Invista Share Discussion Threads

[skyship] 03/2/2012 08:00

HE - thnx for that. Not a website I knew - very useful with PropertyWeek only permitting 5 views/month.

[skyship] 02/2/2012 14:49

Going back to Jan'11 IFD has still outperformed PCTN. But going back to the start of Jan'12, PCTN has substantially outperformed. A good switch perhaps – SELL PCTN @ 42.5p – BUY IFD @ 32.5p...

[skyship] 02/2/2012 14:36

HE - sorry to read that. Where did you pick that up - PropertyWeek perhaps...

[horndean eagle] 02/2/2012 13:12

Article in December saying Delancey no long interested in Plantation place. Not too disheartened as there are plenty of large properties being put up for sale which are still being sold on similar yields. GPOR still suggesting overseas cash buyers very keen on London property. Could be a big bonus on the way if a buyer is found.

[seekerofvalue] 02/2/2012 11:39

envirovision & SKYSHIP, having now bought into IFD. Would it be okay to post the occasional sector article?

Like this one that suggests looking at countries such as Germany, Scandinavia and France going forward.

Northern Europe 'best for commercial property investment'

[cwa1] 02/2/2012 08:23

Will be very interested to hear if the company have any comments about Scroders offloading-but doubt they will say much even if they do know the reason(s).

[skyship] 02/2/2012 07:52

GARY - I will be asking that exact question as the reason for my buyback proposal is to take out any further stock Schroders wish to sell. That was the inference intended in the final sentence of my 455 above.

[skyship] 02/2/2012 07:50

LG - I couldn't agree with you more regarding buybacks in "Conventional Trading Companies". If Boards have excess cash and no clear investment projects, then they should return the cash to shareholders via open tender offers or special dividends - not via buybacks, which serve just to provide cash exits for lumpy institutional holders. There are so many appalling examples of crass stupidity on buybacks - HOME being the most recent classic.

HOWEVER, when it comes to asset-backed and asset-valued companies such as investment trusts and property companies, the position is totally different as, when the buybacks are enacted at substantial NAV discounts, the remaining shareholders benefit both from the removal of the Tap and an increase in the NAV.

I've had long debates elsewhere on this subject and don't want to go back over old ground; I am posting just so that any interested parties should be aware of the difference. Indeed there are some companies, the Realisation companies, whose total business concept is based upon the truism in the second para, though the buybacks are affected through tenders - SAR etc.

[gary1966] 01/2/2012 21:55

Probably a better question would be to ask the company why they think Schroders are offloading. There surely is dialogue between the two and so they must have an inkling.

[lord gnome] 01/2/2012 18:33

Skyship - I hate share buybacks with a passion. They are the single most sure way I know to waste money and deliver very little (nothing) to shareholders. I would be most concerned if IFD embarked on a share buyback programme. No disrespect to your good self, but I will be writing to the Chairman to advise him accordingly.

[envirovision] 01/2/2012 18:14

A real pain Schroders reducing, what they hell is wrong with them ? They must be short of cash or something.

[skyship] 01/2/2012 17:46

What is often forgotten with IFD is that there is a continuation vote at the AGM in Sept'14 - OK, still quite a long way away, but yet another safety net for shareholders.

This is what the Chairman, Andrew Sykes, said in a letter to me in Sept'11:

"You should also be aware that the Company has a continuation vote in 2014....we would expect to canvas the views of major shareholders well ahead of that date in relation to the Company's future strategy. The Board is working hard to deliver the best possible outcome for shareholders, both in terms of the Company's NAV and its share rating. We will continue to review any opportunities to enhance either of these as they arise."

I shall be writing to him again tomorrow to reiterate my request for share buybacks - a re-rating scheme now doubly appropriate with Schroders choosing to reduce their holding...

[billy5] 31/1/2012 09:09

tilton

Thanks for that.

Should have gone to Specsavers !!!!!!

[tiltonboy] 31/1/2012 09:01

You didn't scroll very far!

[billy5] 31/1/2012 08:45

Looks like these went ex divi on the 2nd Feb 2011 and paid .88p. Can anybody please advise what is happening this year. I have scrolled thro the last statement without success.

thanks.

[skyship] 31/1/2012 07:54

Sleepy - dealing with the easy one first:

"Paying £11 per sq. ft. to refurbish a property which will rent for under £4.50 a sq.ft.- I wonder what value is put on that and if there are many more like it?"

Seems good value to me. A 2.4yr payback and a property once let which will be valued on perhaps a 9% yield for a capitalised value of £50/sq ft.

Just part and parcel of the routine aspect of property management.

[ianbrewster] 30/1/2012 22:26

To be fair, the company is only paying £170,000 - just under 1 years rent. The rest has come from the previous client.

[sleepy] 30/1/2012 18:58

I am a holder here and believe it is undervalued. However it is not all rosy -
e.g. c.45% of leases expire or have breaks within 5 years.

I don't understand the following extract from the recent IMS:

"As noted above, on 24 October 2011 the Company completed the acquisition of the BT building in West Bromwich for GBP14.9 million. The property was re-valued at GBP18.9 million as at 31 December 2011 which compares to the gross acquisition cost of GBP15.8 million. British Telecommunications Plc is now the Company's largest tenant, paying GBP1.2 million per annum.

The acquisition of West Bromwich and other completed activity over the quarter increased the portfolio rental by GBP0.2 million per annum and reduced the void rate slightly to 11.8%"

Does it mean that, after allowing for the adiitional £1.2 million rent from BT they actually lost £1.0 million of other rent?

"At Kingsland Trading Estate in Bristol, the Company has received GBP0.3 million as a dilapidations settlement in connection with a 44,000 sq ft warehouse unit that became vacant in early 2011. The unit is being refurbished at a total cost of GBP470,000, of which GBP153,000 was incurred over the quarter. Terms have been agreed to let the property at a rent of GBP0.19 million per annum and legal negotiations are progressing."

Paying £11 per sq. ft. to refurbish a property which will rent for under £4.50 a sq.ft.- I wonder what value is put on that and if there are many more like it?

[ursus] 30/1/2012 17:41

I suppose one cd look upon it as an example of a Chinese wall in operation, but agree not encouraging....

[skyship] 30/1/2012 17:31

Two late trades - 750k bought @ 33p

[skyship] 30/1/2012 17:01

ASMO - I remember well that you were one of the ZEROs faithfuls - hence the reference...

Bizarre - I posted in 442 above: "...and I suspect all will become clearer when the seller is finally revealed from a "Holdings" statement."

Well, I admit to being totally confused by the RNS which arrived just 11mins later!!!

Our new investment manager stable Schroders REDUCES its holding by over 10% from 39.788m to 35.755m - taking them from over 11% to just under 10%.

Can anyone suggest any reason why they would be doing that....I admit I am mystified.

[seekerofvalue] 30/1/2012 16:46

SKYSHIP I made a small purchase, increasing my risk quota. If the dividend can be maintained then I will be happy to wait for fuller realisation.

[asmodeus] 30/1/2012 16:37

Yes, quite correct, Skyship, and I was one of them, as you probably remember.