Newriver Reit Share Discussion Threads

[spectoacc] 07/6/2019 15:24

Ah but chucko1 - if you'd just received that pile of sh*te (ex NRR, obvs!), knowing it was a fractional share of a liquidating fund (ie WEIF), would you want out ASAP, before Woodford, or would you wait?

Could well explain some of yesterday's volume (assuming they've actually settled yet).

And good point - all these RNS's are a day out of date.

[chucko1] 07/6/2019 15:14

I don’t think those taking over NW mandates will look to sell out in a hurry. Some, yes, but they know they own the good ones cheaply. And they have no redemption pressures which has catalysed this whole fiasco.

[chucko1] 07/6/2019 15:11

Recall 5.8mm traded yesterday. Something’s going to show up. Effectively, they have been sold by Woodford even if by proxy.

Either that or someone is taking out a short in anticipation of future large scale selling. But that would have been done a long time ago.

[spectoacc] 07/6/2019 15:08

Yeah, so - we're wrong about the Woodford sales (thanks @Jonwig for pointing it out). It's part of one of the mandates Woody has lost. ie yes, he's gone from 20% to 15%, but no, those 5% haven't been sold and are still waiting to be sold (I'm assuming the new manager won't want to keep too many Woodford fiascos).

Applies to most of those he's RNS'd so far, ex a few like PURP.

[spob] 07/6/2019 12:11

IC podcast - talks about Woodford

there is a 30 second advert at the beginning

[spob] 07/6/2019 11:38

Invesco’s Barnett seeks to distance himself from mentor Woodford




Manager who inherited Neil Woodford’s funds says he has a more balanced approach


Chris Flood

Financial Times


Mark Barnett, the portfolio manager who stepped into Neil Woodford’s shoes at Invesco, has sought to distance himself from the crisis engulfing his mentor by insisting that his funds have a much more “balanced” approach.

Mr Woodford’s decision this week to stop investors pulling money from his flagship fund after a sustained period of poor performance has angered customers, drawn scrutiny from regulators and cast a shadow over those with ties to the former star stock picker.

Mr Barnett became head of UK equities for Invesco in 2014 after Mr Woodford set up his own firm. The two funds inherited by Mr Barnett have since been beset by investor withdrawals of about £17.5bn and battered by poor performance.

“My funds are much more diversified [than Mr Woodford’s] and employ a more balanced portfolio approach,” Mr Barnett told the Financial Times. “The Invesco High Income and Income funds offer plenty of value and clients are happy to support us. I am confident that my team will deliver the results that clients want,” he said.

The Invesco High Income fund has delivered a total return, including reinvested dividends and net of fees, of 16.5 per cent, while the Invesco Income fund has returned 16.1 per cent since Mr Barnett took over as lead portfolio manager. Over the same period, the FTSE All-Share index has handed investors a return of 31 per cent.

The fact that the two managers, who worked together for 17 years, have overlapping holdings in multiple companies in their funds has also drawn scrutiny given the mutual interest that such a situation creates. In April, Mr Woodford sold a 6 per cent stake in NewRiver, a listed property group, for £42m that was acquired by Mr Barnett in a deal conducted in the open market.

The price Mr Barnett paid drew attention because it was a discount of about 10 per cent to NewRiver’s net asset value, a relatively generous valuation at a time when Mr Woodford was attempting to shore up his largest fund, and comparable property companies were trading on much bigger discounts because of fears over Brexit.

Mr Barnett said he had “no idea” about the identity of the seller.

“The broker did not tell our trading desk who the seller was. That would have been against protocol. There were no discussions with Neil. NewRiver is a longstanding holding since 2013 which offered a 10 per cent dividend yield and is therefore very attractive to an income fund manager,” said Mr Barnett.

The two fund managers also both backed a controversial hostile takeover bid by Non-Standard Finance for Provident Financial with each manager holding stakes in both doorstep lenders. The deal was abandoned this week in the face of opposition from other investors.

“I did not know how Neil voted,” Mr Barnett said of the failed takeover. “I thought it was a good deal and still believe that.”

The holdings of unquoted companies have dropped to 4 per cent of the Invesco High Income fund’s assets and 4.9 per cent of the Invesco Income fund, said Mr Barnett.

“Around half [of the funds’ private company holdings] is in Oxford Nanopore Technology which is highly successful. There were plenty of buyers when I sold some of the shares,” said Mr Barnett.

There remained a significant overlap of about 19 per cent in common assets held between the Woodford Equity Income fund and the Invesco High Income and Invesco Income funds at the end of February, the latest data available, according to Morningstar.

“The level of overlap has steadily decreased over time. It stood at around 66 per cent in June 2014, the first breakdown that was available for the Woodford Equity Income fund,” said Peter Brunt an associate director in Morningstar’s manager research team.

