Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Invesco Perpetual Enhanced Income LSE:IPE London Ordinary Share GB00B05NYM32 ORD 5P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  +0.10p +0.14% 72.50p 72.20p 72.80p 72.50p 72.40p 72.40p 140,876 08:01:21
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Equity Investment Instruments 7.5 6.5 4.5 16.1 119.26

Invesco Perpetual Income Share Discussion Threads

Showing 101 to 124 of 125 messages
Chat Pages: 5  4  3  2  1
DateSubjectAuthorDiscuss
04/9/2018
15:23
yep , the dispute has really served as a kick in the teeth and put it out of favour , good for picking up ,at a discount , a reasonable yield though .
holts
04/9/2018
14:45
IPE appears to be well out of favour. Having fallen from 77.31p at the end of 2017, the trust's NAV (incl current year revenue) appears to have been relatively stable since the start of June (see below) yet it is back trading at a discount to NAV, despite having resolved its well-publicised differences with the investment manager. The share price closed at a low of 71.60p on 14/6; current buys appear to be going through around 71.7p. This appears to be specific to IPE e.g. sector peer NCYF has seen little movement in NAV since the start of Feb & its shares continue to trade at a 5%+ premium to NAV. Not sure what conclusions (if any) to draw from this, apart of course from the fact that NCYF seems to be outperforming IPE on a NAV basis and this is being recognised in its continued share price premium vs IPE's discount. IPE NAV (incl current year revenue) 3/9/18 73.31p 1/8/18 73.15p 29/6/18 73.15p 1/6/18 73.36p 1/5/18 74.34p 29/3/18 74.94p 1/3/18 75.63p 1/2/18 76.20p 29/12/17 77.31p NCYF NAV (incl current year revenue) 3/9/18 57.29p 1/8/18 57.08p 29/6/18 57.66p 1/6/18 57.47p 1/5/18 57.23p 29/3/18 57.01p 1/3/18 57.66p 1/2/18 57.61p 29/12/17 58.58p
speedsgh
15/8/2018
14:25
Mike Lombardi (NED) has sold 184,340 shares @ 74.75p = £137,794 Director/PDMR Shareholding - HTTPS://www.investegate.co.uk/invesco-perp-enh-inc--ipe-/prn/director-pdmr-shareholding/20180815111830P8EDF/
speedsgh
27/6/2018
12:44
htTp://citywire.co.uk/investment-trust-insider/news/invesco-returns-to-enhanced-income-as-chairman-leaves/a1132970 Happy about this might have caught the bottom for a change!
tim 3
27/6/2018
09:39
Invesco have come to their senses. Bargain picked up :-)
rcturner2
27/6/2018
09:29
Resolution with Invesco Revised management fee basis of 80bps on first GBP80m of net asset value, 70bps on next GBP70m and 60bps thereafter, as previously agreed arrangements between the parties. The existing performance fee arrangements will be removed and the notice period reduced to 3 months. These new arrangements will take effect immediately and will be deemed to have had effect from 1 January 2018. The Chairman, Donald Adamson, intends to stand down with immediate effect. Richard Williams, Chairman of the Management Engagement Committee, has informed the Board of his decision to stand down as a director of the Company with immediate effect.
rahosi
25/6/2018
15:52
1.25 pence per Ordinary share. This dividend will be paid on 31 July 2018, to shareholders on the register on 6 July 2018. Shares will be quoted ex-dividend on 5 July 2018.
neilyb675
25/6/2018
09:53
Bought some this morning.
tim 3
25/6/2018
08:31
60k against, voted
rahosi
24/6/2018
19:05
agree I will definitely vote against the motions, as should all small shareholders. It is an outrageous attempt by large minority shareholders to feather their own nests at the expense of the rest of us.
rcturner2
24/6/2018
06:46
If it assists you I know some of the board personally and can assure you that they could have quite easily kept Invesco as managers and kept taking their annual fees. They made a difficult decision precisely because they wanted to do their jobs properly and not be pigs at the trough. ADVFN is full of examples of directors being motivated by self interest. This is a clear example of when they are not, and whether you agree with replacing Invesco or not, you should support the directors because to do otherwise is to send out a message that the board should not seek to hold the fund manager to account.
mad foetus
24/6/2018
00:05
I voted against too, Supporting the board and not Invesco Perpetual !
noiseboy
23/6/2018
21:41
