We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register for Free to get streaming real-time quotes, interactive charts, live options flow, and more.
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Stock Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Digital 9 Infrastructure Plc | DGI9 | London | Ordinary Share |
| Price Change | Price Change % | Share Price | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.00% | 9.20 | 10:59:32 |
| Open Price | Low Price | High Price | Close Price | Previous Close |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 9.20 |
| Industry Sector |
|---|
| EQUITY INVESTMENT INSTRUMENTS |
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 28/2/2025 14:40 by loglorry1 hxxps://www.arqiva.cArqiva Q2 |
Posted at 03/2/2025 12:04 by craigso The markets are indeed saying something, but everybody interprets that "something" differently.My guess is that some investor types - hedge funds, etc. - analyse the "catalysts" that would take a share price higher (or lower) and are strict about dumping positions when that catalyst arrives. (profit or loss) In the case of DGI9, it was fairly obvious that Aqua was the main catalyst in the short term. A decent sale price and the share price would pop into the 20s or 30s. But when the sale price was terrible, far smarter investors than I realised that it was time to get out. Barring a major surprise, there won't be any news that moves the share price needle until 2026 or 2027. The share price won't find a floor until those event-driven investors have closed their positions. There could also be somebody shorting the stock that hasn't been disclosed yet. |
Posted at 31/1/2025 23:54 by riverman77 Arqiva bonds seem to be trading OK - nothing to indicate a company in distress whose equity is about to be wiped out. Bonds investors normally a lot more sophisticated and knowledgeable than equity investors so I'd take this as a positive sign. |
Posted at 29/1/2025 15:58 by popit Selling at any old price now by the remaining Institutional Investors just to avoid the embarrassment of having to say that they own itRare opportunity then for retail investors to have a free bet at doubling or tripling their money As others have also said the idea that Arqiva is worthless is absurd They already have about 10p in the bag So this is effectively now a free bet at possibly getting another 10p for Verne and another 10p, 20p, or more for the Arqiva broadcast business and smart meter business A bit like a free bet at the casino You get your 10p back, but you may also get back 20p,30p,40p or more |
Posted at 26/1/2025 22:10 by popit The Arqiva contracts are “government backed” and obviously there are no “government backed” returns here or in any other shareInvestors who want the security of gilts will buy them Most investors who buy DGI9 at 13p will probably understand the risk and the potential reward Probably not much downside and a possible return of over 200% if the NAV is realised |
Posted at 19/1/2025 12:21 by cc2014 I have no position in DGI9 but continue to watch.I was quite surprised by how much the share price fell on Friday given the share price was already indicating an expectation of the assets being sold for less than NAV. Having said that what it does tell us is that investors expectations of where the value lies in DGI9 have been shaken. Or perhaps what it tells us is that most of the share owners of DGI9 are not long term investors but short term traders or investors and bailed. I am wondering if I have to stop listening to how great OakBloke is now. This and VSL show he's writing too many articles, doing too much detail and not applying the test of what something is worth in a wind-up. Still, I expect DGI9 will bounce on Monday, probably to 17p as the fall seemed overdone to me. Of course none of the buyers will be investors just PI's looking to make a quick buck. I think Arqiva is worth not very much and therefore any cash return will be a long way away. The opportunity cost of money makes an investment in DGI9 look challenging now on a long term basis. |
Posted at 15/11/2024 08:17 by cc2014 Gilts (UK government bonds) reflect the risk free return. I.e. the opportunity cost of investing in something which has an agreed return but no credit risk.In the middle of September 10 year gilts were trading at 3.75%. Today they are trading at 4.5% (due to Rachel Reeves wanting to borrow more money and RR's and Trump's inflationary policies) As investors get an extra 0.75% risk free, investors will demand an extra 0.75% on their investment just to stand still. Thus the price of assets has fallen (take a look at any of the renewable or REITs that act as bond proxies. Many of these are down 10% or more in this time period) (or put another way if you are borrowing money to buy DGI9, the cost of financing has gone up and you will want to pay a lower price to compensate) And don't even get me started on the impact of the long term higher cost of debt on the very highly geared Arqiva holding... |
Posted at 04/10/2024 08:54 by dog239 Yes I think the strange thing about Arqiva is its duality of value.If DGI9 owned it outright, it would be worth a lot in the NAV because it would be under our control. If it were listed, it would be worth similarly a lot in the NAV. The problem is no investor in Arqiva controls it. Owning a chunk of it isn't that appealing. So to do anything useful with it requires all the investors to agree. Given they've binned IPOs in the past, it is possible different investors have different objectives/expectati With regards to people saying there is no evidence of kitchen sinking the NAV. I think the directors saying the portfolio has been valued on a 14% discount rate with a 0% growth rate speaks to this. |
