Mountview Estates Share Discussion Threads

[strathroyal] 14/6/2018 11:06

I too thought the CEO comments were interesting. Presumably they were addressed to members of the concert party and encouraging them to diversify their portfolios by use of the (enhanced) dividend income rather than considering selling their shares. This seems to be one of the more likely family controlled companies that might be taken over. I say this because at the last AGM over 20% of shareholders voted against the resolutions yet the annual report only shows one notifiable stake that doesn't belong to the concert party and that was only just over 4%. So perhaps the concert party isn't held together with superglue.

[catsick] 14/6/2018 07:55

I would guess as all the family receive huge amounts in these divs they will be quite sensitive to div taxation issues, cant say it bothers me tho as I pay nothing ...

[jonwig] 14/6/2018 06:52

Yes, I'm quite relaxed about these. Note the way the CEO's comments are much longer than usual, and I sense some thoughts about "Life after Mountview" - ie. return some capital as the traditional business contracts, rather than push expansion into new areas. If so there's plenty of hidden value to unlock. I wonder if he's aware that there's a rumour that the Budget will align dividend tax with income tax (ie. same at 20%)? If so, that partly explains the increase. I'm willing to add if the price drops hard today, though I sense it won't!

[catsick] 14/6/2018 06:42

Results so-so taking longer to sell stuff so profit realizations are slowing but the margins are still fat on what they are selling, increasing div makes sense as leverage is still negligible .

[tiswas] 29/5/2018 17:49

The trouble is the share price has gone nowhere in 3 years and the divi is not exactly enticing. But knowing me I will get bored and sell up and then they will sell up the following day for 30-40% more!

[robowen65] 29/5/2018 16:58

Can we expect anything significant in term of news?.

[jonwig] 29/5/2018 15:42

tiswas - at least it's the sort of boredom where you can go away and not worry about the house falling in! Yes, 14 June.

[tiswas] 29/5/2018 14:55

Results in a couple of weeks time hopefully might relieve the boredom.

[jonwig] 31/1/2018 10:54

There's been a lot of press coverage recently of lower London house prices. It looks to be more than just high-end properties. Maybe that's it. The full interim report is on the website. I haven't had time to look closely to see if there are any significant details.

[tiswas] 31/1/2018 10:42

Heading for the 105 support. Anyone have any thoughts?

[greatgiginthesky] 29/11/2017 12:12

NAV has increased by 6.8% because that is what the company has added to retained earnings after taxation and dividends. Note that the 6.8% figure compares NAV with the figure 12 months ago, not the financial year end. However, we all know that NAV is meaningless for MTVW because it relates to the book value of assets and that is a long way away from the present realisable value. Maynard Paton has conducted another good review on his blog, which is well worth reading.

[jonwig] 23/11/2017 08:38

gdjs - true, but it would have been good of them to tell us asomething! Maybe a fuller interim report will come onto the website.

[gdjs100] 23/11/2017 08:29

The ratio was only 2.0x in H2 2017 - not sure how much we can read into short term fluctuations.

[jonwig] 23/11/2017 07:45

Rather downbeat H1 results. May have leaked yesterday? https://www.investegate.co.uk/mountview-estates---mtvw-/rns/half-year-report/201711230700032851X/ Clearly Mr Sinclair puts it down to Brexit uncertainty, and I think I know where he pins the blame: ... until the bureaucrats in Brussels agree to meaningful negotiations with our government those uncertainties will remain. Have I perhaps read it right: property sales 2.7x cost against 3.4x in H1 last year - have they been mostly selling recently bought properties, or accepting lower prices? If the latter, why is NAV up by 6.8%? A cold bath for the share price?

[greatgiginthesky] 02/11/2017 16:12

Look at paragraph 5 of the Introduction to the recent Notice of General Meeting. Some shareholders with substantial holdings want a different independent non-executive director and a compromise seems to have been reached with the company agreeing to consider appointing another one as well as Mrs Jarvis. We will see if this is an attempt to shake things up a bit and get the share price up nearer to real NAV.

[dab26] 31/10/2017 13:16

Thanks Jonwig. Clearly the scale of the votes against the remuneration and auditors, as well as Ms Jarvis, suggests someone isn't too happy. Given the concert party control over 50% of the votes I'd have thought it someone was that displeased with the way the company is run, they would be better off moving along but then what do I know...? No obvious reason not to support the board it appears, so I shall act accordingly. Thanks again for your insights. Best, DB

[jonwig] 31/10/2017 12:57

DAB - can't thinkof anything! She's a property consultant (though in Scotland) and seems properly qualified for the job. And of course it's probably nothing to do with any tensions in the controlling factions here since the resolution is an independent one. Perhaps outside shareholders think either that they don't need another non-exec, or they would perfer one who will stand up to Duncan Sinclair a bit!

[dab26] 31/10/2017 12:48

Can anyone educate me as to what the issue was with Ms Jarvis' re-election? The voting pattern from the AGM makes me think that there must be something going on here, behind the scenes, but I have no idea what that might be. Would be useful to have some idea of what is going on when considering ones vote for the GM. From the notice of the meeting, I can't see any obvious reason why Ms Jarvis' re-election would have proved controversial. Thanks in advance for any enlightenment you can provide. Best, DB

[greatgiginthesky] 22/9/2017 19:12

True value will only ever be realised when the concert party decides to exit and I doubt that will be for a very long time. This share epitomises the long term approach to investing. Buy for a 20 year, 30 year or longer view to enhancing value. And when the next recession hits the UK economy and the MTVW share price suffers collateral damage, then that is the time to fill your boots with more shares.

[tiswas] 21/9/2017 12:31

Struggling to get past that early 2015 high! I would not mind if the yield were a little higher but goodness knows how long before true value realised.

[jonwig] 09/8/2017 17:44

Seems like the AGM was eventful. Three resolutions passed by 2:1 only, and one failed conclusively - reelection of Mhairi Jarvis defeated 87:13. I've been to two AGMs and she didn't speak, but wasn't the only silent director. Mr Sinclair doesn't like dissent, and another GM is to be arranged to try to overturn the vote! EDIT: there must be some rules about who is not allowed a vote on certain resolutions - eg. reelection, remuneration. I don't know what they are.

[catsick] 19/7/2017 16:02

The Allsop valuations are for properties with sitting tenants, when the tenant dies there is a big uplift as they then have vacant possession and can sell, the Allsop valuations are probably not that far from market, just have to wait for the tenants to croak...

[jonwig] 18/7/2017 10:55

gdjs - thanks. looks significant. The 2014 Allsopp valuation was the one which was keenly awaited, and revalued the TPs at about 2.07x their book value. So can we add 48% to that, ie. make it 3.07x book? That would look like a NAV of £270 per share against book of £86. Trouble is, that's the valuation uplift of the properties held at end-2014 and properties were added at higher costs between then and now, whilst some have been sold. So the true multiplier will be a lot less than 3.07x. And note 15 pours cold water on too many assumptions!

[gdjs100] 18/7/2017 09:43

I found it interesting that the properties sold last year that were in the 2014 Allsopp valuation were sold at an average premium of 48% to that valuation. Page 43 of the report.

[jonwig] 18/7/2017 08:37

I haven't found anything of significance yet, either. Except the Belsize Park investment properties which were valued 2.4% below a year ago. And yet Camden apparently saw a 3.5% increase in the year to March 2017: Http://www.cityam.com/266388/london-house-prices-haringey-enjoys-biggest-annual-house Admittedly I haven't read much of the report as yet.