We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register for real-time alerts, custom portfolio, and market movers
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Stock Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gore Street Energy Storage Fund Plc | GSF | London | Ordinary Share |
| Price Change | Price Change % | Share Price | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| -0.10 | -0.16% | 61.00 | 16:35:13 |
| Open Price | Low Price | High Price | Close Price | Previous Close |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 61.60 | 60.70 | 62.00 | 61.00 | 61.10 |
| Industry Sector |
|---|
| EQUITY INVESTMENT INSTRUMENTS |
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 26/4/2024 18:46 by cocopah Thought that investors might appreciate seeing what we’re up against … The cut and paste below is from a LinkedIn post by the CEO who was interviewed by Tamarindo Insight …… But O’Cinneide argues that, in the longer term, the numbers make sense. “Will revenues be a lot lower over the 20-year horizon that you need to own this asset for? I think it’ll average out. So as long as investors have taken an appropriately mature attitude to how capital should work, how leverage should work, how diversification should work, we as citizens and participants in the energy society should welcome there being a big stable of energy storage facilities in GB.” Cheeky @@@@ … “as long as investors take a mature attitude” … how about the CEO taking a “mature attitude” when he has overseen a 50% decline in the share price since it’s high and is unable to be anything but opaque on investor concerns? It beggars belief and took all my patience not to comment on the post in LinkedIn!!!😡 |
Posted at 27/3/2024 13:58 by cocopah So these are questions I’ve put to their investor relations team … I will share any response.a) the amount of consideration in £s that was paid for the recent acquisition … without this information the information in the RNS below is meaningless … “The total consideration for these transactions was settled via the issuance of 9,700,000 new Ordinary Shares in the capital of the Company (the "Ordinary Shares") issued at 111.0 pence per Ordinary Share[1], plus cash consideration.” b) clarity on the dividend cover, if it is only 0.6 (which I and others including the analysts believe it is) then investors need to hear that loud and clear AND when it will really be 1.0. We don’t need confusion about the ‘operational&# c) How much income will be required to achieve the above AND service the borrowing on the debt below? “The Company intends to utilise its debt to c.15% of GAV by December-end 2024 to build out its prioritised portfolio; this conservative level of debt will enable accretive projects to become operational.” d) Is the post period income of £16.1 per MW/hr inclusive of the damages payment and if so what is the actual income? “Includes estimated liquidated damages of c.£3.0m across the portfolio.” “Post-period, the Company generated an estimated average hourly revenue of £16.1[3] per MW/hr in January and February 2024, demonstrating the resilience of the Company's diversified portfolio.” e) accurate communication of monthly income earned until the discount to share price improves. Long term Investors are nursing paper losses of nearing 50% and need more than platitudes to reassure them. |
Posted at 18/3/2024 09:25 by daveoz1 At least the sector is getting some publicity. Some of you may have seen the article (two-thirds of a page in the Sunday Times Business Section yesterday) with the headline 'What to do when the wind doesn't blow'. Aha, I thought, this will be mainly about battery storage! Think again - just 8% of the article was about batteries. 'Battery storage projects are enticing to investors because of the double-digit returns they offer'. 'Batteries have really opened up a new investor universe' he gushed. Somehow I doubt that the writer is a long investor in GSF... He did warn however that 'the long queue to get connections to the grid could hold back their rollout.' |
Posted at 08/3/2024 10:19 by cc2014 Dividend policy· GSF reaffirms its dividend target of 7% of NAV for the fiscal year. It has met its dividend target since listing. · The Company's dividend cover has been trending upward and was fully covered in the last reported quarter (September-end 2023). Liquidity and Dividends: The Board seeks to reassure shareholders and address any potential concerns on liquidity management and dividends. While these are recognised as valid in light of recent sector news, the Board wishes to provide comfort to investors. The Company maintains a strong balance sheet, with sufficient cash to meet its contractual obligations and undrawn lines of credit totalling c.£83 million. In line with its prudent investment policy on leverage, the Company has a low debt burden and, consequently, a low refinancing risk. The Company also continues to generate a healthy operational cash flow and fully covered its dividend during the last reported quarter (September-end 2023). The Company continues to follow its mandate to deliver sustainable long-term returns for its investors. Based on the current year's performance, GSF reaffirms its commitment to a dividend target of 7% of NAV for the fiscal year. I don't think the dividend is at risk. If you take them at their word for dividend being 7% of NAV the dividend would actually increase from 7.5p to 7.9p. The market will go crazy if that happens but I see it as very unlikely |
Posted at 07/2/2024 17:58 by cocopah #scruff1 … so as requested, some feedback from my discussion with Ben at Gore Street Capital Investor Relations.Firstly, they are very welcoming of a discussion and interactions with private investors. I get the sense that they are frustrated with the current share price and whether the message is getting out to investors about income in the near-term future. I asked about the difference between operational dividend cover and fund-wide dividend cover and the reason the latter is lower is that it includes more costs. I asked if this could be made clear to investors. I also asked about the income and whether or not they could be more forthcoming in terms of forward-looking statements. For example whilst Stoney may not be contributing at the average £15/kwh revenue, it is contributing in absolute terms (as will Ferrymuir when it is energised very soon). He is taking that feedback back to the decision makers. He said it was unlikely that we would get a monthly unaudited NAV but understands that for GSF to be seen as a buy, investors need to be convinced that dividend cover is improving (ie. income) and NAV stability and growth is on an upward trajectory, because that drives the absolute level of the dividend. I left him pondering about how investor information (that would assuage current concerns) could be packaged and communicated in a simple way. |