MRF - Depends entirely on who you think is best looking after your own/shareholders interests and is most likely to do so in the future. Based on the information available in the public domain, I have decided to support the board & have therefore voted against all resolutions. One thing is for sure - I felt doing nothing was not an option.
speedsgh
23/6/2018
19:51
So what are we meant to do with the latest corporate action. Vote for or against the resolutions, abstain or do nothing?
my retirement fund
23/6/2018
17:59
Holding both here too, July Dividend announced 27th June last year, hopefully any day soon!
noiseboy
23/6/2018
12:33
Holding both
neilyb675
23/6/2018
11:50
Can anyone tell me if IPEI has any advantages over NCYF? I would like to add another bond fund to my portfolio but end up adding to NCYF because of the 7%+ income which has increased every year.
bonnard
23/6/2018
10:44
Is there any reason why they would not? Do people think the outcome of the dispute could have a negative impact on future returns,(I know if we knew the answer to that........lol) Gut feel is agree with RC and others looks like a good buying opportunity tempted. TIA.
tim 3
23/6/2018
09:45
I wonder if the regular dividend due at the end of July will still happen?
noiseboy
18/6/2018
08:33
I have picked up another 35k shares.
rcturner2
12/6/2018
15:27
HTTP://www.adventurousinvestor.com/761-closer-to-the-end-game-ranger-and-ipe ... Over at IPE – Invesco Perpetual Enhanced Income the battle is intensifying ahead of an EGM on 20 July. There are resolutions to remove two directors: Donald Adamson (Chairman), and Richard Williams (Chairman of the Management Engagement Committee), and two appoint two new directors, Hazel Adam and Howard Myles. As many of us suspected Invesco have confirmed that the row was not only about fees but also “concerns about Board governance”. Numis reports that Invesco thought the board was “overly aggressive” in the fee negotiations, serving a 48 hour ultimatum, and attempting “to insert additional, material changes to the investment management agreement that had not previously been discussed”. Invesco confirms that prior to its resignation, it had already agreed to cancel the performance fee and to reduce the annual management fee (albeit that it was in favour of keeping the performance fee)”. The IPE board has hit back with its own circular which states that it “has behaved correctly” in attempting to renegotiate fees with Invesco and then initiating a “competitive and fair process for a new investment manager when Invesco chose to resign”. However, it is “now being pressured by a very large asset manager” in a “cynical attempt to use concentrated voting power against retail investors” who constitute the majority of the share register. The Board believes the Requisition is “an attempt to subvert the rights of the independent Directors to run the Company in the best interests of Shareholders”. Personally, although I have some sympathy for Invesco’s position – it had done a good job – I’d be voting with the board simply as a matter of principle. I’m also deeply worried about its attempt to remove the directors which strikes me as overly vindictive. I think the move to renegotiate fees was entirely reasonable although one has a suspicion that the process might not have been handled brilliantly. It’s also clear that other investment management groups seem eager to bid for the mandate – assuming Invesco doesn’t try and grab back control. Overall, I’d argue that neither side comes out of this slightly sad affair smelling of roses but the row does present an opportunity for income-based investors. The funds’ managers have delivered an NAV total return of 102.2% over the past decade versus 64.2% and 78.0% for the IA High yield and IA Strategic Bond sectors, respectively. Crucially the shares have fallen significantly since Invesco’s resignation, and are currently trading at a discount to NAV of 0.8% versus a premium of c.9%. That strikes me as a potential opportunity to buy back into a well-managed portfolio of bonds at a reasonable price. The running yield is now closer to 6.8% per annum which strikes me as a reasonable number, as long as the new managers are up to scratch.
speedsgh
11/6/2018
08:53
Invesco fees row is a tragedy for shareholder democracy - HTTPS://www.ft.com/content/e07f8462-6a5f-11e8-b6eb-4acfcfb08c11
speedsgh
11/6/2018
08:51
