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 Shares Traded Last Trade
  0.00 0.0% 72.50 207,832 08:00:00
Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price
71.50 73.50 72.50 72.50 72.50
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
General Financial 5.36 -10.69 -11.05 70
Last Trade Time Trade Type Trade Size Trade Price Currency
16:05:21 O 100,000 73.25 GBX

Ground Rents Income (GRIO) Latest News

More Ground Rents Income News
Ground Rents Income Investors    Ground Rents Income Takeover Rumours

Ground Rents Income (GRIO) Discussions and Chat

Ground Rents Income Forums and Chat

Date Time Title Posts
31/10/201920:41:::: GROUND RENTS INCOME FUND ::::196
04/4/201309:17Ground Rents Income Fund plc - Investment Trust1

Add a New Thread

Ground Rents Income (GRIO) Most Recent Trades

Trade Time Trade Price Trade Size Trade Value Trade Type
2020-11-23 17:00:2873.25100,00073,250.00O
2020-11-23 16:05:2273.50570418.95O
2020-11-23 16:00:0073.4047,70035,011.80O
2020-11-23 15:46:0273.401,000734.00O
2020-11-23 15:11:2673.4011685.14O
View all Ground Rents Income trades in real-time

Ground Rents Income (GRIO) Top Chat Posts

DateSubject
23/11/2020
08:20
Ground Rents Income Daily Update: Ground Rents Income Fund Plc is listed in the General Financial sector of the London Stock Exchange with ticker GRIO. The last closing price for Ground Rents Income was 72.50p.
Ground Rents Income Fund Plc has a 4 week average price of 72.25p and a 12 week average price of 72.25p.
The 1 year high share price is 94p while the 1 year low share price is currently 68.50p.
There are currently 97,006,497 shares in issue and the average daily traded volume is 44,410 shares. The market capitalisation of Ground Rents Income Fund Plc is £70,329,710.33.
25/10/2019
09:14
spectoacc: 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
22/10/2019
06:43
spectoacc: 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 :) :)
02/7/2019
12:15
erstwhile2: 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.
02/7/2019
07:20
spectoacc: 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".
09/5/2019
19:56
spectoacc: @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 :)
01/2/2019
07:34
spectoacc: You don't get this with a Linker: "01 February 2019 Ground Rents Income Fund plc ("GRIO" or the "Company") Notification of Judgment Ground Rents Income Fund plc (LSE: GRIO), a listed real estate investment trust ('REIT') investing in UK ground rents, wishes to announce that a High Court judgment has been handed down in connection with the recent hearing of the case between its wholly owned subsidiary North West Ground Rents Limited ('NWGR') and Blue Manchester Limited ('BML'), a leaseholder within Beetham Tower, Deansgate, Manchester, (the 'Building') the principal freehold property asset owned by NWGR. In the Company's 2018 Annual Report and Financial Statements details were disclosed regarding NWGR's intention to defend legal action brought by a leaseholder (as set out within the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements: Note 22 Other financial commitments and contingencies). Legal advice obtained at the time of approval and publication of the 2018 Annual Report indicated that no significant liability or no material irrecoverable losses were likely to arise in respect of the claim. Furthermore, the published Net Asset Value ('NAV') of GRIO as at 30 September 2018 included a write down of the Building's value to reflect the influence of the legal action and the uncertainty of its outcome. The principal basis of the claim relates to the failure of the structural sealant on a number of shadow box units, which form part of the façade of the Building, and the question of whether or not the remedial work done to date has kept the building in good and substantial repair. A summary of the judgment is as follows: The court has found for BML. The Building is in disrepair and BML is entitled to an order for specific performance that permanent remedial works be designed and implemented within a period to be agreed or the subject or further order although the provisional view of the court is that this should be within 18 months from the judgment date. Hoardings, which were erected by the contractor while the initial remedial works were carried out, must be removed within a period to be agreed or the subject or further order although the provisional view of the court is that this should be within one month and BML is entitled to damages in respect of a period of 31 months when the hoardings have been in place. NWGR was ordered to pay GBP250,000 on account towards BML's costs within 28 days. The final amount of costs will be determined at a future date. 