Member Info for MikeM14

Hello MikeDHill,

Thanks for the reply. I think it very likely is incorrect and/or out of date information.

As you probably know, a lot has changed with the company since this time last year, as per the company's RNS announcements. The last couple of quarterly dividends got delayed, and I think there's still some uncertainty about the next one or more. They used to be paid at about the end of March, June, September and December, but the latest December one got slipped to late January, and then the latest March one got slipped to middle of May. For the next one, who knows?

All the best, whether or not you're still invested with them!

MikeDHill,

You say "... as we head to exdiv day on Thursday". Where are you getting that information from? What date was the next dividend of SEIT announced? To my best knowledge, the next divi hasn't even been declared yet.

Hi DINVOFT, and thanks for the reply.

Re the telephone call - I guess the reason is simple. Organisations are very quick at calling when *they* want/need something from *you* (but rarely the other way round).

All the best,

Mike.

Hi Krusty and others,

I too have now received the "postcard" on behalf of GSF.

I'm with "II" but with the optional ability to vote.

My immediate reaction is that I should not be getting stuff in the post direct from investee companies and their registrars, but no doubt there is something in the "small print" that allows this to happen.

Needless to say, I exited my extremely small holding (at a loss) on Monday so shall not be voting. I read the GSF circular, and also the RM 10-page document, to try to see things from both sides and get a balanced view, but can see this turning into a time-consuming war of words, almost like what happens with a hostile bid, but because of domestic issues just haven't got that much time in view of the very small value of my holding as a proportion of my portfolio. I will certainly be interested to continue to look in from the sidelines from time to time to see how it plays out.

Good luck all, whichever way it goes!

Thanks Hardboy, for a comprehensive and easy to follow explanation.

I bought some UTs some 25 years ago, one of which later turned into an OEIC, right at the beginning of my investing "career", but I always found them rather "messy", and sold them all in 2006 (fortuitously just before the financial crash). Ever since then, as well as individual-company shares, I've stuck to Investment Trusts (for good or for bad). I enjoy buying and selling them in the market just like shares of individual companies, knowing the price instantaneously, voting on the AGM resolutions, etc etc. Let's all hope that with TRIG and several others in the renewables sector the current discounts close (unless one's buying, of course!) - so many in the sector seem to be affected in the same way at the moment.

All the best.

Hello Travelcard,

"Given that the NAVs in similar OEICs in the sector trade on discounts of between -75 % & -28% TRIG seems to be doing quite well."

TRIG is an Investment Trust, not an OEIC. Unless my knowledge is out of date, or my memory has gone (perfectly possible!), an Investment Trust is in effect a Closed Ended Investment Company, whereas an OEIC is similar to, but not quite identical to, a Unit Trust. Happy to be proved wrong!

Mike.

Hi gregson,

"Can anyone clarify if the reason is suspended is due to it now being traded as IP?"

Yes, that seems to be the case - read the RNS announcement by IPC at 09:04 today (4 February):-

https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/IPC/delisting-and-cancellation-of-trading-73elusgcs5yoq84.html

Mike.

Yes sotonspike, that agrees exactly with my figure. Of course if the share price changes significantly tomorrow, the yield will change as well!

"Chatroom" still hasn't explained how he/she is getting the figure of 6%, though.

Hi sotonspike,

You say:-

"According to dividendmax this is paying 8.2% at these prices".

I can't see how that can be right. The (target) full year dividend for the current year is 10p (4 quarterly dividends each of 2.5p). The share price is currently about 142.2p. Divide 10 by 142.2 and you get about 7.03%.

Hi Chatroom,

No, it's a bit more fundamental than which stock exchange the shares are listed on. Basically what the 11% have voted for is that the company (UKW) should cease to exist in its present form and be restructured or even wound up, so all assets (ie the various wind farms) would be sold off, and UKW would just be a pile of cash that then gets distributed to all the shareholders in proportion to how many shares they own. The company's Articles of Association basically require that such a vote takes place in any financial year in which the share price is at a discount of more than 10% to the Net Asset Value. If you want any more detail, probably best you go on the UKW website, find the recent Notice of AGM, and read the resolution in full rather than risking me misquoting any of it.

