Buy
Sell
Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Ground Rents Income Fund Plc LSE:GRIO London Ordinary Share GB00B715WG26 ORD 50P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  0.00 0.0% 74.00 73.00 75.00 74.00 74.00 74.00 17,666 00:00:00
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
General Financial 5.4 -10.7 -11.1 - 72

Ground Rents Income Share Discussion Threads

Showing 176 to 193 of 200 messages
Chat Pages: 8  7  6  5  4  3  2  1
DateSubjectAuthorDiscuss
31/10/2019
20:41
Has taken me until Private Eye's arrival this morning to realise the reason for some of the rise is that leasehold reform got no mention whatsoever in the Queens Speech. As there'll likely be another of those along after the GE, that gain may get reversed - and far, far more than reversed if the comrades gain power, whether solely or with the SNP.
spectoacc
25/10/2019
14:45
Fair enough - I continue to hold in my SIPP to give inflation protection over a lot of years into the future. I think the industry might consolidate once the legislation becomes clear (3-5 years????).
18bt
25/10/2019
09:14
Agree not fatal. Far more pressing bear points on GRIO: 1. The Manchester cladding court case, which they could walk away from (separate subsidiary) but which wouldn't look at all good 2. Uncovered divi (separate issue to having paid previous divis "illegally") 3. Govnt finally getting round to legislating on leasehold reform 4. Small size of the co/disproportionate fees/inability to grow when trading at (theoretical) discount to NAV Bull points: 1. Some inflation protection - cheap compared to Linkers (for a reason..) 2. Asset management initiatives - fewer than with most property plays, but they're proving there's still some
spectoacc
22/10/2019
06:43
Not a rise I've been buying but yes - with Brexit ongoing, there's a distinct lack of Parliamentary time (or will) to get on with leasehold reforms. Not sure what to make of this, other than that it's no surprise from GRIO: "In addition, the Company also intends to regularise the position with respect to historic dividends, in relation to which the Company has recently become aware that such dividends were made otherwise than in accordance with the provisions of the Companies Act 2006. In order to put the potentially affected parties in the position which they were always intended to be, the Company is proposing to waive any and all claims which it has or may have in respect of either current or former shareholders, or current or former directors, in relation to such dividends." I assume today's distributable reserves issue relates to not having the historic profits to be paying out divis - ie paying from capital? But glad to see that, as a former shareholder, the company intends to waive any and all claims it has against me, in relation to the dividends it paid :) :)
spectoacc
22/10/2019
06:32
Some recovery from lows of c78p. Sensible asset management initiatives and quieter on the political fron for ground rents. ?gap fil to 94p next stop?
18bt
10/7/2019
10:45
hxxps://www.propertyindustryeye.com/labour-outlines-its-plans-for-leasehold-reform-as-criticism-continues-over-government-inaction/
spectoacc
02/7/2019
12:15
I read the fact that they could walk away from ring fenced assets as positive news - one bad bit of due diligence in any of the assets can only effect NAV up to the initial purchase price of that asset, rather than draw on the wider resources of the group. Sure, they've burnt 1p of NAV on this case but I think "utter fiasco" is a bit of a stretch. The present 25% discount (on sensible asset valuation discount rates) reasonably captures the risk here, so I'm neutral but I would be a buyer a lot before your hungry target.
erstwhile2
02/7/2019
07:20
Not sure new house leasehold ban makes much difference to GRIO. But I see they're continuing to pay out of capital - c.1.6p earnings, c.2p divis (made a loss but only due to yet another revaluation downwards of portfolio). No mention I could see of previous legal problems re Manc block? Still feels a bargepole stock to me, but it has a price - based on 1.6p for Half Year extrapolated up to 3.2p, perhaps 60p/share? Costs will be eating into it now they can't realistically expand. Edit - sorry, the Half Year Report did talk about the Manc legal problems further down: "In January 2019 a High Court judgment was handed down against North West Ground Rents Limited ('NWGR'), a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company. The damages associated with this judgment have yet to be determined in a separate hearing, for which a date has not yet been set. NWGR continues to evaluate what the next actions and consequences of the judgment may be. NWGR is reliant on the financial support of the Company to finance further legal action and to comply with the judgment. The Company continues to review its own obligations in regard to NWGR and NWGR's obligations under the judgment." And "Due to the legal action and uncertainty of its outcome in September 