Member Info for Guitarsolo

These are the people that Brexiteers/ Tory supporters have voted for. I think it's a case of own your problem MV.

Perhaps it was, 88, but I only picked it up at MV's claim that it was remainers' fault that the country is failing left, right and centre.

Gate "We needed a Brexiteer".....
Tories voted for Cameron, and got May.
Tories voted for May, and got Johnson.
Tories voted for Johnson, and got Truss.
You wanted Johnson to sort Brexit, the man who wrote support speeches for Remain and Leave.
You are happy with Truss now, who campaigned for Remain.
It seems to me, you don't know what you're doing!

Gate, it's not about whether a vote is accepted. Maths proves that one. But MV's initial comment was to blame remainers for the fact that Brexit is such a mess......Nothing to do with accepting a result.....Him trying to blame the wrong people!

It's a bit like Brexiturd, an amalgamation of Brexiteer and Turd.

But I would never call anyone that.

Oh MV, you do make me laugh you able seaman.
You're right, you won! Get over it. Stop blaming others for the fact that (by your own admission) Brexit hasn't delivered what you thought it would.

Explaining the realities of the law, of trade agreements, or that the other side won't like something so you'll have to make a concession is not placing a barrier! It's explaining to a grown up what will happen. Only a toddler thinks they can do something without there being any consequences. It's not my fault if you couldn't work that out. And again, the Tories/ right-wing have controlled every step of this. They are the establishment! You enabled them, so be a man and be responsible.

MV, there is a difference between speaking truth to power about what can't be done and saying they don't accept the vote. I don't know anyone who doesn't accept the result as it was. Your original post was about remoaners (you frequently like to insult with that) "trying to make disasters happen"....your words. Absolute nonsense.
If you need to blame remainers for the lack of Brexit's delivery then clearly Brexit hasn't delivered what it promised. And yet it has been the Tories/right wing who have voted for and controlled every step of this. So you can take responsibility for your own actions.

Theo, I am ranting at those responsible!
If you knew what you were voting for, then you knew there was no deal yet negotiated and therefore you accept that you got whatever was agreed (and knew who would be the people negotiating it for you).
If you didn't know what you were voting for, that's honest, but frankly irresponsible to bet the future on the country in such a manner.

Your post MV sadly shows how incapable you/Brexiteers are of accepting responsibility for your own actions.

What your post demonstrates is the following:
(i) There have been none of the expected benefits of Brexit. This is logical because if there were you would be wallowing in the glory of it. Instead, you need to blame others for the absence of the benefits.
(ii) Rather than considering that those Brexit benefits wouldn’t ever happen, you take the coward’s path of saying others must have blocked it somehow (but offer no evidence).
(iii) You claim that “two-faced May” prevented “getting Brexit done” without realising that there is no “getting Brexit done” without negotiation with the EU which requires making concessions. In fact, May’s deal probably represented about as close to a workable solution as we could get.
(iv) You “got Brexit done” by voting for Boris Johnson whose plan was to agree a deal with the EU that he knew would never work (e.g. Northern Ireland) and that he was already planning to renege upon.
(v) Let it not be forgotten that it was the Tories who proposed the Referendum, the Tories (largely) who campaigned for it, the Tories/right wing who funded it, the Tories who voted for May’s government, then the Tories who voted to ditch May’s deal, then the Tories who voted for Boris Johnson’s “oven ready” deal that he would renege upon, and the Tories who decided to vote to get rid of Boris and replace him with Liz Truss. So I wonder who should really be held responsible for the result of Brexit?

At least be a man about it and take responsibility for your actions.

Hi Alavib,

I don't know if you hold within and ISA given your residence (or whether that makes and difference at all). However, I think it relates to the way in which the money must be distributed to avoid double taxation (as Property Income Distribution). I too hold shares through HSBC Invest Direct and they pay 80% of it now, and the balance about 6 weeks later. So I too got 2.64pps which is 80% of 3.3p.

I also hold then through Hargreaves Lansdown who pay the whole thing up front!

So you will get the balance soon, but blame HSBC for being unnecessarily cautious!

All the best

Guitarsolo

I'm no expert on retail but in terms of energy use I would imagine most occupants of NRR's retail parks (clothes, household items, games, electricals etc) are not high energy users compared to say food outlets. They should be able to ameliorate their energy use somewhat (turn heating down/ a few lights off etc) with little impact. So one would hope that spiralling energy costs themselves may not force many to close temporarily or permanently. Of course, a recession in general terms will still impact them.

NRR has a relatively large portfolio of convenience stores which have higher energy usage (fridges and freezers required for health and safety reasons etc). These have fewer options to reduce their energy usage I suspect. However, being mostly food retailers they will still have trade no matter what. And perhaps there will be a recession-driven migration to discounters (SD's point I think).

Last point, NRR may have fortunately dodged a bullet by selling the pubs. Yes, they sold them at a loss and not because of anything to do with the current energy crisis. But if the forecasts are correct and many of these close for a while or for good, you would think there will be huge pressure for rent holidays, rent reductions or simply mass defaults and no new tennants. Perhaps we should be thankful NRR is not still holding that portfolio?

GLA

Guitarsolo

Agree Whitelye (getting your name right!).....I've held for a decade and pocketed the dividends. The share price is a bit of a pain but I believe it will improve as people seek boring and predictable.

