Gcp Infrastructure Inves... Share Discussion Threads

[williamcooper104] 02/11/2023 14:12

It's not something smelly There's dead rotting fish GABI lent money to a borrower connected to the manager - that's 5% of their NAV - it's not a small position Question is how deep is the rot; that I don't know But forgive me for being somewhat paranoid about small/start up managers post the recent debacles at CSH, HOME and DGI9 (that's more incompetence than dodgy though)

[ghhghh] 02/11/2023 14:09

Erstwhile

Rather than posting your analysis here, why not run through this all this with GCP? I'm sure they will be keen to reassure you if they can.

So please, speak to GCP, we'd all be interested in your conclusions

[ghhghh] 02/11/2023 13:17

WC

Instead of throwing mud, why don't you check the 2022 AR, page 124. This details that investments are made through SPV's for historical withholding tax purposes. They are back to back. Auditors are KPMG.

You are also erstwhile? It's just you both seem to have an agenda here. Why not contact the company rather than pumping out all these 'something smelly' allegations?

[donald pond] 02/11/2023 12:19

All of the GCP investments are at arms length.
The sensitivity to inflation comes about because of inflation linkage in the loan documentation.
The sensitivity to power prices has 2 sources. Firstly, it affects the ability of the borrower to service the loan, and this affects the discount rate the valuers apply. If the loan note bears 9% interest, and the asset is yielding 15%, then the loan will be worth more than if the asset is only yielding 10%.
But some of the projects are refinanced at some point, or go through an enforcement procedure, or are structured so that GCP has a form of profit participation.

[williamcooper104] 02/11/2023 12:05

At inception the loans were mostly equity but as it was PFI sub debt it was still a high quality credit asset

[williamcooper104] 02/11/2023 12:03

Doing that would of course mean that Gravis could now say that there's no loans to entities connected to the manager

[williamcooper104] 02/11/2023 12:02

Is it a case of Gravis/related entities funds develop an asset They sell it to an orphan SPV/charity Orphan funds itself by way of a loan from GCP which strips out the economics (possible there's still a profit participating note for any excess cashflows owned by someone else or GCP) So basically GCP then used as a conduit for the manager/related parties to fund their own developments Not saying this is the case by the way - but gravis have of course lent to themselves in GABI

[ghhghh] 02/11/2023 11:07

Have spoken to GCP

1. All GCP loans are to independent third parties. See page 124 of 2022 AR

2. Gravis has zero beneficial interest in any entities where GCP has invested.

3. Re equity buffers, see 'Average Capital Structure by sector' exhibit in 2022 AR.

[speedsgh] 02/11/2023 08:24

Dividend Declaration -

GCP Infra is pleased to announce a dividend of 1.75 pence per ordinary share, for the period from 1 July 2023 to 30 September 2023. The dividend will be paid on 5 December 2023 to holders of ordinary shares recorded on the register as at the close of business on 10 November 2023.

The Board, in its discretion, has determined that the offer of a scrip dividend will remain suspended for the period from 1 July 2023 to 30 September 2023. The suspension is as a result of the discount between the likely scrip dividend reference price of the shares and the current net asset value per share of the Company. The Board will keep the payment of future scrip dividends under review.

Expected timetable:

Shares quoted ex-dividend - 9 November 2023
Record date for dividend - 10 November 2023
Dividend payment date - 5 December 2023

[someuwin] 02/11/2023 08:12

Divi confirmed.

[ghhghh] 01/11/2023 19:06

erstwhile

Thanks but why haven't you raised these concerns directly with GCP?

It's just a couple of easy to answer questions and they are happy to talk to PI's?

[chucko1] 01/11/2023 18:15

Yes, Specto, although some were brought to operation and STILL went for a low valuation. Mind you, the buyer knew they were in essence a forced seller. They also had 46% of this entire "debt" fund in these ADs - which had zero pure equity.

[mwj1959] 01/11/2023 18:07

I wonder if the Board actually understand all this!

[chinahere] 01/11/2023 18:06

It is an interesting concept - if you are right and there is no equity behind these investments, then who benefits if they succeed? Not GCP as they are on a fixed income return aren't they?

[spectoacc] 01/11/2023 16:57

SLFR's were development assets really - some of which never got going. Presume GCP's are operating?

[chucko1] 01/11/2023 16:56

The link to the legal matter regarding Kelly Green is long and I have not read it before. No matter, brief inspection attributes a fraudulent representation to the party advising GCP, and no explicit blame to GCP (I can be corrected in part on that if anyone knows better).

Also, Kelly Green is a performing asset within the current portfolio, so I presume the case for it was resubmitted to OFGEM with new and honest information. But I have nothing further, so if anyone can add to our total sun of knowledge, that would be most appreciated!

[chucko1] 01/11/2023 16:50

0.38 is cited in the most recent report. A mixture of 0.25s and 0.5s. The average for the whole portfolio is 7.82% (unsure if weighted or unweighted, but likely not material). Shore Capital should focus on comparables, rather than its movement although an analysis of both is optimal.

FYI

22% PPP
65% Renewables
13% Social Housing

Of the renewables, 9% is AD which blew SLFR up royally - that truly was equity masquerading as debt. On a previous call, I asked GCP about the strength or otherwise of the AD positions they had and they were confident that they were operated well - and the strength/capability of the operator was front and centre of what mattered in these assets.

[ghhghh] 01/11/2023 16:24

Chucko

My reason for talking to GCP was to query a note by Shore Cap claiming that GCP have only increased the discount rate by .5 over the last year. In fact Mazers have increased by 0.71

GCP claim actual asset valuations are currently holding up well but sellers think these may fall to catch up with gilts. However imo that lack of new investment should reduce future supply

[ghhghh] 01/11/2023 16:01

Yes, senior and mezzanine loans to connected and controlled parties with no equity in them. Thats the point. they tell you its debt, but you own the whole economics of the whole enterprise, ie you are net long equity performance of the collateral. I guess I can lead you to water....

How can a loan be senior unless something underneath it?

I've copied your posts to the investment team so will be interested in their response.

It's just you appear to have an agenda. The Solar case is no big deal (£1 bn portfolio) and to accuse Mazars of grossly and presumably fraudulently over valuing the assets is daft.

[ghhghh] 01/11/2023 15:51

True NAV? lol no number, but of course enormously lower than where Mazars mark it for GCP. Mazars fingers are in a lot of these sorts of funds, DGI9, TENT, GABI etc etc. And they did Donald Trump for a bit. Usually a warning flag for me.

Mazars dodgy! LOL