Marwyn Value Investors Share Discussion Threads

[mad foetus] 19/11/2015 08:44

jonwig,
it's a Jersey company but I assume pre-emption rights have been disapplied. That said, PIRC have issued guidelines about this and I am not sure they will be able to get such an authorisation to disapply away next year.

[jonwig] 19/11/2015 08:42

Because they wanted to raise funds and there weren't enough takers above 220p?
It can't be easy to get a placing away above a current share price.

You can wonder where pre-emption rights went. CAY-registered, I think. probably explains it.

[tiltonboy] 19/11/2015 08:37

Shocking!

He will probably take the credit for narrowing the discount...lol...

[skyship] 19/11/2015 08:28

Hmm - Robert Ware at it again!

Why should new placees get stock at 220p versus the NAV of 260p?

If the issue is limited to 22.73m shares and not more, then the NAV falls 4% from 260p to 249.5p.

[dell1234] 10/11/2015 09:23

obviously have to change the xx in the url to tt

[dell1234] 10/11/2015 09:23

Shares magazine published a Marwyn interview in August, all relevant today apart from eOne subsequent events - does include comment on Silverdell hxxp://www.sharesmagazine.co.uk/?p=55835

[davidosh] 04/11/2015 02:02

Mf.....If you want to do AGM summary reports then I recommend the ShareSoc Agm library archive which is very useful and you will get recognition for your work.



A CC will certainly include lots of questions....I set up tens of them.

[mad foetus] 03/11/2015 19:59

I live in Jersey. I can understand your preferences for AGMs onshore but Jersey companies have certain advantages (particularly the simplicity of accounting) that make them very attractive for asset holding vehicles. Perhaps I can do AGM summaries of Jersey cos and leave London trips to you guys!

A conf call would only be of use if they allowed questions: all of the meaningful discussion occurred after the formal meeting closed!

[davidosh] 03/11/2015 19:47

I may try to ask them for a conference call to replace the fact that the Agm was beyond the vast majority being able to attend.

[cerrito] 03/11/2015 19:25

Thanks mad foetus for those comments
Can I ask do you live in the Islands or did you fly over specially for the AGM?
I am a MWI holder but do prefer to own shares in companies who have a mainland AGM

[mad foetus] 03/11/2015 19:05

Thanks guys. David, they didn't mention silver dell and because it predates my investment and I didn't know about it I didn't think to ask.

[fishbournetrader] 03/11/2015 17:46

Can I second those thanks, MF. Good work.

[davidosh] 03/11/2015 17:43

Thanks mf. Did they say anything about the Silverdell investment which they had to write off ?

[jaws6] 03/11/2015 11:41

mf
Thank you and good report.
let's hope for good nav or action next year.

[mad foetus] 03/11/2015 11:37

Just back from the AGM. I was the only individual investor there but there were a couple of guys from an institutional investor.

The formal business was run through very quickly and then Mark Brangstrup Watts, the Managing Partner of Marwyn, answered questions. He didn't say anything that isn't public knowledge but equally, I didn't say in advance that I might report his comments so won't report things in too much detail. He came across as being extremely knowledgeable and enthusiastic about all of MVI's investments. Clearly the modus operandi is to identify businesses where there is unrealised value, and then import specialist management to find that value.

He spoke at length about all of the investments (except BCA, which was barely mentioned) and explained how they fitted into that strategy (even the wellie boot maker, an investment that I have never understood but which he was confident would bring returns comparable to the other exits they have made).

He was also very pleased with Invesco coming on board as a new investor.

The aim is to invest the remaining cash, with the focus on investing in a small number of liquid investments: although it wasn't directly said, I got the impression that Marwyn would not want to be as exposed to a single investment again to the degree they were with EOne. Having said that, the work they do is hands on and Mark said that they wouldn't want to have exposure to more than 6 or 7 investments. It was clear from his answers that he knew a huge amount about all of the company's current investments.

I asked about the timescale that investors should be looking at and he said that he was always aiming to double money every 3/4 years and that was at the forefront of his mind.

