Member Info for Guitarsolo

Gazzleberry,

"Definition: Baby Boomers: Baby boomers were born between 1946 and 1964. They're currently between 57-75 years old."

Correct. Which means even the youngest Boomer became an adult in 1964 (and the youngest in 1982). Unless they were some child prodigy I don't think you can claim Boomers were rebuilding the country from the rubble which occurred in the 1950s and early 60s. Thank you for proving the point though!

Guitarsolo

Gazzleberry "so we should seeing as we built this country back up from the rubble". Sorry but by mathematical defintion Baby Boomers were children during the post-war rebuilding of the country. You became adults during the late 60s or 70s, just in time for that period of economic malaise in the 70s!

Andy,

Thank you very much for a superb reply! And do not apoligise over its length when it contained great, succinct info.

I will take a closer look at DNA2 but am happy with AA4 for sure (particularly, as you say, with the possibility/prospect of unlocking further income for dividends from Thai's emergence from bankruptcy protection).

On another note, and applicable to both AA4 and DNA2, what are the prospects of them adding further planes in the future to be leased out. I am sure this depends on the price/availability of an A380/dreamliner etc, financing costs, lease potential/agreements etc. But for those who have been here longer, would you expect AA4 (or DNA2 for that matter) to be on the lookout for such opportunity, or to focus on what they have?

Guitarsolo

Andy,

Am I correct to think you own both of these aircraft leasers? If so, are you able to explain the differences/ similarities?

Do you invest in both to simply spread the risk, or do you prefer one over another?

Best regards,

Guitarsolo

The latest set of results, whilst viewed as positive, also highlight a new reality. For those invested for say the last couple of years, and in particular those who joined sub-50p, the 6.7p dividend and share price isn't at all bad. But for some (like me) invested since about 2016, I remember when the share price was over 300p, EPS was around 24p and the dividend was 21.6p! With the exception of the pubs business, which cost NRR a lot, the portfolio is not that different. Occupancy rates are still high (c. 96%), but that means there isn't much room to increase occupancy.

So the new reality is that EPS is a third of what it used to be, and so is the dividend. I can't really see it ever recovering those levels so it's just a slow build from where we are. Of course, the pandemic is to blame for most of these woes, but it does grate somewhat the I haven't heard management acknowledge even once that there has been massive destruction of value and earnings here.

Fortunately, I don't have the biggest exposure here but nevertheless present optimistic comment never acknowledges the long-term facts.

I too have voted against. It won't matter, but perhaps it will register that most retail investors are disappointed to see this fund wound up.

Staude have got a lot to answer for in my opinion.

I think it shows that the purchase of Enisca was prescient. The pressure to deal with the sewage problem has been building for a long time and therefore it was only a matter of time before a large amount of money was promised to deal with it. It is logical that Enisca would have been more expensive to buy once news of that investment was known, so well done RNWH for moving when they did.

JimmyD83, we get this a lot. Direct Line has multiple insurance brands and some of them are on comparison sites, others not (e.g. Churchill).

Thanks for sharing Rivaldo.

History suggests that with £17m in cash (and presumably rising by about £2m a month) they will be able to make a suitable acquisition for cash (or mostly cash) as soon as the right opportunity presents.

I note you found an entry of c.£550k for aborted acquisition costs, so they are obviously actively looking but, more importantly, remain suitably discerning. RNWH is a very high quality business, even if it is not exciting.

It bobs around being my largest investment by value and I am very happy with it.

Guitarsolo

Crikey Asperger, you're brighter than this!

It is not a fact, as you claim. There is no Labour policy announcement, this a pro-Tory newspaper with a "reveal" that is designed specifically to trigger people in the way you've been triggered. Wait for the policy announcement before calling it a fact.

But, let's say it does make it onto the Labour manifesto, why shouldn't settled migrants working and paying tax here have a vote? No taxation without representation! It seems fair to me.