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. The damages associated with this judgment have yet to be determined in a separate hearing, for which a date has not been set. There are a range of potential next steps which NWGR could take, which include pursuing the proceedings which it has already issued against the original contractor's insurers and the sub-contractor through existing warranties and indemnities, which, if successful, would limit any potential liabilities or irrecoverable losses for NWGR. The proceedings have been issued against the contractor's insurers because the contractor was Carillion Construction Limited, now in liquidation. BML has also commenced action against the contractor's insurers and sub-contractor through their existing warranties. As regards the remedial works, the scope of the trial was limited to the issue of liability for the remedial works to be completed, but not the issue of the quantification of the cost of such works. NWGR continues to seek advice on the nature of the remedial works required to comply with the judgment and their associated cost. NWGR will evaluate what the next actions and consequences of the judgment may be. NWGR is reliant on the financial support of GRIO 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. The GRIO board will keep shareholders informed of progress and provide a further update as and when appropriate.
21/12/2018
09:06
spectoacc: @Jombaston - yes, GRIO has offered the RPI switch. Unfortunately for them, that isn't what the legislation may come up with. Interesting to see how few leaseholders have taken it up. Fair point about retrospective changes - unfortunately, Parliament can do whatever it wants, and altering contracts is exactly what they're planning. Banning the future sale of houses on leasehold has no effect on GRIO either way. Being sub-scale is bad enough (disproportionate charges etc), but the continuing near-death of the traded market can't be helping - and if they do get to pick anything up on the cheap, it has a knock-on effect on the valuations of what they already hold. Everything has its price - but I suspect GRIO's is currently too high at c.£1.09, particularly when you can buy long-lease prop co's on eg 10% discounts and 8% yields. GRIO may be much more recession-proof, but it's not legislation-proof.
24/8/2018
16:29
kenmitch: Just in case there are any readers of this thread who do understand warrants and the previous posts about them, this one could prove useful. 1. Sadly warrants and subscription shares have all but disappeared. (Investment Trust Subscription shares are identical to warrants in all but name, but by calling them subscription shares they can go in to ISAs whereas warrants can't.) 2. There is currently only one Investment Trust subscription share worth considering. (I bought it about a year ago at 20p and it has so far only inched up to 24p to sell). It's Fidelity Asian Values Investment Trust subscription shares. If you want a lot of detail it's in this link:- (change the xx to tt for it to work) hxxps://www.fidelity.co.uk/static/pdf/common/investment-trusts/asia/fav-qa.pdf If you just want a few simple basics here they are. The exercise prices are 381.75p until November 2018 and then 392.75p until Nov 30th 2019. FASS spread is wide but it is often possible to buy and sell inside it. Current buy price is 28p but it could be bought for 27p today. So at the 2018 exercise price (call it 382p to keep it simple) FASS is worth 28p. (Share price is 410p). And at the 2019 exercise price of 393p FASS is worth 17p. Target a 10% share price gain between now and November 2019 to 450p and FASS will be worth double the current 27p buy price. i.e it would be worth 57p. So if you invest £5000 in the share the profit is the same - £500 - as when investing just £500 in FASS. For any who understand simple arithmetic and are not hung up on unnecessarily complex warrant theory the advantages of buying the sub share should be screamingly obvious. BUT BUT BUT..... just as GRIO and GRIW (the warrants) are not buys yet and might not be for ages, so also imo FAS and FASS (the subscription shares) are not buys yet either. Wait for NAV, which FAS report daily, to get moving up again before buying. If no increase in NAV then FASS might never become a buy. If it does increase and even if only a bit and enables the share price to rise just 5% to 430p then FASS would be worth 37p , which is nearly a 50% gain. Also remember FASS can be bought and sold at any time, the same as shares can. AND note that you don't have to sell them even at expiry date as the Trust Managers appoint a trustee to exercise any sub shares allowed to lapse, and send the proceeds, less their expenses, to your accounts. Finally both for GRIWand FASS ignore nonsense posted here about market makers pricing in bad news for ground rents or bad or good news for Fidelity Asia. Market makers have no interest in that sort of thing and prices depend on buying and selling. Also market makers often have little knowledge about warrants in general and don't need to have. e.g in the past when new issues started trading there could be some wonderful starting price opportunities when they priced them far too low and early buyers could double their money in a day! Or sometimes they did the opposite and started with the price far too high. fwiw I'll post here if news/events suggest either GRIW or FASS are worth buying but for now best to monitor.