It seems to me a bit worrying that, at the recent AGM, there were so many votes (some 11%) for discontinuation of UKW as a company! I wonder how many of them didn't read the resolution properly before voting. Whilst the discount to NAV is still significant, UKW is far from alone in that amongst infrastructure/renewables investment trusts. I've seen continuation votes in AGMs of some of my other IT holdings, and there certainly weren't votes for discontinuation that were anything like as high as this!

Hi traxxas,

Yes, OVO did take on SSE's residential customers - I was one of them. I don't know about commercial customers.

Although taken over by OVO, it was still branded as SSE for quite a long time before it eventually was re-branded as OVO so the appearance of the bills, etc changed.

I was somewhat puzzled by Special666's comments, given the numbers being quoted.

Hi Grezzz,

It looks like sloppy reporting to me.

I'd have thought that it would be subject to "due diligence" on both sides, shareholders on both sides voting in favour, regulatory approvals (if required), etc etc, which is why an extension to the deadline was asked for and agreed. As well as this being an all-share deal, so the "acquirer" doesn't need to take on a load of extra debt, the other main difference from most other "takeovers" that I've seen is that in effect SMDS management are recommending it to their shareholders rather than saying "shareholders are advised to take no action because we're going to negotiate a better offer".

All the best, Mike.

Hi Trouts,

"We're actually at 346p. What does this suggest?"

To me it suggests 2 things. One that the market is factoring-in a possibility (if not a probability) that this won't actually happen. There could be sufficient shareholders on either side (SMDS, or MNDI) that vote against it to stop it happening - SMDS because the "deal" isn't high enough, and MNDI because it's giving too much of a premium to SMDS. The other is the "time value of money" - this whole process could take several weeks if not months. But there again, what do I know?

Whatever happens, ATB!

Mike.

Thanks Oldfortyniner!

I think I'll be watching the Mondi price like a hawk this morning - it seems so far to be creeping upwards - 1,358p as I write.

Thanks johnychainlocker!

We can but hope!

Dear all,

The relevant key sentence in yesterday's "joint" MNDI/SMDS RNS announcement seems pretty clear:-

"Based on Mondi's closing share price of 1,381 pence per share on 7 February 2024 (being the day prior to the commencement of the offer period), the terms of the Combination would represent an implied value of 373 pence per DS Smith share and a premium of 33 per cent. to DS Smith's closing share price of 281 pence per share on 7 February 2024 (being the day prior to the commencement of the offer period)".

So the SMDS price is now linked to the MNDI price, rather than to any cash figure.

Given that the MNDI price was about 1,344p when I started to type this, that puts SMDS at about 363p.

(373p x (1344/1381)).

However, the MNDI price has now risen a bit, to about 1,352p, which would put SMDS at about 365p.

I'm guessing that SMDS management would have consulted with a number of large shareholders before "agreeing in principle" the construct of the offer, and therefore MNDI don't have any incentive to increase the offer, unless another bidder comes in.

The MNDI share price would have to go above 1381p for the "implied value" of SMDS shares to go higher than 373p - what's the chance of that happening?

ATB, Mike.

Okay all, thanks for the views and knowledge re Mondi. The bottom line is that the important deadline is 5:00pm, not 3:00pm. The current price action of SMDS doesn't seem to be giving much away as to what may happen (or not happen!) by the deadline!

Wayzgoose,

"with Mondi being American"

I thought that Mondi was British.

You're not thinking of Mondelez are you?

Hi stewart1964,

I really can't see anything specific to TRIG that hasn't also affected other renewables Investment Trusts (although we've got their next results due imminently). The share prices of many others have been falling again quite heavily in a similar pattern over the last few weeks - UKW, SEIT, GSF, ORIT and EGL to name a few. They're all now trading at a large discount to their stated NAVs. TRIG's latest quarterly NAV was down quite a lot - from memory about 127p as compared to 131p - but they say their dividend is well-covered - about 1.6x. I can see that continued high savings interest rates make high-yielding shares seem less attractive, but in my experience savings interest rates have actually typically been falling quite a lot over the last couple of months. I decided late this afternoon to do a small top-up of my TRIG holding, and bought at a price just below 100p. Things weren't helped by this site apparently not showing any RNS announcements today, but as we now know the date of TRIG's forthcoming results, and they've recently announced their latest NAV and the dividend target for their next financial year, I doubt anything major's been missed.