Posted at 12/9/2024 15:31 by petomi Some interesting comments about possible valuations above, thanks guys for this hard work. My only thought would be that the disposal costs will be quite heavy.The IC has an interesting summary of DGI9 vs CORD, which is still undervalued, probably tainted by this disaster. GLA ============= A tale of two digital infrastructure trusts - Investors' Chronicle (investorschronicle. The contrast between Digital 9 and the only other peer on the market, Cordiant Digital Infrastructure (CORD), couldn’t be greater. Stifel analysts recently called Cordiant “structurally robust”, emphasising that it has no debt maturing until 2029, and the dividend is covered; Numis analysts have praised its portfolio of “cash generative companies at attractive multiples, which are capable of self-funding growth, supported by stable and flexible balance sheets”. We’re all perfect investors in hindsight, but looking at what the two trusts did differently can perhaps teach us something. Cartridge says that a key mistake made by Digital 9 was that it tried to please everyone, by offering both an attractive dividend and the potential for high growth. In a changed funding environment, this proved impossible to deliver. Numis analysts agree, noting that at its IPO, Digital 9 promised a dividend that was uncovered and looked high in the context of its investments in “growth-hungry digital companies”. “This was compounded by the acquisition of businesses that could not fully self-fund growth and weak equity markets removing the prospect of raising fresh equity,” they add. In a nutshell: if it looks too good to be true, it’s probably because it is. By contrast, Cordiant was managed more prudently and was able to gradually increase its dividend. Cartridge also notes that there is a good alignment of interest between shareholders and Cordiant’s board, with chair Steven Marshall owning more than £8mn-worth of shares. Cordiant was trading at a 34.5 per cent discount as of 9 September, and part of this could be due to investors becoming sceptical about the sector after Digital 9’s woes. Once Digital 9 is taken off the market, there is hope that Cordiant will be able to “shine brighter”, Cartridge concludes. |
Posted at 27/3/2024 12:09 by donald pond The farce continues, as the 2 adults appointed to sort this out - Messrs Boleat and Miller - have both stepped down, leaving the incompetent original board still in place. I think this demands action and so have written the following emails. I would be grateful if anyone who shares my concerns and views on a likely solution writes in a similar vein. The more who do this, the better the chance of success.To Triple Point contact@triplepoint. Thank you Charlotte and I note that I have yet to receive a response within the 20 day period outlined in your letter. I wish to expand my complaint further to cover the recent abrupt and unexplained departures of Richard Boleat and Brett Miller. They were appointed specifically to bring fresh blood to the board and to see them step down so soon is extremely disappointing. I have a large social media reach and from multiple platforms it is clear that retail investors have lost all confidence in the board and in Triple Point. This has been exacerbated by the recent reckless and incomprehensible spending on financial advisers, with £17m accruing to Goldman Sachs alone, and Liberum, Peel Hunt and JP Morgan all appointed to provide services to the company. It appears that the focus of the board is on spending as much money on advisers as possible. This is, in my view, grossly negligent and indicative of an emphasis on protecting the directors, who appear out of their depth and floundering, from any further liability rather than acting in the interests of shareholders. The focus fn the board should be squarely on minimising costs and maximising the proceeds of sale of the remaining assets held by DGI9. At first glance, the proposal of Messrs Boleat and Miller to become a self-managed investment trust had merit and many shareholders are frustrated that this could not have been explored further. The frustration investors feel at Triple Point continuing to accrue fees based upon an NAV that has no credibility is embarrassing. That the board and Triple Point have not addressed this yet is a gross failure of governance and of the fundamental duty to treat investors fairly. I would at this point like to put myself forward for the role of director at DGI9. I am a Jersey qualified advocate and was for 10 years a director of GCP Infrastructure Fund, a FTSE 250 company. Given the disastrous performance of DGI9, it is surely time for a new board to be constituted who can look afresh at the decisions made that have led to an investment that was widely perceived as a relatively safe play losing over 80% of its value. I would suggest a board of Messrs Boleat, Miller and myself would at least create confidence that all avenues to protecting shareholder value are being pursued. I am sharing this email on social media and with the Jersey Financial Services Commission and encouraging others to write to you in support of this approach. Yours To: info@jerseyfsc.org Dear Sir/Madam, I used to work in a senior role at the JFSC, and thought I would share the above complaint with you, a copy of which is attached. Digital 9 is a Jersey company listed on the LSE that has lost over 80% of its value and become an embarrassment. The board appear unable to hold the manager to account and, most worryingly, Richard Boleat and Brett Miller, two experienced professional NEDs brought in to sort out the mess have stepped down after they clearly felt that they were not being listened to. This is causing a huge loss of investor confidence on top of the destruction of shareholder value. It is clear that the manager, Triple Point, did not understand the financial implications of one of the investments and they made, and the board did not have the wherewithal to hold them to account. It is hugely concerning from a corporate governance perspective that the board that were unable to understand what they are doing are still in place, while the directors appointed to bring new expertise have left. The time has come for the regulator to step in, both in order to assist investors and to support the reputation of the Island. |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions
Hot Features
Premium
