Member Info for damofarl

What is it with this current vogue to do buybacks instead of dividends. Another buyback in lieu of the dividend.

Show me the money. The dividend money

I voted against the wind down . I'd rather they took 10 years passively running the current assets out.

If they can't obtain scale, the reason for wind up, why not merge with CORD, to aid scale, and economies of scale. At least then those of us who believe in DGI9's assets can see and reap their fruition.

Rodger Rodger; whilst I agree with the generality that the US increasingly will dictate the SP of DEC, I do think your view on its positive impact on by banishing shorters , is from a very narrow prism.

In that YouTube talk, the DEC man was quite specific, almost angry, to the UK investor base being the problem of the SP fall. Tthe US understanding/liking of oil/gas will only aid a US producer. But US private/small/individual investors (not just institutions) are also far more understanding and active in shorting stocks. And holders (believers) frequently employ options/short to manage positions. I hold a number of US stocks, fundamentally sound, that are frequently and considerably shorterd. It's prevalence of use by small investors is exponentially greater than the UK, almost mainstream, and as such, I disagree the shorts will be nullified - they will magnify. Normalise. Albeit within what holders would hope is a more knowledgeable/appreciative market

Scandiexpat; also, do you have a view here? On the wind down.

The lack of 'action' supports my view that it will take quite a while (3 years), and frankly I'm quite happy with that, both in that it's likely to provide the same level.of income for some time, and that they aren't firesaling their positions but maxamising into natural rundown, an elongation that will see much of the NAV discount narrow and materialise, yes, in to lower yield, but returns of capital. As a patient investor, I've actually wondered whether adding here, as I do think most of that NAV discount is real.

Hi Scandiexpat; you really are a globetrotter.....from UK, in Scandinavia, with a Swiss broker! Are the deeds of your house held through a nominee shell company in the Cayman Islands?

Jokes aside, hope you/your investments are well.

We don't know how the spill will plan out, and whilst obviously not a positive for such an environmental sensitive place, I do see positives here.

It's our oil, but not our barges, so PTAL could just ignore and hold their contractor to contract/account and distance themselves from someone else's failings. Yes, PTAL could be questioned, blamed for say, using cheap barge operators, but the double hulled barges suggests they weren't/aren't cutting corners. The proactive provision of provisions to affected areas/communities shows a responsible operator.

I invest in stocks to make money yes. And whilst investing in oil whilst having a moral/societal compass may seem an oxymoron, I think PTAL doing assistance rather than waiting until forced to do, shows (along with the community fund), their awareness, astuteness, that all, (investors, communities, environment) are integral, not a tokenistic fop, to prosperity. For all. That we all should, and can, share prosperity.

Just.my views, and I know it's early days on exactly what happened. But that's my gut. That PTAL do not think providing assistance is a cost, but an investment.

No. A share purchase to satisfy employee share options is a standard thing. Arguably, if it is open to all staff (i.e. not just an executive/high level mgmt 'incentive/performance' plan), it is actually a vote of confidence in the wellbeing of the Company, as rank and file employees are putting their own money in (tax advantages amongst other upsides), for which these purchases are being set aside, normally for 3 to 5 years to cover the 'vesting' duration..Signals thqt the workers think its doing well.

I see a 27p divvy. They could afford more easily, and i don't see a special. It's just not their style.

I do like their steady and sure style - never promising the earth, but always delivering the goods.

(For what it's worth, I actually think they could deliver a 25o dividend too).

Pleased to see JXN's increased appreciation, witnessed in the SP trajectory, and for all here, who have held fast. Nice to see the divvy increase, the trajectory of which will be slowly but surely upwards for holders. Don't think it will ever reflect what it could, as the US generally prefer buybacks (different tax treatment).

Notwithstanding such, a few of us have been here since day one, took deep breaths when dropping through $30, and will even with small dividend increases, soon be reaping a 10%+ yielder. Never a shabby place to be.

2 of 2

.....for the foreseeable future.

The key to the investment case here, is the legislative requirement for SOHO's provision, and the shortage of such. A requirement which surmounts any govt fiscal restraints in wider housing provision. The index linking of the rent roll is key, the property valuations (beyond LTV convents which they are nowhere near) is almost an irrelevant distracting sideshow.

A tremendous long term income yielding stock - and that rate beast that actually enriches society and not just shareholders like me.