If 16/17 year olds are given the vote, well it's hard to argue that is not an attempt by Labour to manipulate votes in their favour. But let's remember, the Tories have been moving boundaries and recently employing voter suppression tactics to their advantage. I don't agree with this race to the bottom, but the Tories have been playing dirty for a while. More importantly though, if you speak to youngsters they are largely dismayed at what older generations have voted for that will disproportionately affect youngsters over pensioners/ retirees. So I am not surprised many 16/17 year olds would welcome a chance to vote to shape their futures.

I see far less that's scary there than with the chaos of the current Conservatives (who are basically UKIP, ERG, CDO).

I took the dog down to the beach this morning. No swimming allowed yet because of the sewage discharges earlier in the week. If ever there was a methaphor for the country......

He hasn't adopted anything. If there was any coalition or pact, it would be a negotiation between parties. Nothing wrong with that as the result becomes representative of more people.

Rejoining is not Labour policy. As a balanced individual I am sure LTI will be all over you for stating hypotheticals and not "facts"! Or perhaps that will only be facts that he wants.

We've been through this before Asperger. In 2019, the Conservatives said that a general election is not about a single issue. Now you want to make it just that. You can't have it both ways! So the Conservatives should quite rightly be judged on their record in government and plans for the future.

And if the majority vote for other parties, and those parties do combined their forces to overcome the bias of the FPTP system, what would be wrong with that? Surely you wouldn't deny democracy now, would you?!

LTI "I certainly do not like the Lloyds board after 7 years to be disrupted....."

From the man/woman/thing that posts 30 times a day!

Back to being the board police again! This is not YOUR board! Jeez, I'm beginning to think your narcissistic! Funnily enough, that's another characteristic of the dishonest bankers I investigate!

Wrong again LTI.

Facts and opinions are posted here and challenged.

You can't stand it and so, as a bully, just try and shut everyone down.

It won't work. Deal with it.

Man, you really do have one hell of an ego!

Catching and prosecuting dishonest bankers is very fulfilling, so I definitely won't be giving it up.

But whilst on the subject, it is also typical for dishonest bankers to react with saracasm or mirth. Psychologists tell me it is a defence mechanism to try and deflect attention. It also goes hand in hand with the persona of the bully who tries to shut down people with attempts at humour aimed at belittling or humiliating their challenger. It's quite common in my line of work.

My day job is to investigate dishonest bankers. It’s very common for them to be bullies, to try and drown everyone else out, belittle people’s knowledge and puff up their own to try and ensure they are not challenged. Their behaviour is designed to intimidate people against challenging them, either through trying to avoid conflict, fairly doubting whether they are correct about something, or just not wanting to engage with a bully that will do anything to have the last word. It’s a common trait I see so often in my line of work.

Notice how LTI has to try and shut down every argument for something he doesn't like.

" We are not in the EU.....we are not (re)joining the EU......Get over it......No political party is offering it.... End of....."

As Nomlungu points out, we might rejoin at some point in the future. As I have pointed out (with facts LTI), were the UK to do that, it would be a special case (never seen before) because the UK would then be doing something that hasn't been anticipated in the rules. Therefore, anything can happen.

"It won't happen" cries LTI ...... I guess you haven't noticed the growing support for the EU, now well in excess of 60%. As I said, you can not beat the twin forces of Mother Nature and mathematics!

Brexit's only chance was to deliver early success to turn the heads of the young and middle-aged. It hasn't done that, in fact it has done the opposite. With Mother Nature doing her bit, the rest is in the hands of mathematics!

"The UK is not joining the EU....repeat, repeat, repeat..." WAHWHAHWAH..

What a cry baby. I merely pointed out to IggyPop (an unrepresentative username if ever there was) that the UK's position to rejoining the EU would be very different to another country joining for the first time. Just facts, which you claim to like.

Keep on dissecting every single comment. It's amusing how, one by one, everyone gets to see you for the bully you are!

I've been out for the afternoon.....Looks like it's been the usual afternoon of LTI telling the world he is right and everyone else is wrong! For fk sake man, grow up!

A person who has to have to last word, who has to quote and dissect every single f-ing thing people write is just a bully!

I bet you were one of those bankers who really thought you were Masters of the Universe!

LTI, as usual you think that only your view matters. Get the fk over yourself.

I'll put my faith in the twin forces of Mother Nature and mathematics.