2018, the value of the Building was reduced to GBP100,000 in the accounts of NWGR. NWGR continues to pursue Carillion's insurers and sub-contractors under collateral warranties. NWGR has no external third-party debt and is ring-fenced from the wider group. During the period, NWGR incurred costs of approximately GBP1.1 million in relation to the judgment and will incur further sums as part of seeking to comply with the judgment timetable. NWGR is reliant on the financial support of the Company as its parent to finance further legal action and any decision on future funding requests will have appropriate regard to shareholders interests together with the interest of other stakeholders." Which sounds to me like they might attempt to walk away from NWGR! But not before having incurred £1.1m - and more - in costs. An utter fiasco for an Investment Trust, and are any similar grenades lurking elsewhere in the portfolio? Not what shareholders signed up to when they invested in GRIO. Changing my target price to "below 50p, bordering on uninvestable".
spectoacc
09/5/2019
19:58
Agreed, not cheap enough for me yet, tho', like you, not sure what price would tempt me...
cwa1
09/5/2019
19:56
@CWA1 - also a non-holder, tho not so content after taking a bath on them! Wonder at what price they'd be a long - divi nothing to write home about and wasn't even covered. 80p? 60p? Everything has its price, but GRIO not got to it yet :)
spectoacc
09/5/2019
19:54
A reasonably content non-holder here!
cwa1
09/5/2019
19:53
Struggle to see how this won't just wither away - are they still paying the divi partially out of capital? Does the NAV reflect the court judgement against them? Where are we with legislation? Costs need to be cut too - chances of them growing into the cost base now seem remote.
spectoacc
31/3/2019
07:35
Investor Report a fortnight ago made for pretty grim reading too - with not much more detail on the legal case: hTTp://www.rns-pdf.londonstockexchange.com/rns/5128S_1-2019-3-11.pdf
spectoacc
30/3/2019
22:43
Brokenshire announces industry pledge to crack down on toxic leasehold deals https://www.lease-advice.org/news-item/brokenshire-announces-industry-pledge-to-crack-down-on-toxic-leasehold-deals/
sikhthetech
12/2/2019
08:36
My error ....doh
slicethepie
12/2/2019
08:23
@slice - that's Brum, this is Beetham Tower Manchester - any idea what they paid for it? [Edit - this one it seems, so pre-IPO: hxxp://www.groundrentsincomefund.com/portfolio/beetham-tower-manchester/ [Edit 2 - seems they paid £9.6m for "an established portfolio" consisting of Beetham, Gatehouse, & Masshouse, which doesn't tie in with the link above. What I'd like to know is - are any others in their portfolio at risk of multi millions of costs, whether ultimately recoverable or not? And what does this mean for the uncovered dividend?] Also realised there's no mention in today's RNS of: "In a second issue considered by the court, BML is also entitled to damages in respect of the release of dirty water into the water supply of the building due to lack of maintenance. BML is entitled to two-thirds of its costs in respect of an interim injunction it sought in connection with the water supply issue, such costs will be determined at a future date. "
spectoacc
12/2/2019
08:10
From the 27 June 2018 :interims for mar 2018 interimsSome heads should role !Beetham Tower BirminghamIn November, the residential head-lease interest of Beetham Tower Birmingham was completed. The 39-floor mixed-use building, designed by SimpsonHaugh, was built in 2006. The 152 apartments generate £25,950 of total ground rent linked to 21-year RPI, although a non-peppercorn rent linked to five-year RPI is payable to the freeholder, which brings net ground rent to £13,288.The Group paid £152,000 for the asset, giving a gross initial ground rent yield of 8.74%, which should provide an excellent income return on capital deployed, partly due to the unique ground rent review pattern secured against one of Birmingham's most recognisable buildings.
slicethepie
12/2/2019
07:31
An AGM statement that is actually an RNS about the court case they lost. On the plus side, they seem confident they can recover the £4m remedial costs and maybe the legals too. On the negative side, they've got to spend the £4m, spend the legal fees, then hope to recoup it: "However, in order to comply with the judgment NWGR will be required to finance the remedial work and any litigation costs while seeking recovery from Carillion's Insurers and BUG. There can be no guarantee that NWGR will be successful in that recovery, but it has received legal and expert advice which suggests that its case is strong. "
spectoacc
Chat Pages: 8  7  6  5  4  3  2  1
ADVFN Advertorial
Your Recent History
LSE
GRIO
Ground Ren..
Register now to watch these stocks streaming on the ADVFN Monitor.

Monitor lets you view up to 110 of your favourite stocks at once and is completely free to use.

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

P: V: D:20201026 11:26:40