Member Info for Guitarsolo

Andy, I am trying to be gentle here. But if you spout nonsense it makes it hard.
(i) EVs in a traffic jam. If the vehicle is not moving the electric motor uses "tickover" amps. It would be minimal and less of an issue than an ICE running out of fuel. If it is creeping along (as you amend in another post), the EV's energy usage is really rather proportional to speed. Of course any vehicle can run out of fuel/energy, but where are the reports of stranded EVs compared to ICEs? There are none.
(ii) Infrastructure to deliver for EVs. Read what the National Grid (who I also hold) are doing. They have had a plan in place to ramp up the grid to cope. It is very impressive.
(iii) Infrastructure to charge. There are multiple companies out there building the EV charging infrastructure. Read the government's National Infrastructure Strategy and you will see the billions being poured in to building it through companies like Renew Holding (RWNH), who I also hold! Bear in mind new ICEs are banned from 2030 and you will see, the charging infrastructure is being built a pace.
(iv) Fusion. Lots of people name fusion as being the solution, possibly because they've read the odd article or seen the odd film. Fusion (combining atoms, not splitting) is indeed incredible science and produces amazing energy. But humankind has presently only just begun this understanding after building a giant circle on the Swiss border and spinning a few electrons around it to bash into each other. Fusion as a source of reliable energy is decades away. We don't have time to wait for that given the climate situation. Hence the need to decarbonise using what we have now (renewables, nuclear (fission), and fossil fuels). If fusion becomes feasible later, great. You say we need a cheap, plentiful supply of energy. We have one already, it's called the sun (which creates other energy such as wind). We only need to hardness 1% of the energy that arrives on earth from the sun to power humankind!

To achieve what needs to be achieved, we must focus on the realistic solutions. For the next 20-50 years, that is EVs with (at the moment) lithium as the key constituent.

Hope this helps.

Guitarsolo

Andy, every day when I was doing my MSc in Chemistry at King's College I would walk past the original Daniell Cell (located on the 7th Floor, Strand), considered to be the first battery as we know it. Daniell did much of his work there. It was always a reference for students studying the chemistry of fuel and energy. But we learned very early on from a fantastic lecturer, Professor Hughes, that there is theoretical chemistry (what can be done) and realistic science (what can actually be done). The simple fact is that OEMs have spent £100bns going down the EV route, so hydrogen fuel cells for cars is a non-starter in any of our lifetimes. It has application in shipping (but so do other things like amonia), and also in energy storage (e.g. using wind power to produce H2 to burn when the wind stops), but when it comes to vehicle transport that ship has sailed (if you forgive the analogy!).

Theo, I seem to recall it was Dominic Cummings and Vote Leave that took the lead with online targeting using social media!

https://www.thedrum.com/news/2017/06/13/we-dumped-our-entire-budget-the-last-10-days-inside-the-behavioural-science-strategy

I particularly like the Cummings quote: "“It was also about taking back control of the system itself. For a lot of people it was take back control that made them think, 'yeah, these are the guys who screwed up the economy, who drove it off a cliff in 2008, whose mates are all Goldman Sachs bankers with hedge funds on massive bonuses.”

Who have leavers put in charge? An ex-hedge fund partner and Goldman Sachs (almost) billionaire!

You couldn't make this up!

Well, just looking at Enisca, £2m net profit/ 79m shares = + 2.5p for EPS, which would account for nearly half of Shore Capital's predicted increase. As you say, that looks conservative.

No, only one was correct Theo. And so typical that you then have to throw around insults because you've been found out.

(i) "BoE QE of £895bn was as a result of Covid.. Not Brexit."
(ii) "We all know that the £895bn was not all covid but it did boost the programme."

So statement (i) was incorrect then!

Theo: "BoE QE of £895bn was as a result of Covid.. Not Brexit."

Err, wrong!

https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/monetary-policy/quantitative-easing

A good chuck of it was because of Covid. Not all.

Epro was explaining to Hardup how Brexit had influenced house prices and wrote:
"Interest rates were lowered and QE was carried out to mitigate the impact of Brexit (as well as earlier tge crunch) in 2016."
You responded: "That is the daftest statement this week. QE started in 2009 to provide liquidity to the banks."
I showed you how the BoE printed £70bn in response to Brexit.
You want to change the subject and talk about the EU/ECB! I would call that distraction.....!

Theo, it's a thread about Brexit! One might say you're trying to distract with the "Quick, look over there at the EU!" rather than facing the situation here in the UK.

But the ECB's QE programme (about Euros 3.3 trln) is proportionately smaller than the BoE's £895bn programme.