Posted at 02/2/2024 10:53 by cc2014 What next? First GSF has clearly decoupled from HEIT and GRID so it's good to see most investors have got to grips with the idea that 82% of GSF's revenues are not from the UK. Perhaps most investors that are left well informed.I'd like to think that in the background GSF have been quietly reassuring investors and that this is the bottom and the share price will bounce from here. I have my fingers crossed. |
Posted at 01/2/2024 19:21 by cocopah I am currently in correspondence with investor relations, funnily enough this started before the news from #GRID today. I have a call booked to discuss why there seems to be a reluctance to update NAV monthly (like #SEQI do) and also to give forward guidance on dividend cover (until the issue goes away). I also want to understand the difference between operational dividend cover and fund-wide dividend cover (the latter being the cause of the recent slump since the Jefferies note).The call is booked for next week, so I am also going to bring up investor frustration at the lack of communication following today’s announcement by #GRID. Unless #GSF have some bad news to share it seems ludicrous that they do not put a statement out saying that dividend is covered or (say) 90% covered on an ongoing basis and that the dividend is safe. After all, they were keen to tell us all about dividend cover being above 1.15 for the last quarter so they can’t have it both ways (i.e. say that they don’t want to say anything now when they made such a hullabaloo about the dividend cover at the last update). In fairness the investor relations team at Gore Street are approachable and will communicate, so I suggest investors on here should contact them … if nothing else a significant number of approaches by those on this forum will probably result in an RNS.🤷 |
Posted at 26/1/2024 07:24 by george stobbart Jefferies published another note today 26/1/24 gathering feedback from investor tours including battery storage trustsFeedback from the Road We present feedback on the common themes from our monthlong roadshow focused on the 2024 outlook for alternative investment companies. Listed Infrastructure: The yield environment was, unsurprisingly, a focus, with questions centred around what level of risk-free rate would engender a broad-based re-rating of the sub-sector. That said, in stock-specific terms, investor interest was focused on the higher risk/reward funds, such as 3IN and PINT, which have little mechanical sensitivity to changes in risk-free rates within their valuations by virtue of utilising discount rates with material risk premia embedded. Elsewhere, SEIT was a significant area of interest, likely owing to the extent of its discount to NAV (of currently c.40%) and also the debate on whether the fund represents a bond proxy or growth opportunity. Renewable Infrastructure: Most investor attention was focused on the extent to which M&A activity in this sub-sector is feasible and what form it could take. In valuation terms, the risks to power price assumptions, both at the front and back end of the curve, appear to be well understood, while there was growing interest in the consultation last year by the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) on changing the payment structure of ROCs. Battery Storage: Questions were dominated by the weak near-term revenue performance of GB batteries and the implications for dividend cover across the sub-sector. As such, it seems that the progressive dividend policies of the funds are being reassessed by the market, with investors likely to favour more flexible policies that better suit batteries' volatile earnings. In this context, we saw an increasing preference for GSF versus peers, given growing acceptance of the merits of its diversification strategy. Opinion on the longer-term outlook for batteries was more split, however, with some investors remaining confident of the longer-term secular growth story but others concerned over the potential for return saturation in multiple markets and technological obsolesce risks. |
Posted at 19/10/2023 16:02 by scruff1 Got a lot of sympathy with your last sentence especially. I think its poor management of investor relations that has severely damaged confidence in the outlook for GSF. And as everyone knows confidence is critical for the markets.Its understandable that deadlines arent always met for any number of reasons. But its not hard to keep investors informed of such. Its not hard either to reassure investors when the share price drops dramatically that there is no reason known to the board for such a movement. They did neither whether or not that was a major part of the reason large numbers of investors have sold up and scarpered. Only the company/management can restore confidence. Ive been dithering for a few weeks now whether to sell up or buy more. I probably would have done the latter but I no longer feel confident in the management so I will sit on my hands until confidence is restored or gets shot through completely. If there are any positives its that the share price seems to have been a tad more resilient in recent days |
Posted at 11/10/2023 16:26 by tayle Plenty of small investors will have thrown the towel in I reckon. Barclays closed to retail investors anyway, why the sudden change of status, do they know something we don't ? I'm not sure how many Barclays customers hold GSF but would this make a difference if their retail investors are restricted from buying? Investors keep asking if Stoney is energised, I think a thread on another site suggested it was (not sure if that's more wishful thinking). Unless I've missed something I don't think it's been officially confirmed. Time will tell if The Professionals will move in and buy at a knockdown price.A lot of hopes and should bes on posts and lack of communication from the management doesn't fill me with confidence. |
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