The other investor asked about the discount and the board answered that really it was a function of liquidity but that it also reflected the discounts in place when entities sell PI interests. Mark made the point that it had narrowed and provided it did not widen then for investors who bought at the discount (as I did) it shouldn't be such an issue, which I think is correct. They would consider buybacks but it wasn't a priority and is not necessarily effective. Investor relations are however important and they have just employed a new guy whose job will be to ensure institutions understand the Marwyn offering. Ultimately, new investors will narrow the discount, but the emphasis is on growing NAV.

I also asked about the IC comment and that may have been a misunderstanding: there is a redeemable class that can redeem at NAV next year but it is not anticipated that it will be a material amount: Marwyn's focus is clearly on managing assets and continuing to produce the historic returns they have previously managed.

So, nothing earth shattering but I left feeling that my money was with a very capable team and I am happy to continue to hold for the long term or until something changes. At the very end Mark crossed the room to thank me for attending and for my support, and my impression from listening to him answer questions was that if I was selling a big chunk of a business I've owned for ages, he is the sort who I could trust and see myself working with. But let's see how things pan out from here.

[mad foetus] 28/10/2015 10:43

I'll ask the question if I go to the AGM. At the moment MVI are sitting on a big pile of cash and the underlying assets are valued at a huge discount. If they distribute the cash to shareholders then the critical mass of the company is too small to survive. So they really have a choice of either investing pretty sharpish or else commencing a winding up.

I had assumed when they sold out of ETO it was because they had another investment that needed to be made quickly. It increasingly looks like it was because they thought ETO was fully valued, and what's more, they were right!

[skyship] 26/10/2015 14:10

In an extensive article on investment trusts in this week's IC, Richard Curling of Jupiter Fund of I. T's recommends MVI for GROWTH. He says that investors have the opportunity to redeem their shares via a liquidation pool at NAV next year. Is that so? Or is he referring to the small redemption/divi we saw the other day?

[fishbournetrader] 21/10/2015 17:10

I am a bit late to this discussion about the capital return.
Surely the point is that the 9.18% shares are cancelled so a shareholder who had 1% of the company before still has 1% of the company even though holding numerically 9.18% fewer shares. Therefore, it can not be compared with selling shares in the market and getting the current market price.
Of course, the net asset value of the company is lower after the distribution but that is the case with any dividend distribution.

[mad foetus] 21/10/2015 10:02

so it seems that Asset value Investors have left and been replaced by Invesco. I'm happy with that - I regard Invesco as one of the best fund management houses and I sure they won't be taking an £18m bet on MVI without having a pretty clear idea of where it is going.

[skyship] 16/10/2015 08:06

MF - we agree. My point all along is that the presentation was a masterful deceit. Instead of saying the redemption is the equivalent of a 4.3p dividend or capital repayment PER SHARE; they instead waffle on about "capital return equal to 24.6p per ordinary share" (see my post No. 776 above)

I think it was deliberate obfuscation; and many who simply skimmed the statement will have been misled.

Incidentally, a Tender is always a better bet for active shareholders as there is always the chance of a far better outcome if stock held in group nominees. Many don't tender, so the entitlement is split amongst other holders. Last year there was a 16% tender at MTH - I received 54% from memory. A great result.

[mad foetus] 15/10/2015 21:01

Sky,
It is more or less 9% of the shares being redeemed at a premium of 10-15%. If they hadn't been redeemed it would have equated to a 4.3p divi, but they have.
In the end, the amount being distributed is the amount paid out, whether by way of divi or redemption. Isn't it really the same as a compulsory tender?

In any event, today felt like a big day - lots of shares moved, presumably news of some sort to come soon.

[richied] 15/10/2015 20:54

I had some of these with Youinvest I have been paid (not released yet, though) for each 1000 shares, 92 redeemed at £220.23, I seem to have been short changed £26.33. Any similar experience or explanation?

[tiltonboy] 15/10/2015 19:14

I've disposed of the majority of my holding now, and will take my chances elsewhere.