They've both been equally bad in terms of inflating assets to the cost of the average person.

Theo, the BoE specifically printed £70 billion in August 2016 "to help the economy after the EU referendum". Looks like a fairly direct link between Brexit and QE to me.
https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/monetary-policy/quantitative-easing
So if Brexit caused some of the QE, and the QE has inflated asset (house) prices, then Brexit has caused some of the increase in house prices, as Epro suggested.

The EU referendum is also connected to QE though.

So Epro would be correct to connect Brexit to QE to house prices. But it is never just one thing.

Mr Grim, as a chemistry student nearly 30 years ago I was quite involved with researching H2 as a realistic fuel for motor vehicles. The science is all there, but the practicality isn't. It's like saying, why don't we have nuclear powered vacuum cleaners?! It would work in theory, but not in practice.
H2 is definitely a solution for shipping and air travel. But not for cars which are too numerous and used for relatively short trips. The proof of this is that every single OEM went down the electric vehicle (battery) route at least a decade ago. They have invested £100bns having already dismissed the H2 option. There is no way on earth they will change course now.
So on that front, SAV is fine. Lithium is the short and medium term option without doubt. They just need to get mining.
Guitarsolo

Gotta love RNWH! Every time they deliver. It's not that it is spectacular, it is just so consistent. The predictability of the company is a blessing too...... You just know they are going to pay off the debt from the last acquistion and then be in a position to buy another company. The fact they're buying Enisca for cash (and they'll still be net cash after it by the looks of it), means they have the balance sheet clear to make another purchase with debt (although that may not be as appealing now as a year ago) if the opportunity arises.
Thanks Rivaldo for all the posts!
Guitarsolo

The question is Rivaldo, how good? Perhaps EPS above 55p?
I'll be interested to see what the net debt figure is, as clearing the cost of the last acquisition is often the catalyst to another one. I very much approve of this approach.
I also expect a penny or so uplift in the dividend (just over 5%).
Guitarsolo

Ade, you seem to be the only one who wants hostility. It's been quiet and calm and then you pop up and acuse others of hostility and even being "representatives of the managers" (your words)!!

You're entitled to your opinion and of course to express it. But you seem to feel the need for everyone to agree with you and accuse people of being hostile if they don't.

We are all aware of the accusations of dividend washing, but unless you can show the data of all of HFEL's trades to show an imbalance towards buying cum-divi and selling ex-divi, then all you've got is the underlying yield.

Afternoon Damien,
Putting aside a discussion over management's credibility for another day, I note that the EUR/USD exchange rate on 1st July (PEY identified the first period to cause the forex losses was "July/August") was 1.0427....... and today it is..... 1.0418.
I know it is not quite as simple as that (!), but is it possible the EUR recovery could reverse a substantial amount of these forex losses? They indicated in the presentation there had been a recent partial reversal, which they wouldn't have mentioned if they didn't have an open position to benefit. They also said they hadn't changed their strategy.
Am I being too optimistic to hope some of the damage might have been repaired?! (whether by luck or judgment)
Guitarsolo

What on earth for? If they use the word "firepower" you should scream!

But serioulsy, what would they buy that can't be covered by the cash and authorised credit? It's not like they have a good, recent track record so they would be raising at a significant discount = more shareholder value destroyed.

I make it a 45% discount (72pps v NAV 132p).

Regional REIT trades at a 39% discount (61p/99.5p)
Palace Capital REIT also at a 39% discount (210p/ 345p)

NRR perhaps deserves the more punishing rating for its history and use of claptrap phrases!

Morning 1msn. I wouldn't quite say "strong", but then I have been here for so many years I have purchases over £3 and used to receive a 21.6p annual dividend! Summary:

UFFO: 4.4p
Div: 3.5p ("up" from 3.3p, but not comparing against a stable dividend year imo)
LTV: 33.8% (good, well within range and comfortable)
No refinancing required for 5.2 years (good, hopefully can pass over the rising rates "blip")
Interest rate: 3.5% (similar to other REITs)
Cash: £95 (over 30pps)
NAV: 132p (all REITs trading at big discounts)
Rent collection: 97% (good enough)
Occupancy: 96.3% (always high, good but leaves NRR open to it falling as it can't increase much)
Recent management contracts based on % of rental income. No guide though.

Overall, it's steady but uninspiring. It is a long road ahead in my opinon (unless they go for SD's liquidation, which they won't). I do struggle to read the updates without wanting to puke at the management-speak drivle.

Guitarsolo

I'm not allowed to "chip in", but you are?! Oh well........