@CWA1 - Yes, it seems the gloves are now off. Difficult to know who to believe in these situations. There's always two sides to every story and the truth doubtless lies somewhere in between... IPE publishes Circular to shareholders - HTTPS://www.investegate.co.uk/invesco-perp-enh-inc--ipe-/rns/ipe-publishes-circular-to-shareholders/201806110700038607Q/ Situation overview The situation may be broadly summarised as below: · A requisition has been served on the Company by Invesco Perpetual and Practical Investment Fund asking that Donald Adamson, Chairman, and Richard Williams, Chairman of the Management Engagement Committee, be removed as directors of the Company and Ms. Hazel Adam, and Mr. Howard Myles, be appointed as directors of the Company. · The Board believes that this Requisition is firmly against the interests of the Company's shareholders. · The Board started negotiating the terms of its Investment Management Agreement with Invesco in November 2017, most notably around the level of management fees being paid and the removal of the performance fee. Despite good faith negotiations, Invesco subsequently resigned as the investment manager in April 2018. They did so after initially agreeing in writing to a new fee arrangement. · Following Invesco's resignation the Board invited proposals from leading fixed income managers. Invesco were offered, but declined, the opportunity to participate in this competitive process. · On 22nd May 2018, the Company received the aforementioned requisition demanding removal of Donald Adamson and Richard Williams. It is the Board's view that if Invesco had fully engaged with the Board during this process, it would understand the purpose of, and need for, an independent board for the successful running of a company. Invesco's actions would appear to clearly demonstrate that this is a lesson they are yet to learn. · The Board believes Invesco Perpetual is using its clients' ownership position to disrupt the tender process for a new manager. · The strong proposals received by the Board from a number of high-quality potential managers demonstrate the untenable nature of Invesco's position. Every proposal received would result in lower management costs as compared to what it currently pays. No party has proposed a performance fee. Furthermore a preliminary review of 5-year performance suggests that, when measured on a like for like basis against IPE's unleveraged performance, Invesco's historical performance is at approximately the mid-point of the performances quoted in the proposals. · Costs matter - they go directly to Shareholder returns: They influence how much income the Company can distribute and what investment performance can be achieved. A further consequence of the lower fees offered by prospective managers is that dividend cover could potentially be fully restored and a positive contribution to reserves restarted, improving the long-term sustainability of the yield the Company offers. · The Board has behaved correctly. It first attempted to renegotiate fees with Invesco and then, when that process was rejected by Invesco, initiated a competitive and fair process for a new investment manager when Invesco chose to resign. · The Board is now being pressured by a very large asset manager. This is a cynical attempt to use concentrated voting power against retail investors who as platform registered owners or wealth management clients constitute the majority of the share register. · The Board believes the Requisition can only be seen as an attempt to subvert the rights of the independent Directors to run the Company in the best interests of Shareholders. · The Company is responding to a request for information from the FCA about the circumstances surrounding the requisition. · The Board understands that, based on previous conversations with Invesco Perpetual, Invesco Perpetual has historically very rarely voted its shares at company general meetings. Given this past prudent behaviour, the Board would expect them to take a similar approach on these resolutions to ensure that the will of independent shareholders is not prejudiced.
speedsgh
11/6/2018
07:29
Invesco fight back:- https://uk.advfn.com/stock-market/london/invesco-perpetual-income-IPE/share-news/Invesco-Investment-Trusts-Open-Letter-to-Sharehold/77631521
cwa1
Chat Pages: 5  4  3  2  1
Your Recent History
LSE
GKP
Gulf Keyst..
LSE
QPP
Quindell
FTSE
UKX
FTSE 100
LSE
IOF
Iofina
FX
GBPUSD
UK Sterlin..
Stocks you've viewed will appear in this box, letting you easily return to quotes you've seen previously.

Register now to create your own custom streaming stock watchlist.

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

P:41 V: D:20181022 18:43:50