Hicl Infrastructure Share Discussion Threads

[senhormm] 16/11/2017 14:06

I've been trying to forecast BTCUSD 1.58% patterns by looking at a straight trend line but decided to redraw it as a parabolic curve, which is basically what it is.

Looking at this information hxxps://blog.forex4you.com/trading-the-parabolic-curve-pattern/ we can observe that we are now resuming the bull run after Base 4, which could be the last run before its sell point.

Extrapolating the parabolic curve and the top trend line , it looks like they may meet at $9500-10k where I would expect it to be the sell point to cool off this parabolic rise.

[jonwig] 16/11/2017 14:05

Interesting political angle:

[jonwig] 16/11/2017 13:50

McDonnell was on about raising billions more debt this morning (BBC News) - for social housing this time. His reasoning, as always, that interest rates were extremely low. Has nobody told him that the day he's elected (if) gilt yields will go through the roof?

[apollocreed1] 16/11/2017 12:13

In response to INPP's statement, most governments around the world are over-indebted. If we start seeing more government debt defaults, they won't be able to spend on infrastructure or honour their current obligations.

[spectoacc] 16/11/2017 07:29

INPP's comment this morning quite interesting, tho I'm left with the twin conclusions that 1. The political angle has been way over-stressed; but 2. That I'm unconvinced any of the infrastructure ITs should be trading at fat premiums.

"INVESTMENT ENVIRONMENT AND OUTLOOK
The market outlook for the Company remains positive. Infrastructure ranks highly on many government agendas and this asset class continues to be a key driver for economic growth and positive social impact. The global scale of the capital investment ambition of governments is significant and we anticipate this will generate more investment opportunities in the developed OECD geographies in which the Company invests.
Political uncertainty and consequential economic risk present potential market-wide challenges, which need to be analysed and assessed as and when they materialise. The nature of INPP's investment portfolio and the active approach we have adopted to asset management both provide a firm foundation from which to react to any emerging risks. "

[jonwig] 13/11/2017 18:38

apollo - there's a discussion on the JLIF thread. perhaps visit there rather than repeat it here?

[apollocreed1] 13/11/2017 18:11

Does anyone know why the Infrastructure funds had such a large fall today? HICL down 1.47%,INPP down 3.81%, JLIF down 3.47%, BBGI down 1.23%
I suspect it's due to exaggerated fears that the government may fall.

[losos] 09/11/2017 13:52

jonwig - Thanks for that link, very interesting. I only get to look in here every month or thereabouts but do like to read comments from more experienced people in this area.

[jonwig] 01/11/2017 06:43

Interview in response to political threats;



No mention of the point I made in post #576. See my comment at the foot of the article.

[jonwig] 26/10/2017 15:00

Think about it this way: HICL invests in a company which operates a hospital's facilities. This company makes a profit, pays CT and passes on an after-tax dividend to HICL. You wouldn't expect HICL to incur extra tax.

The fact that HICL is CI-based means it can apply the same reasoning to any investee company's domicile and avoid a lot of complex accounting, but NOT avoid tax!

HICL's NAV is based on the discounted cashflows from these operating companies. If they'd paid more tax, the cashflows would have been smaller. Hence the (Labour) logic of a windfall tax.

[losos] 26/10/2017 13:21

jonwig - "investors need to keep up with politics"

Yes you are right of course, my post above was merely to say that these days it's actualy quite hard to miss any of the main headlines, the only 'on-line' newspaper I read lets me see all the story headlines, and I get a little bit more from the TV news 'cos my wife watches it.

Like you I can see little point in trying to discuss politics on a forum like this, what would it achieve :?: The taxation aspects of HICL (and others) is important but I know nothing about tax matters and hope to pick up a few snippets from people like yourself :-)

[jonwig] 26/10/2017 11:58

Losos - for purely practical reasons, investors need to keep up with politics - at least the bits from groups which might get elected. That's not the same as having an interest or an opinion, both of which I'd prefer to be kept out of the discussion!

LE4R - I agree on the whole, but surely BEPS doesn't apply. HICL pays no tax at holding company level, but each operating entity pays UK corporation tax. Double taxation wouldn't apply in any case, but a windfall would hit the holding company, I suspect.

