Mountview Estates Share Discussion Threads

[brahmsnliszt] 11/5/2015 14:45

Nice day....

[firtashia] 19/3/2015 11:14

RSI showing oversold, first time since August.

[wjccghcc] 19/3/2015 10:36

Added a few. Now at 35% discount to NAV with the trading book uplift included.

[jonwig] 19/3/2015 10:04

This should be resistance of sorts, and lots of trades today might signal the end of the fall ... otherwise look out for about 80.

Company not known to make further statement between now and June.

[eggbaconandbubble] 16/3/2015 12:06

I might top up soon. I said 'might'!
Still, my money has done a whole lot better here than with a certain oil co. ;-)

[tiswas] 16/3/2015 09:39

A bit of profit taking? No budget rumours to worry about?

[eggbaconandbubble] 16/2/2015 11:22

And to think that I seriously thought of topping up around the 100 quid mark.

Any of you property co. experts got the share price on UTG - Unite?

[brahmsnliszt] 11/2/2015 20:23

Strong as u like

[jonwig] 11/2/2015 09:45

greatgig - they've promised full details in the FY results, which is probably what you are asking for ... all we got at HY stage was a single sentence.

If we don't get enough, it will surely be raised by someone at the AGM.

[greatgiginthesky] 11/2/2015 09:25

If by "property valuation" you mean what price a property would command if marketed today free and unencumbered, then I agree that such a valuation would be a nonsense. The only sensible valuation is to take the current market value and employ a discount for the fact that the property is not free (sitting regulated tenant). Whilst the annual percentage discount applied might be the same for all properties owned, being effectively the required rate of return of the owner, the size of the discount will be affected by, inter alia, the age of the tenant.
This makes each property very much like a Deep Discount Bond and here is where your comparison with Sovereign Reversions sits.
Some useful information to know would be the total free market value of the trading properties that were valued and the discount rate used to determine current market value.
Your input will be appreciated and such posts are useful for potential investors looking at MTVW for the first time.

[jonwig] 10/2/2015 07:24

One of the auditors explained the terms of the revaluation to me at the AGM, and the chairman confirmed the same.

EDIT: was discussed here after the AGM (August).

[topvest] 09/2/2015 21:28

Has anyone got the valuation wording to confirm? I think the valuation is the property valuation and not the discounted valuation based on a sale X years into the future at current market value. There is a very big difference, if you look at the accounts of Sovereign Reversions from a few year's back. Incidentally, were they not acquired by Grainger? I agree a takeover is possible. I'm just creating some liquidity in my portfolio and this looked a bit expensive. Still, as I say, a very good company but no longer cheap.

[chri5 wright] 09/2/2015 11:30

a very expensive whim to placate.

[greatgiginthesky] 09/2/2015 11:09

Extract from Chairman's statement 26 June 2014...
"Whilst it has never been a requirement to value the trading stock it has been a concern for some of the shareholders. The Board has decided to undertake the valuation of the trading stock and anticipate that the results will be published together with the Interim Report 2014."

[chri5 wright] 09/2/2015 10:30

Engaging Allsop to tell the family what it already probably knew would strike me as a pointless waste of money.......

The valuation cannot be admitted onto the balance sheet, so the only purpose can be that another party wanted it, as I doubt the Sinclair family did it for us, the minority shareholders, do you?

It feels like a bid, and I'm coming round to it being Grainger

Chri5 Wright

[jonwig] 09/2/2015 10:20

topvest - I don't think there's a lot of disagreement between us - but I am looking for a 400p total dividend for the year, and I want to see what the next AGM has to offer.

[greatgiginthesky] 09/2/2015 10:19

Jonwig is correct. The valuation was conducted on an 'as is' basis (why would it be conducted otherwise?) so the £160 is a true NAV figure. Therefore, the valuers applied a discount for the fact that the properties are tenanted and not available to sell unoccupied for some years ahead.
I think you may be confusing the uplift that MTVW gains when the property becomes vacant with the other 'uplift' that has been recently revealed as a result of the properties having been held on the balance sheet for many years at cost.

[topvest] 09/2/2015 09:53

Agreed. Yes, but I would say true net asset value is about 120p which is adding on about half of the uplift given the properties are not free to be sold for an average of 5-10 years or so. That's why I have sold - 2% yield and near asset value for a family controlled property company in a bubble London market is good enough for me, particularly when they have tripled in 4 years and the share price has gone vertical because of what I see as a poorly informed/slightly misleading Investor's Chronicle comment which has clearly caused a bit of buying in an already illiquid share.

It's a very good company though, so will probably still perform well over the medium term. There is also an outside chance of a bid as the Sinclair's may decide it's a good time to exit as well. The property valuation was the first hint of that. I think Daejan Holdings is better value than this now.

[jonwig] 09/2/2015 08:36

topvest - strictly speaking, IC say it right.

The TPs are on the balance sheet at lower of cost and present value. So MTVW had a present valuation done, which they never needed to do before, I assume.

The present valuation is "as seen" with no assumptions of occupier status or future refurbishment. So a wild optimist could add a bit to the £160.

[topvest] 09/2/2015 08:04

It was tipped in the Investor's Chronicle quoting a £160 net asset value. Isn't that a little misleading actually? The assets are only worth that when vacant, so obviously it can take years to actually gain access / the tennant to die! I've sold my few shares today - happy with tripling my money in 4.5 years with dividends on top.

[eggbaconandbubble] 09/2/2015 07:31

Did anyone spot any press comment over the week-end?

[jonwig] 06/2/2015 16:03

mad f - on balance, I think you're right to be cautious of others' stock suggestions. I've missed a few good ones, but also avoided some lemons.

Actually, I first noticed MTVW around 1971 when I started looking at the FT share pages - it was the only share in the property sector which was quoted in £ (something like £6+7/8 or thereabouts). I had a broker, and in those days they expected to give advice and charge for it. I mentioned MTVW - he said he knew nothing about it except it was hardly ever traded and, anyway, he wasn't going to trade them for me! In those days there was no access to live news for ordinary folk and all I had was FT and Investors Chronicle.

Then during the GFC and property meltdown I thought it might be a big beneficiary (low gearing tipped it for me). Patience might be paying off now!

[mad foetus] 06/2/2015 09:52

I am currently kicking myself very hard, having watched this at £80 and waited for a pullback since the last results. Well done holders.

[tmfmayn] 06/2/2015 09:49

I see the open was not that chaotic. But the price is up anyway :-)

I recall last year REC jumped 40% when they were included in ST's Bargain Shares 2014.

This year REC are once again in ST's Bargain Shares portfolio, but have budged <5% this time.

Just goes to show what a difference a year can make.

[tmfmayn] 06/2/2015 07:30

Not sure to be happy or sad given his record from last year with those Chinese tips.

But could be chaotic at the open here, with little share liquidity normally. Let's see