Mr Woodford’s exit from Invesco prompted an exodus of retail investors who ploughed money into his new venture.

As a result, assets managed in the Invesco High Income fund have shrunk from £13.9bn in October 2013 to £7.5bn at the end of April, while the Invesco Income fund has declined from £10.2bn to £3.3bn, according to Morningstar, the data provider.

Mr Barnett said the “pattern of redemptions, small monthly withdrawals from two mature funds, is longstanding and has not changed”. He added that the funds were in “good shape”.

[spectoacc] 07/6/2019 06:50

I agree that once it's done, we should get a nice reboound.

My worry is that the likes of Barnett are taking them, and he's getting near 29.99%.

[chucko1] 06/6/2019 22:05

I think at this stage the extent of the sale is so well signalled that the move from 235p to 192p has taken the sting out of any future sales. The market appears to be digesting them with relative ease for large amounts.

And as we reach the end of the liquidation process, market players will anticipate this ending - you just done want to be caught at the beginning of the process. We are some way past that now.

I think it’s akin to a rights issue of a non-distressed company. Pressure, yes. But panic, no.

[spectoacc] 06/6/2019 20:32

@chucko1 - I look at it the other way, the early sells (eg the 5% NRR sold as reported this morning) are the easy ones, with other buyers filling their boots.

It's the last eg 10% when everyone else is maxed out that will be the problem - and IMO he's very much a forced seller of the lot (& everything).

[chucko1] 06/6/2019 20:07

Another 5.862mm traded today. Look out for any RNSs as that’s just shy of 2% of the company so would be notifiable if Woodford.

I’m buying here - not many so far - but as Woody clears the decks to circa 10%, market will lose the fear of a big dump (if the price holds up as it currently is, losing just a few pence on massive sales). Then in hard. Has worked so far with IMB where I see the selling having ended. Furthermore, that was frantic selling as he tried to bail a hell of a water out of his stricken boat.

[spectoacc] 06/6/2019 19:39

Well, they'd be wise to offload before he's a forced seller out of WEIF, but RNS's say it's him, down to c.15%.

[cc2014] 06/6/2019 19:00

I don't think they came from Woodford. I reckon they are the new manager for St. James Place who I think has spent the day clearing a load of inherited stuff.

[spectoacc] 06/6/2019 18:46

I don't think he's getting a bad price for those sizes either - am happy to be buying a few from him.

[hugepants] 06/6/2019 18:17

I don't think Woodford is getting that bad a price to be honest. Its about a 20% discount to forecast NAV which can be justified quite easily given this company is 60% shopping centres and the entire bricks and mortar retail sector looks like its heading straight down the toilet.

[ramellous] 06/6/2019 17:53

There were 2 sell trades settled just before 3pm for £420k each at 192p. Think we know where those came from

[scrwal] 06/6/2019 17:27

I wonder what caused todays drop as Woodf sold 5% yesterday with the price rising. Maybe he shifted a load today and the buyers for the last couple of days sold as well.

[strollingmolby] 06/6/2019 16:59

Exactly, it will get worse before it gets better but a good buying opportunity down here.

Track what else Woodford is selling here

[chucko1] 06/6/2019 16:34

Great information and it’s likely quite a bit lower today. 11% ish? Actually not too much damage being done which bodes well for the patient (patient - you couldn’t make it up).

I see this and IMB as a once in three year opportunity. Interesting price action on WHR as well, which is an IFF holding.

[ramellous] 06/6/2019 15:59

So yesterday Woodfords stake went from 20 to 15%. Holding around this level till he’s out will be good. Onwards after that. Someone’s buying them.

[porsche1945] 06/6/2019 14:28

Sooner toxic Woodford out of New' the better. Him having to reduce his stupidly huge weightings in the listed stuff will help the shares down the line as he has distorted and reduced liquidity, he has been abso toxic for every company he has gone near especially where he has got involved like Stobart, sooner hes out and closed down the better.

[spob] 06/6/2019 11:55

Woodford fights to save career after losing biggest client





Rivals say one of best-known UK fund managers is reaching an ignominious career end

Financial Times

Owen Walker, Peter Smith and Caroline Binham yesterday


The fall from grace of Neil Woodford has accelerated after his largest client, St James’s Place, deserted Britain’s best-known fund manager, in one stroke yanking more than 40 per cent of the assets he oversees.

Mr Woodford is now fighting for his professional life after already being abandoned by several of his few remaining supporters, while his loyal army of retail investor followers has begun heading for the exits.

At the same time the Financial Conduct Authority, the UK regulator, said it was in close discussions with the firm, following Mr Woodford’s move on Monday to halt investors withdrawing their money from his flagship fund.

Senior industry figures, who are concerned about the wider reputational damage of the collapse of such a well-known figure, said it appeared that one of the most celebrated careers in British fund management was drawing to an ignominious end.