Excellent results, and frankly nothing more or less than I expected. As for the detailed RNS, well, anyone that takes the time to read it all will garner all they need to know as to whether to invest (or not). If you absorb the details, you will see what a secure investment this is - frankly an indexed link licence to print profits.

Debt - the duration and rate are extremely advantageous. They are quite clear on their desire to leverage debt, and to be paying a long duration fixed 2.8% whilst receiving an inflation linked upwards/plus income well in excess of such, is always going to provide security, and income. Cash at hand alone should be earning more than the debt rate.

Rent roll - a rent roll of £40m against a debt cost of £7.4m clearly highlights the disconnect here. That the 2 problematical housing suppliers equate to 15% of properties, shows that they can absorb problems with individual providers, and also the upside if positively managed/resolved.

Property value - interesting to note the commentary that the small selective sales were to reaffirm the valuations, being around book, and that there is no intention (need) to make further sales. Also interesting that against mkt cap of £240m £75m is unencumbered.

Property valuation/NAV discount - the doldrum sentiment currently prevelant ignores that SOHO have no need (and I hope no intention) to sell; they have 9 years to await stabilisation/appreciation of property prices, and I don't think there is a window that long in recent memory where they haven't appreciated. I believe the NAV to be true, and for the patient this will manifest itself in the SP narrowing towards it.

EPC work - the way they have initiated a small scale trial/rollout of upgrading EPC ratings is astute, learning what works on a small scale whilst building relationships to efficiently deliver across their portfolio. As well as complying with legislation, this is cementing their good owner status with housing provision providers, and cementing those relationships. And yes, maintaining the value of the properties.

Specialised sector provision - the security of their focused proposition, ergo security of income, is highlighted by their mentioning that 2 of their contracts, were with local authorities that were effectively in bankruptcy special measures, but the regulatory requirement ensured provision, hence rents, were undisturbed. The specialised housing they provide, is in demand, and short supply, and the regulatory protection of provision is the bedrock to SOHO that seems misunderstood/missed. The provision must be provided by law, irrespective of whose name is above the door. The tenant housing provider may change/default but the need/legal requirement remains.

Dividend - an index linked rising rent roll income against a fixed low debt cost is always going to support the dividend, and at current SP, with thier reaffirmed progressive dividend policy, will be yielding 10%+ for the foreseeable fu

You don't often get to say that a share that has gone up 30% is still 30% undervalued. So I will!

Arqiva, ariva ariva! Next stop the arrival of KKK....

Davidspellqcy; on the basis this statement, ..

'I reiterate that your original holding does not change', having tendered my total shareholding of 1 share I was worried that i would lose out on the rounding down

Now I'm reassured I will still own my share.

Brilliant!

I'm not saying all this Tender Talk is boring.......but......I have been rather hankering for the wht/WBEN discussion omnipresent at divvy time .

If I'd known buys of £15k would have such a positive affect, I'd of bought £15k myself......

Seriously that's a shockingly disproportionate impact.

David Charles; ..."if it won't flow in a reasonable time frame, it ain't liquid"

Err, rather my point.

David Charles; ......"30th Jan 2024 - 5 weeks ago - • " Current Liquidity of ~$135 million"

Liquidity isn't necessarily cash.

Hi Gavster-NBC; hope you, your investments are well.

I don' doubt they have the (dividend amount) $42m, and they way I see the structure, that $42m will cover the tender, so they don't need a dime more. Which is probably the reason for the tender.

Looking forward to the accounts. The hedges (bar a haircut on the small oil) should show a big profit.

I don't think they have spare cash at hand, but that doesn't mean they are struggling. The repayment conditions of the ABS' constrain them. Perversely, I think DEC could actually be profiting disproportionately from their hedges at such low spot prices, as they will be paying less in royalties to right holders. The flip of course of the ABS excess cashflow requirements is that the debt, and cost of such, should be reducing, which for those with a long term view will deliver a bounty (on/against DEC's projections).

Lochnivarlass; your simple humble opinion is correct (I hope!!!) that they have $42m in cash for the dividend. But that doesn't mean they have more than that, and if they could, at least 50% of such gets absorbed in extra ABS payments.

Maybe they don't have much left after the dividend, for buybacks as well.

Tiburn; ha ha very good! And you are probably right.

Hasn't moved my attention on - just focused it in. When something 'is' too clever by half, I invariably ask why?

And this tender is, and I am.

On a more positive note, there should be a whopping IFRS profit in the update, which will concentrate/confuse the comments all over again.

Oh what a merry go round DEC is. Never boring. Never simple, and me, never complacent.