sell this holding because Janus Henderson, in my eyes, are damaged goods. I do not trust the Janus Henderson brand, and for good reasons. I invite Janus Henderson to come on to this board and tell me that I am wrong about them dividend stripping and not openly advising investors that this is what they are doing. I invite ShareSoc, who claim to advocate for private investors, to look in to my concerns.

LTI,

"You really are stupid."

Feral

"HSBC"

No one cares that you worked for HSBC. If you did it was in the mail room, anyway.

Good Morning Actuary63,

I am pleased my past comments have been to your benefit. I sold my holding in HFEL at a significant loss, and this is because the manager has not been transparent about the use of dividend stripping as a means to create income. They do publish their turnover figures, but don't explicitly express their practice of dividend stripping, which is reprehensible and dishonest. So I will pop up here occasionally to warn other willing to listen, because it's the right thing to do and I am angry at Janus Henderson for their lack of integrity. I am also angry at the chairman for evading my question when I asked him about it (emails on file).

LTI,

"You care".

If you feel the need to gain status by declaring a career working for HSBC, it's you who cares. This is a chat forum; no one cares. Step out of your head.

"unlike my decades".

No one cares about your own perceived status. This is a chat forum, albeit a very entertaining one.

LTI,

"I bought below 60p - was that a once in a multi generation opportunity?"

Yes, that is my contention.

"where I was based and worked in a high position role."

Nobody cares.

LTI,

"ballax", "fck".

Use of language like this, apart from being feral an uncivilised, within an argument is a sign of weakness and ignorance, which you have displayed across the LSE forum for a plethora of companies. Even though I have citations evidencing my argument, the best you can come up with is "ballax". Not only are you intellectually challenged from a language point of view, you are mathematically challenged, too, it seems. You are the only person I know who buys a share all the way down, as with CLI, and declares this has not lost them money. Please stop and preserve your dignity. Learn when it's best to say nothing.