23/8/2018
05:57
spectoacc: Hmm thanks @kenmitch, I've been trading for more than 20 years, including warrants, but thanks for "trying to help". OK let's look at it another way. Usually with a warrant vs share, you'd work out likely scenarios, and likely upside/downside. GRIO isn't going to zero, just about whatever the govnt come up with. NAV is going to c.40p if the worst case "10x" suggestion is adopted on everything. Something is going to be adopted, and eg 10x for resi doesn't seem out of the question. But even 20x affects GRIO's NAV (although it's already trading at a decent discount to it). So: 40p lowest (warrants: nil) 80p if more like 20x (warrants: 0.5p? Seems unlikely that even with 4 years to go, GRIO could get back over a quid when it's also paying out income, currently uncovered, in divis) £1 if some fudge that sees much of GRIO's assets avoid a hit - eg only resi, in certain circumstances (warrants: a few p of time value, but the point about them paying out more in divis than they're receiving in income still stands) £1.20 if legislation abandoned (say a hard Brexit takes up all Parliamentary time). Warrants - 21p? Looking at those scenarios, I have to agree that GRIO is probably too risky - upside back towards previous NAV is only one of about 4 possibilities. Very roughly per scenario, one of which we know is going to happen within months (please don't check my maths too carefully): Shares -55%, warrants -100% Shares -25%, warrants -95% Shares -5%, warrants -75% Shares +12%, warrants +260% I'd rather be left holding the shares, with a divi, than taking a punt on option 4. But the previous point stands - probably better holding neither. Options 2 or 3 surely have the highest likelihood, and whilst the shares survive either option largely OK, the warrants only thrive on Option 4. The fact the shares aren't going to zero, even on a Labour govnt, and also aren't about to recover highs or even get back to highs over the life of the warrants in most scenarios (thanks to the change in legislation), makes the calculation a little different to normal. Good luck calculating what stake to place on the warrants if anyone did deem them the best choice. You note yourself how little time value there seems to be in the warrants, but haven't grasped that the impending legislation is the reason why.
22/8/2018
08:46
kenmitch: So you're here too SpectoAcc! For you or anyone else interested, once hopeful about prospects again, the warrants are by far the best way to play this one. Exercise price is £1 and they don't expire until Aug 2022. Current share price is around 106p so these warrants are currently worth 6p. They can be bought for 7p so are incredibly cheap. BUT that's no use unless/until the share price goes up again! I don't hold currently, having offloaded mine at 28p a while ago. I originally bought around 4p and have been in and out several times, but have been out for months. The upside, for those not clued up on warrants, is easy. At £1 share price the warrant is worth nothing but will until 2022 be tradeable, probably around 2p to sell. AT £1.10 share price the warrant is worth 10p AT £1.20 share price the warrant is worth 20p etc etc So, say, the share goes up 10% to 117p then the warrant should go from current 7p to buy to around 17p to sell. i.e the warrant will more than DOUBLE for just 10% on the share price. And target a 20% share price gain (a not unreasonable target if "regulatory uncertainty" eases) around 130p and the warrant would be worth 30p and that's 4 times the current price! Those of you who only bought the shares in the past missed out on a brilliant winner. The warrants peaked, from memory around 40p. DON'T all rush to buy now! Warrants are very thinly traded and even one buy can move the price -but unless the share rises too the gains won't last. And it is not always easy to trade warrants and sometimes market makers will widen the spread and hit the selling price. So any tempted to trade GRIW could come unstuck unless/until the share price rises again. Share is stuck at present and until that changes money in both share and warrant will probably do little. THE one plus for the share is the dividend. No dividends with warrants, but with potential gains like that who cares? They can be bought and sold at any time (up to Aug 2022 expiry date) exactly the same as shares, though brokers will probably ask you to sign a risk form first. It's full of dire warnings that are a load of nonsense. The most you can ever lose, as with shares, is your original stake. And with much higher upside you only need a small stake to cash in. e.g £1000 in the warrants gives roughly the same upside as £13000 staked in the share! And the most you can lose is £1000 instead of £13000! And that £12000 saved can be used elsewhere!
Ground Rents Income share price data is direct from the London Stock Exchange
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:20201124 04:45:59