Civitas Social Housing Share Discussion Threads

[chucko1] 15/10/2021 10:53

I do not agree that this has much similarity with Burford. Burford, to me, is more a matter of opinion about mark-to-market accounting - something banks and insurance companies have faced since time began, and upon which there are no perfect answers - just opinions. If they do not win Peterson, it hardly matters how they account for it but at least it will be easily seen by investors with the risks reasonably accounted for.

In the case of CSH, if the allegation is founded, the loss of value will be of an entirely different nature - a slow remorseless bleed that involves possibly the majority of their portfolio.

I had a few of these and I do not now as I felt SOHO now offers a significantly better profile of risk and reward.

[toffeeman] 15/10/2021 10:14

Where's the golden bullet?

right between the eyes

[chucko1] 15/10/2021 09:03

There is no golden bullet, except that a constant bleeding of value from leases with 25 years to run without a break is asking for trouble. The allegation appears to be that some of CSH's "contrivances" serve to mask the impact of this.

Long dated contracts are fine, but only so long as there is no mud within close distance. One cannot say that here.

Further, the 29.98% being non-material whereas 30% is material. A very poor look.

Also, Matthew Earle may not always be correct (though he often is), but as we saw with Wirecard, he is not easily, if at all, blown off course.

[hindsight] 15/10/2021 09:03

Brought a few, think will play out like Burford, post them having thier cards marked.

[toffeeman] 15/10/2021 09:01

>>ghhghh

Wake up and smell the smell

[ghhghh] 15/10/2021 07:53

This boils down to who do you trust. The highly reputable BoD and their advisers, who have 100% nailed their colours to the mast, or SF who have a vested interest in throwing as much mud as possible.

The SF allegations contain no golden bullet?

[cwa1] 15/10/2021 07:27

Either brave or foolish. Pretty much we've said all we plan to and you lot can go take a hike...

15 October 2021

CIVITAS SOCIAL HOUSING PLC

Response to Further Letter from Short-Seller

Civitas Social Housing PLC ("CSH" or the "Company") notes the letter issued by a short-seller in response to the "Market Update" published by the Company on Monday 11 October 2021.

Having recently issued a detailed and verified commentary in the form of a Market Update, the Company does not intend to respond further to this letter. CSH and its investment adviser continue to make themselves available to meet and speak with shareholders and continue the regular and professional dialogue with the Regulator of Social Housing and with the Company's various counterparties.

The Company would like to take this opportunity to restate all positions set out in the Market Update and specifically to confirm the Board's confidence in the Company, in its investment adviser and to note that the Company's assets and revenues continue to perform in line with expectations. The Board reaffirms its dividend target for FY22 of 5.55 pence per Ordinary Share.

[toffeeman] 14/10/2021 15:06

I think the shadowfall reports are totally damning - I cannot see how this can remain intact and I would not touch it with a bargepole.

[ghhghh] 14/10/2021 14:39

c. 50% of Civitas' portfolio is not leased to housing associations, local authorities or social tenants. It is leased to Civitas.

But it's not leased to Civitas, it's leased to entities with Civitas personal holding minority interests?

Have you checked out the main BoD? This lot signed off on the rebuttal. Are you suggesting that they are dodgy? Or that they would not have thoroughly investigated all the Shadowfall allegations?

[george stobart] 14/10/2021 11:06

Reading the second Shadowfall report it's really shocking to see that Civitas has continued establishing and controlling new tenants. Qualitas Housing (Qualitas) has been set up by Paul Bridge, CEO of Civitas.

c. 50% of Civitas' portfolio is not leased to housing associations, local authorities or social tenants. It is leased to Civitas.

When the tenant and the landlord is the same person, investors always lose.

It is shocking to see that the share price is still holding at the current extremely high levels of 88p.

[george stobart] 13/10/2021 16:42

Second Shadowfall report published today

[ghhghh] 13/10/2021 16:34

Share price implying that Shadowfall are hanging in with their short? I assume they are borrowing the stock so will have to cough the dividends plus fee.

[saltaire111] 12/10/2021 09:20

The regulation in this area is a toothless-tiger. They cannot push too hard because they run the risk of the responsibility for the 4,200-or-so Civitas residents falling on already over-stretched public services. The Government understands the challenges of looking after this cohort - and they will not take the risk.

Salty.

[williamcooper104] 11/10/2021 21:34

That was my gut feel It's a great example of why external management can be a really bad thingThe leases are likely to be restructured; but a lot of that is in the priceI'm curious but not got enough drive to go either long or short at the moment; annoyed I slept in this morning and missed the obvious day trade :)

[gopher] 11/10/2021 21:05

comprehensive but complicated.

Interesting what the market makes of this over the next few weeks. Personally think discount to NAV is appropriate and not much to go for at current level.

[george stobart] 11/10/2021 09:12

sell this dead cat bounce with both fists

[chucko1] 11/10/2021 08:08

Yup, comprehensive. Ignore the puerile (as usual) garbage from Stobbart.

That said, let's see what the "complainant" responds with. SOHO a reasonable alternative that has also cheapened significantly, and there is no equivalent issue with them.

[saltaire111] 11/10/2021 08:05

I’ve just bought another 22,000 shares.

Salty.

[pdt] 11/10/2021 07:51

Looks like a comprehensive reply to me. Strong demand for their properties, dividend covered from rising cashflow and good controls/oversight.

6% yield. 100% rent collection.

I do think future regulation will require easier exit from leases. But if they are genuinely offering value for money compared to the rest of the Care sector providers then I doubt they will have trouble finding tenants.

And while the share price is below NAV diverting funds from new property purchases to share buybacks seems better value for shareholders.

I am a holder - 6% yield plus capital appreciation as price moves back to reflect NAV over time. Having said that it is a small percentage of my portfolio so happy to take the risk. As usual time will tell and will the shorters close or double down?

[saltaire111] 11/10/2021 07:36

Why? Confirmation of next year’s divi. On first read, don’t see any clangers.

Salty

[george stobbart] 11/10/2021 07:23

should collapse further on this disaster response

[kemche] 09/10/2021 10:51

The delayed response tells you everything you need to know.

[wskill] 09/10/2021 09:58

Why are they taking so long to make up a story about the rather poor financial control they have exercised.

[wskill] 06/10/2021 12:57

Yes it makes it look that they are looking for someone to fall on his sword and the longer this lasts the more smelly it becomes.