“This materially increases the odds on Woodford Investment Management folding as a whole,” said a fund manager who has known Mr Woodford for decades.

A senior executive at a rival fund manager added: “The Woodford brand is finished. The honourable thing to do would be to return investors money as quickly as possible.”

Another said investors would be lucky to get half of their money back from the fund after any fire sale and described the decision by St James’s Place to jump ship as a “death knell” for Mr Woodford.

Board members of the Investment Association, the industry body that counts Mr Woodford as a member, met on Monday evening and discussed the trading suspension — or “gating” — of the equity income fund. Attendees, including heads of some of the UK’s biggest asset managers, said they were concerned about the reputational damage to the wider industry.

At the beginning of this week, Woodford Investment Management had less than £8.6bn under management, with St James’s Place accounting for £3.5bn or 40 per cent of the total.

Most of what remains after St James’s departure is the gated Equity Income fund, which has £3.71bn in assets but will shrink considerably if it ever opens again.

The rest is made up of the listed Woodford Patient Capital Trust, which has roughly £800m of assets, but trades on the stock market at a whopping 25 per cent discount to its net asset value; and the Woodford Income Focus fund, another open-ended vehicle that has shrunk by 14 per cent in just over a month.

Mr Woodford also runs a handful of segregated mandates for clients including the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority and Openwork, the financial adviser network.

Mr Woodford and Woodford Investment Management declined to comment on the St James’s Place withdrawal.

Iain Scouller, an analyst at investment boutique Stifel, said Mr Woodford needed to go public on what actions he was taking. “We need clarification pretty quickly on what the manager’s intentions are,” he said.

In the immediate aftermath of St James’s Place announcing its divorce from Mr Woodford, Morningstar, the influential fund rating agency, downgraded Woodford’s Equity Income fund to its lowest rank of negative, following a previous downgrade two weeks ago to neutral.

“By suspending dealing in shares in the fund, Woodford Investment Management has the time to significantly increase the liquidity profile of the portfolio without triggering a fire sale of illiquid assets,” said Peter Brunt, associate director of equity strategies and manager research at Morningstar.

“With portfolio positioning now focused more on sourcing liquidity than on investment conviction, we consider the strategy structurally impaired in its ability to implement its investment process.”

During a day of high drama, the UK regulator belatedly broke cover to weigh in on the Woodford debacle. The FCA is examining the investment approach of Mr Woodford’s flagship fund and its stance on European rules that cap investments in unlisted assets, according to a person familiar with the matter.

In an apparent escalation of what it has publicly said on the matter to date, the FCA warned in a statement on Wednesday that “where the FCA believes there are circumstances suggesting serious misconduct or non-compliance with the rules it may open an investigation”.

However, it declined to comment on whether it had opened any formal investigation into the events that led up to the fund’s decision to freeze investor redemptions on Monday. The regulator instead confirmed that it had been in discussions with the fund.

The FCA’s statement revealed that the regulator was also in discussions with Link Funds, the fund’s corporate director whose ultimate decision it was to freeze redemptions, and The International Stock Exchange in Guernsey, where several of the funds assets were recently listed.

This ultimately allowed Mr Woodford’s equity income fund to go over the cap of 10 per cent that is imposed by European Union rules known as Ucits for unlisted securities that a fund can hold. Three of Mr Woodford’s companies that listed on the Guernsey exchange accounted for close to 8 per cent of the fund’s entire portfolio.

The FCA is scrutinising this element of Mr Woodford’s strategy, a person familiar with the matter told the Financial Times.

The regulator said suspending redemptions was not necessarily negative if it prevented a fire sale of assets. “We expect all firms involved to uphold their obligations to act in the best interests of all investors and to ensure the fund’s assets are sold in an orderly manner. A suspension should last no longer than necessary to allow the fund to build up sufficient liquidity to meet redemptions again.”

Amin Rajan, chief executive of the Create Research consultancy, said Mr Woodford’s future was bleak. “The business is caught in a whirlwind with a momentum of its own. No easy way out,” he said.

Additional reporting by Chris Flood

[eeza] 06/6/2019 09:21

Be interesting where his NRR holding ends up.

[spectoacc] 06/6/2019 06:49

He's delusional, WEIF is finished IMO, and everything - including NRR, including the unlisteds, includlng the unsellable dross - is going to have to go.

And it certainly won't be resolved in a month.

[fenners66] 05/6/2019 23:38

Woodford on blocking fund redemptions - from the DM

"As difficult a decision as this is, and clearly frustrating for you – our investors – we felt that this was necessary to protect your interests,' he said."

Stopping you from getting your money and stopping you from capping your losses is in your (not his) best interests so he says.

Fund management fees safe for another 28 days then .....

Obviously despite losing a fortune in some of the worst stock market dogs for years - he still knows better what to do with your money ..... shows just what he thinks of his investors....