Morning WhiteEye,
Always difficult to read a CSN update! The headline loss figure is usually misleading (as is a large profit), as it swings around with mark to market valuations. I can appreciate the need for M2Ms to give an "immediate" valuation figure for investors, but it is not always that helpful for entities like CSN who aren't going to be disposing of portfolios in the short term. Same thing with REITs, if they're not going to be disposing of assets immediately, does it really matter what it is worth right now? (I know, you need it to assess solvency etc, but if a markdown causes a profit to become a loss, and then back to paper profit later, how has that helped?!)
There used to be a posted called greyinvestor (possibly from iii) who always had a few wise words to say. Not sure where he is nowadays. In his absence, I put faith in the management and I find their dividend movement a good indication of where they see the company. So a 3% uplift says to be they are confident but cautious. Sounds about right!
Guitarsolo

Very pleased to see this as I've been continually topping up for 18 months now. I still think it is great value at 50p on a 5-year timescale. The most pleasing part for me is the statement of product superiority as this should lead to more OEMs seeking supply.

I've sold my minor holding here at 1831p today. I've pocketed a nice profit of about 75% over 2.5 years (incl dividends) having bought in at 1208p. I've long had the feeling that I am better at judging when to buy utilities than sell them, but there are a few current/future issues for SSE that make me think I might be better to pocket my profit and step away:
(i) With the energy price crisis there will be persistent calls for windfall taxes.
(ii) Following on from the above, the threat of nationalisation will linger. It will never happen, but even a whiff can dent the share price.
(iii) Ofgem is going to come under enormous pressure to make future pricing favourable to customers.
(iv) Rising interest rates will make financing the massive investments required more expensive (I haven't done any research or calculations about this, just a general feeling).
(v) There is a clear and coordinated attack from the right-wing of politics against green energy. If the Tories remain in power I see them conceding at least some ground in that department which will hit SSE's windfarms I presume.
(vi) On the financials, it is now trading at a P/E of 15 which is high-ish for a utility.
(vii) The dividend is due to rebase to around 60p in 2024 and then progressively rise (perhaps 5% p.a.). That would put SSE on a 3.3% yield which is way too low for a utility in my view (even if it is then covered x2 and will increase progressively). I think there will be a few shareholders waking up to that over the next year. I would want at least 5% yield from a utility so at 60p that would put the share price at around £12!

I note Berenberg has a recent price target of £22 and Barclays £20 (no dates when it will reach it though!). So clearly analysts think there might be more to come from this rally. As I said, I am probably better and deciding when the buy than sell! And I am sure I will be a buyer again someday.

Good luck everyone.
Guitarsolo

Does the BoE have an agenda? Not really. They have a mandate (keep inflation around 2% and stability of financial markets). The problem is, they don't have many tools:
(i) Interest rates. Increase interest rates and reduce spending power of those with variable rate mortgages (about 2m households out of about 30m in total). Reduce spending power of those who will mortgage/remortgage soon (a few 100k more perhaps). Reduce spending power of renters whose landlords increase the rent because of higher rates on their mortgages. Increasing interest rates also affects the credit markets, but principles are similar to mortgages and it only affects a few.
(ii) Change the capital buffer requirements to encourage/ discourage lending. It has an effect, but it is slow and is outweighed by other factors such as confidence.

The tools to really control inflation are there but never used for it; taxation. Governments can instantly change taxes if they want to and increase/decrease spending power across the board, affecting broadly everyone. So it is much more effective than interest rates.
If inflation is high (like now) then you can increase taxes to reduce spending and bring it down. But don't spend that money - put it into a national saving account (or sovereign wealth fund) to be used to pump back into the economy when it slows and inflation is low. Use it as a regulator (small r).
The problem is politicians. They could not be trusted not to dip into it for their own popularity gain. Indeed we have got Conservative leadership candidates vying to do the complete opposite.
So we get the politicians we deserve because no one is prepared to run the country like you would a company or household.

No MV, oil does not replenish itself! Not unless you've got about 3 million years to wait. Hydrocarbons are made up of organic material left to break down over many years. It happens fastest when under great pressure, hence why most hydrocarbons are sea life (e.g. crustaceans) that die and form a sediment on the seabed and then the weight of water crushes them into long-chain hydrocarbons, over a few million years. Saudi Arabia's biggest advantage is that is it low lying and used to be under water.

From 28th Feb: "So I would say that means they expect earnings will not be fully covered, possibly for a few years, but they will use the reserve fund to keep increasing the final Q4 dividend by the minimum amount of 0.01p. And then they will say; but we've increased the dividend every year!"

Turned out to be spot on! Not a hard prediction though.

I await Franco's commentary at end August/early Sept (?) to see (i) how much they had to dip into reserves to cover the dividend and (ii) what the outlook is like.

Bottom line is that capital is depreciating and dividend increases are way behind inflation having increased by 0.01pps in each of the last four years. It's all very well saying "we've increased the dividend every year" but when it is by that amount you know if has only been done to be able to make that claim and should therefore be challenged as to its actual benefit to anyone.

Still holding but would like to hear the prognosis from the horse's mouth.

Guitarsolo

"Princess Private Equity Holding Limited's ("Princess" or the "Company") net asset value decreased by 5.8% to EUR 13.76 per share"That's a big fall! Especially as it comes on the back of decreases in 7 of the last 8 months as well. I couldn't see any commentary about it from PEY but note there is a presentation coming up. But we're now 1.62 euros below the year-end closing NAV so I think it is going to take quite a good H2 to avoid a dividend being cut (if they use the same criteria as published before). I'd like to see an explanation from PEY to see if this is just short term fluctuations or something more concerning.