Hicl Infrastructure Share Discussion Threads

[irkin] 11/2/2011 16:05

Very useful - thanks again :-)

[jonwig] 11/2/2011 08:21

A comprehensive review of infrastructure funds:



Free to read.

[irkin] 05/2/2011 15:40

Thanks jonwig

[jonwig] 04/2/2011 06:57

Irkin - it was a straight choice of price against NAV: 3IN was trading at quite a premium when I chose HICL. Then I overlooked the quick drop this week in 3IN's share price to around 114p, otherwise I'd have bought in.

[irkin] 03/2/2011 22:02

jonwig, any particular reason why you don't hold 3IN if you don't mind me asking?

[jonwig] 02/2/2011 17:34

Heaps - I think the more interesting thing is the recent (slight) fall in HICL, JLIF (which I hold) and 3IN (which I don't).

The press have picked up on some HMGov words about the rip-offs some PFI contracts are making, especially with schools and hospitals. The Telegraph has reported quite a bit, and I suspect stories have been planted by ministers as part of a softening up exercise, poking scorn at the last govt and hoping for better contract terms in the future, if not some rebates on current contracts.

Whether anything comes of this, I don't know. I suspect not much, though.

[makingheaps] 02/2/2011 16:53

A welcome rise today. any reason?

[jonwig] 15/1/2011 09:24

Hi blueliner.

I also hold JLIF, recently floated. This does make sense as a long-term investment if, indeed, dividends are linked to inflation in some way - with HICL they appear to have done, to date (6.10, 6.25, 6.40, 6.55p).

Of course, if new opportunities aren't taken up, the existing investments will run off as shown in the chart on p18 of the 2010 results presentation. The year 2043 shows its ultimate demise.

Being mindful of the risks involved ...

[blueliner] 15/1/2011 08:57

Thnks jonwig, like the thread title, might bring more visibility to investors.
Apart from PSPI I have nothing in dividend yielding property/infrastructure stocks_ HICL is a long term hold for me.

[jonwig] 15/1/2011 08:47

New thread ... "cnx" hasn't posted since the start so maybe won't notice:

[jonwig] 15/1/2011 08:45

This replaces the previous thread by including a News section. More information will be given in the header in due course.

As the company will change its name shortly from "HSBC Infrastructure Company Limited" to HICL when HSBC relinquishes the management structure, I've called it simply "HICL" in the header.

[jonwig] 15/1/2011 08:43

The PPP Forum:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Significant Holdings

Investec ......... 113,447,629 6.33%
Brewin Dolphin ... 106,312,906 5.94%
Baillie Gifford ... 88,980,620 4.97%
Rathbones ......... 79,585,759 4.62%
Legal & General ... 77,596,424 4.33%
Aberdeen Standard . 60,193,373 3.36%
Insight Inv ....... 58,112,668 3.24%
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[blueliner] 14/1/2011 21:30

cnx:is it time for a new thread, could do with RNS news in the header, new co name etc etc. thanks

extract from 13 Jan 11 RNS >>>>
'''''On the basis of the Conversion Ratio, a holder of 1,000 C Shares will receive 885 New Shares upon Conversion.
On the basis of the Conversion Ratio, application has been made to the UK Listing Authority for 97,350,000 New Shares to be admitted to the Official List. Application has also been made for the New Shares to be admitted to trading on the London Stock Exchange. It is expected that such admissions will become effective and that dealings in the New Shares will commence on 17 January 2011.'''

[jonwig] 16/12/2010 14:18

Tambo - the run up to 118p was equally anomalous ... I'd ignore the noise so long as the share price is channelling, which it seems to have been doing for about two years.

Can anyone really be trading this? New investments are made with debt which are converted to equity via C-share tranches. NAV growth is determined by RPI (or CPI) uplift, but so are costs, and how is the NAV realistically worked out?

The key driver is income, which should be payable in some index-linked form. So far, that's been the case. So you're buying and index-linked gilt at rather favourable yield, with the admitted risk that PFI/PPP isn't all it's cracked up to be.

[tamboerskloof] 16/12/2010 13:25

What's the problem today guys -1.5% @ 1325 unusual.

[chester] 23/11/2010 15:22

Thanks guys for the explanation. I also hold .

[cwa1] 18/11/2010 18:32

jonwig

What took you so long? ;-)

Seriously though, many, many, thanks for the quick and helpful response.

I'll mull this one over but I can't see any overwhelming need to invest based on our current understanding of the situation.

Cheers

[jonwig] 18/11/2010 18:21

CWA1 - It's a bit like taking a scrip dividend as opposed to cash - dividend reinvestment is one of the keys to improved long-term performance.

However, with asset-backed stuff, and this open offer, the cash for new shares is being asked for before the money has been invested. The way they are doing it means that neither existing nor new holders are going to make an "accidental" profit.

So taking up the C shares would be fine for someone who wants increased exposure to HICL without spread or brokerage. (No stamp duty anyway.)

Yes, you've understood it right - my problem is that I'm not altogether sure about the amount of money I want here ... and I think asmodeus above has the same thoughts.

[cwa1] 18/11/2010 18:09

Evening All

Trying to work out whether it is worth taking these rights up or not. Am I correct in thinking, as I think jonwig mentions above, that this will actually be a neutral event with the C shares being converted into Ords by reference to asset value of the share at a specified point in time rather on a 1 for 1 basis. If this is the case then surely there is nothing really to be gained in taking up the issue? Or have I missed the point completely? What benefits are there in taking the C shares up?

I'd welcome anyone more familiar than I am putting me straight on this one.

Thanks in advance.

[asmodeus] 16/11/2010 18:53

I've got mine in my ISA, and have been happy with the yield, and a small profit, but would not add to the holding without worthwhile incentive.

[jonwig] 16/11/2010 18:23

asmodeus - they are meant to be neutral in aligning rights of new (C) and existing holders ... ie. when C shares are converted into ords it needn't be on a 1:1 basis, it will depend on asset value per share.

Their model seems to be to take on debt to finance acquisition then pay down most or all of the new debt by issuing C shares.

I suspect this will work just fine so long as there is demand for such new equity, and that might depend on a stream of prospects and lack of large discount to NAV.

I've a small position here, as the yield is attractive and looks sustainable, but I'm not altogether clear about the state of the business model under stress.

[asmodeus] 16/11/2010 18:09

Does anybody here understand the implications for us for the C share issue?
I cant make out whether they are attractive, as yet.

[cwa1] 16/11/2010 08:37

Half yearly report:-



On behalf of the Board, I am once again pleased to report that the Company has maintained steady progress in the six months to 30 September 2010. The existing portfolio continues to perform as planned. We have sourced a new investment and an incremental acquisition in the period and raised £46.6m through the placing of shares under our block listing.



Our share price in the last six months has traded consistently at a premium to net asset value per share, in part we believe a reflection of our dividend prospects and balance sheet stability.



We are announcing later today proposals to raise further equity capital by way of a C-share issue, which will position the Group well for 2011 when we aim to further grow our investment portfolio.