[le4r] 26/10/2017 09:56

Politic is no doubt one part of it. Suspect the others are BEPS and the prospect of an imminent rate rise and what that means in terms of relative attraction for HICL and other yield plays. Clearly one or more of the largest iis is on the way out - once they've sold down entirely, I suspect the price will base. I know management here well and continue to consider this an excellent long term play. Sure the premium has come off and so some capital gain unwinds, but the diversification and low beta this stock affords is worth quite a lot - esp as markets now hit new lofty highs...

[losos] 26/10/2017 09:28

jonwig - "don't you follow politics?" haha - Don't know about donsan but I do follow the utterings of the muppet left wing, wish I could somehow obliterate them from my ears and eyes. I try, yes I really try, to not hear their twisted outbursts, but they pop up on all the media because of course many of the media are likewise dreamers and all have a hidden agenda.

As I've mentioned a few times life is getting tedious, stop the world I want to get off haha.

[jonwig] 25/10/2017 14:42

donsan - don't you follow politics?

[donsan] 25/10/2017 13:42

Bought these for 170p when it was tipped in the Times, since then it has just retreated - any reasons, and whats the outcome, TIA

[jonwig] 23/10/2017 15:05

Latest NAV of 3IN was 169p (31/03) so about 21% premium. Recent updates suggest that could progress. Rumours of sale of Elenia at a big uplift to book value - could add 70p to 3IN's NAV. See the 3IN thread for more.

I think we have similar views on HICL and JLIF.

[apollocreed1] 23/10/2017 14:45

3IN has an amazing track record but the premium is about 50% isn't it? I am not planning to sell HICL or JLIF either - I intend to reassess that decision around 2 years before the next election.

[jonwig] 23/10/2017 14:36

apollo - yes, I hold some of those too. And you haven't mentioned 3IN which is a class act.

But I'm exercised at what to do about my current holdings in JLIF and HICL. Selling at the first whiff of Marxist rhetoric just seemed wrong, and it's unclear how much a windfall tax would raise or impact their share prices. At least I've stopped automatic dividend reinvestment!

I don't often make party-political points, but if Labour are looking to win the next election, they should be enjoying a substantial lead right now, and they aren't.

[apollocreed1] 23/10/2017 13:46

... Also Greencoat UK Wind (GKUW)has a good track record without exposure to PFI.

[apollocreed1] 23/10/2017 13:45

At the moment, I prefer to buy infrastructure funds that aren't exposed to PFI or PPP, such as GCP Asset Backed (GABI), JLEN, TRIG or Bluefield Solar. GCP has a C-share class (GABC) where they haven't yet invested the funds raised, so I would expect them to choose investments that they foresee would not be subject to this windfall tax.

[jonwig] 23/10/2017 12:31

I wrote this just now on the JLIF thread:

I think Labour's plan to 'take back control' of PFI businesses would in practice apply to some of the earlier ones (say 15 years ago) where the contracts were written more advantageously for the private operator. More recent ones are rather fairer I believe.

Of course, that was Conference Talk, and the reality will be rather different.

A more sensible plan from their point of view would be to impose a windfall tax on the operators. (Suggested by Stella Creasey who is a canny one, but no pal of Corbyn.) Many of the contracts were written when CT was 25% or over, so the reduction to 17% will have led to higher dividend payments than would have happened otherwise.

[holts] 03/10/2017 13:47

If the contracts were negotiated thoroughly and had flexibility to avoid the stupidity of 150 quid to change a light bulb ( exaggeration) scenario , they should work .

[schofip] 03/10/2017 10:31

Do you have shares in the FT by any chance jonwig. Lol

[jonwig] 03/10/2017 10:15

Spec - during peak period of PFI contracts (say 2000 - 2009) the UK 30-year gilt yielded around 4% steady. The early years of new Labour were fiscally quite sound, and the fact that yields were steady when they loosened policy can probably be put down to PFI helping to keep gilts issuance and rates down. the government quite probably saved enough on debt interest to balance the equation.

Most PFI contracts work well, a few don't. A useful objective discussion: