We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register for streaming realtime charts, analysis tools, and prices.
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Stock Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hipgnosis Songs Fund Limited | SONG | London | Ordinary Share |
| Price Change | Price Change % | Share Price | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| -0.10 | -0.11% | 91.90 | 16:15:17 |
| Open Price | Low Price | High Price | Close Price | Previous Close |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 91.50 | 91.40 | 92.00 | 91.90 | 92.00 |
| Industry Sector |
|---|
| EQUITY INVESTMENT INSTRUMENTS |
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 18/4/2024 17:23 by elbrus55 To be fair this company is a financial asset much more than it is a real business. There are some esoteric risks but there is no risk premium expected on non-correlated risks under basic CAPM theory.If you compare it to the return on longterm government bond (including indexed linked bonds) in recent years it doesn't look quite so bad, even despite the management problems.I mainly bought it to reduce my exposure to equity markets.The fall in value is I guess mainly due to interest rate conditions which is another matter. Happy to be out. Hopefully the acquirer will manage it more competently for their investors. |
Posted at 28/3/2024 09:06 by tonysss13 Hipgnosis Songs Fund Limited ("Hipgnosis" or the "Company")Final Due Diligence Findings The Board of Hipgnosis Songs Fund today provides an update on the findings of the due diligence that has been conducted on the Company's assets as part of the Strategic Review. The Board appointed Shot Tower Capital, LLC ("Shot Tower") as lead adviser to provide an independent valuation of the Company's assets. On 4 March 2024, the Company announced that Shot Tower had provided the Board with the preliminary valuation report, as at 1 March 2024, which estimated the fair market value of the Company's Portfolio at between $1.80 billion and $2.06 billion. The Board has since received Shot Tower's final valuation report, which confirms that, based on their due diligence and analysis, the fair market value of the Company's portfolio is $1.948 billion, which represents the midpoint of a final concluded range of $1.83 billion and $2.07 billion. This represents a multiple of trailing 12-month net cash revenue after royalty and administration costs ($121.7 million) of 16.0x as of 30 June 2023. A summary of the findings of the due diligence can be found on the Company's website at www.hipgnosissongs.c The Board with its advisers continues to assess all options for the future of the Company. The Board will announce the conclusions of the Strategic Review, which will include proposals for the future of the Company, by 26 April 2024. The Board intends to seek shareholder approval for such proposals at an extraordinary general meeting as soon as practicable thereafter. |
Posted at 07/11/2023 10:06 by hohum1 You are dead right, Grahamg8. Too many investors don’t look at balance sheets until, suddenly, they realise that the NET in NAV means that after the debt providers have taken their slice, there may not be much left |
Posted at 06/11/2023 15:13 by apollocreed1 I think at a 50% discount to NAV there is still a lot of value here. The catalogues were valued by the same valuer that valued RHM and no suspicions were raised about those valuations. So even if it gets wound down at a 20% discount to NAV, that's still a 30% profit.Then we have large Investors like AVI teaming up to revamp the board and so I do think that they will sort it out. Ruffer also has a large position. |
Posted at 27/10/2023 10:17 by jeffian #925,IMO there's nothing wrong with the business model, just the people running this company. Today's announcement of the sale of Christine McVie's back catalogue shows there's still a market. They needed to focus on the income stream rather than the supposed NAV. Like many PI's (and maybe institutional investors), I bought this for a stable and growing revenue which would have supported a dividend, but they barely mentioned revenue in the early days, let alone their plans to grow it. I bailed out when I realised that not only did Merck and his crew have no idea how to run a company, but also hadn't grasped the key attraction of the asset; income. |
Posted at 26/10/2023 17:53 by grahamg8 Go to hipgnosissongs.com - song fund investors - company docs - forms of proxy for AGM/EGMhxxps://www.hipgnosi hxxps://www.hipgnosi |
Posted at 26/10/2023 11:30 by catch007 Chairman ousted 75% votes against his re election. 83% of investors vote against continuation and 84% votes against the scamming catalogue sale to Blackstone! |
Posted at 16/10/2023 12:17 by kohsamui A fire sale would not be in the interest of investors…trus |
Posted at 16/10/2023 10:41 by cynicalsteve SONG floated at 100p and issued a large number of new shares at well over 100p during the good years, so in theory they are a bargain at this price. In the real world I fear that a forced sale would give investors 80-90p per share, vulture funds aren't charities! |
Posted at 17/9/2023 10:06 by jong Quotes from the Citywire Article :-"The sale represents a 26% premium to the price SONG paid for the catalogues, a 51% premium to their current valuation implied by the company’s 30-day average share price but a 17.5% discount below their audited fair value at 31 March. This portfolio has a ‘Go-Shop’ This deal raised concerns for analysts as the sale is to a related group. While SONG’s board said there would be Chinese walls between the two teams, Liberum analysts said it had only provided ‘boilerplate statements’. ‘It leaves us with the question of where the really good investment team members at the investment advisor are going to sit,’ the analysts wrote in a note. ‘Are they going to be on the team that advises the company or on the team that advises Hipgnosis Song Capital?’ The note went on to question if the teams would use the same models to value the catalogues and if they do they ‘will think alike and not be independent in their assessment of the value of the catalogues’. The deal also raised questions of pricing, with Numis saying it was ‘disappointing that the manager does not trust the most recent valuation’ and the in-house nature of the transaction would ‘make some investors uncomfortable’ and lead to ‘increased scrutiny’ on the selling price. Stifel’s Sachin Saggar also raised the question: ‘How do investors know that Blackstone [the end buyer] has not cherry picked the portfolio’ adding that it ‘does look a little cute’ the transaction is backdated to the beginning of the year with SONG handing back $15.3m in revenue to the purchaser" |
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
