Newriver Reit Share Discussion Threads

[rcturner2] 17/7/2019 10:35

chucko, I can't believe you are even asking.

Once any fixed deal is completed what deal is available (if any) will depend entirely on the LTV, NOT the income. A mate of mine his new girlfriend had exactly that problem after her divorce and the only option was the lender's standard variable rate which was nearly 5%.

[hpcg] 17/7/2019 10:15

Interest rates are going to zero or negative, irrespective of what happens to Sterling. So long as the interest is being paid lenders will extend and pretend because that is what is in their best interest. No impaired debt and a massive positive carry.

[chucko1] 17/7/2019 08:07

RC, really? If the homeowner still has the same job (rate of pay), it makes no material difference. Negative equity in of itself does not mean foreclosure.

The cash flow is what matters to a lender. Either resi or commercial. It’s strange how many posters here view the NAV as a driver of anything (other than refinancing) - all it is is (principally) a reflection of the expected Net Operating Income (NOI) of the asset. It’s the NOI that serves as the battleground for real estate investment. Those out there who have actually been involved in this business, and have used or overseen the valuation models would be aware of this.

[rcturner2] 17/7/2019 07:41

I think it is dangerous to focus on the cash flow and rents here as that is misleading. What will damage NRR is the writedown in value of other people's properties, which will go across to the valuation of NRR's properties. Then the LTV starts to come into play.

If you have a £500k house with a £400k mortgage and you are working and paying the mortgage this is no help if the lender turns round and says the market has fallen 20% and you now have a 100% mortgage.

[fenners66] 17/7/2019 07:27

spitthecat1
17 Jul '19 - 00:32 - 1414 of 1416

Fenners 66

"Given what you say about having no position here, what on earth motivates you to contribute to this forum ?.."


I refer you to my previous answer

[marksp2011] 17/7/2019 07:14

and someone will call time on Industrial Heat which has the equivalent of a secret process to turn lead in to gold using the blood of virgins

[spectoacc] 17/7/2019 06:50

@fenners66 - I told you repeatedly to go short. I remain thoroughly long, and expecting more pain before the glory.

Woody has to sell everything - in WEIF at least. Jury still out on IFF but I suspect the same. He's lying IMO when he claims he'll "reposition to FTSE350 liquid stocks". I've gone on about it ad nauseum on the WPCT thread, having first called Woody in 2016.

(In a nutshell - redemption were running at £10m/day before the publicity from the gating, ie 11 months to absolute zero. Unlisteds were already breaching the limits, esp inc Guernsey, since before Kent CC asked for their quarter of a billion quid back, before HL withdrew their rec, before the publicity, before WEIF was down over 1, 3 & 5 years & 50% below a tracker over 3. So the notion there'll still be a fund around if/when he reopens is laughable. Unless, perhaps, all the unlisteds, unicorns, and unsellables suddenly disappear? Or - and this one's even better - unless there's a massive turnaround in performance, as he sells everything below the bid).

[spitthecat1] 17/7/2019 00:32

Fenners 66Given what you say about having no position here, what on earth motivates you to contribute to this forum ?..

[zac0_4] 16/7/2019 23:35

fenners66

No-one can answer your question other than Neil Woodford. And any suggestions you might have as to why he's chosen to liquidate NRR stock is pure guesswork on your behalf!

In fact, looking at your previous posts I'm amazed you're still posting here with such a negative viewpoint on this company! Oh, you could be shorting this stock, couldn't you? Then again only you know the answer to that question, don't you?!!!!. .

[m_kerr] 16/7/2019 22:47

zccax, CVA and admin impact this year was £0.6m, the previous year £0.8m. funds from operation was around £55m. so it reduced FFO by about 1%. what they are seeing in practice, is although there are retailers going bust, the low average rents in NRR centres means they continue to open, because it's easier to make a profit when rents are already at a realistic level. for instance, with arcadia, they expect at least 3 out of the 4 units to stay open, with a FFO impact of just £50k. pubs also make up about 29% of the rents, which aren't showing any signs of plummeting.

in terms of downside risk, how far can rents fall from an average £12.50 per square foot? buying assets at a low valuation protects downside.

they also have a fully unsecured balance sheet, meaning that they can buy and sell assets quickly, without needing to gain lenders approval, which is obviously an important advantage as a buyer.

fenners - i've no idea. woodford needs to access liquidity, and plainly, NRR is one more the more liquid (notwithstanding it was a 30% position), compared to the long list of unquoted holdings. as a locked in woodford investor, i'd hope decisions would be made on investment merit, but this plainly isn't the case, hence the concentration of unquoted assets, and subsequent lockup.

[propinv] 16/7/2019 22:34

Fenners66 - think Woodford focusing on retaining liquid stocks before reopen. Don't think value is a driver. Just guess only.

[fenners66] 16/7/2019 22:03

Can anyone answer my woodford related question earlier ?

[zccax77] 16/7/2019 21:12

The problem is your income is about to plummet, put that in your DCF and see hat value you get.

[shawzie] 16/7/2019 20:09

As older posters will recollect, Lord Young was a business man in the Conservative Cabinet. He states in his book "The Enterprise Years" that in 1973 he was involved in real estate. He argued that commercial property had no intrinsic value and it was only worth the value of its secure income. On that basis he and his banking partner would lend a multiple of the secure income and not bother with any valuations. Over many years there was never a need to write off one penny of any loan.
I will stick with NRR for the present.

[zccax77] 16/7/2019 20:05

I am perplexed by why HMSO is down so much. 50% of their assets are in France and Ireland, plus they own some of the nicest outlets and shopping centers. Maybe it’s the debt stupid. Plus kleppiere offered 625p a year ago.

[propinv] 16/7/2019 19:02

Fair point m_kerr. I personally think that whilst NRR have the more liquid assets, the stuff that Intu and Hammerson own will be what people will want to own 5 years from now. But that's just a view. Could be wrong.

[m_kerr] 16/7/2019 18:58

prop - NRR was about 220p before the woodford brown stuff hit the fan IIRC. granted, what matters is what the assets are being marked down by, given the 37% LTV. if you take the pubs at book value, the current share price marks down the retail portfolio by about 30%. the 'premium valuation' is justified, as the likes of intu have large, illiquid, low yielding shopping centres that require relatively high and ongoing capex, and which the investment market has shown little interest in acquiring.

[propinv] 15/7/2019 23:12

M-Kerr - by them at 25% discount to what? Last Red Book Value? 25% discount to fair value? Certainly not 25% discount to competitors. NRR are trading at premium to competitors, not discount.

[fenners66] 15/7/2019 23:11

Then you have to ask the question of Woodford - although in the last few years his stock picking has been an absolute disaster - has he sold everything in the portfolio or just targetting certain stocks ?

If it is not everything why put NRR on the list ?

[m_kerr] 15/7/2019 22:41

whilst it's obviously important to very short term investors, it's worth remembering that the woodford / st james place selling pressure has no impact on the underlying business of new river. even so, woodford has already disposed of 90%+ of his holding, in other words, that particular short term downside risk has gone, and you can now buy the shares at a c 25% discount.

[mikeyfernandez] 15/7/2019 17:16

Let’s not forget that st james palace still had approx 3% that it looked like they wanted to shift, so they are probably in the process of that for a couple of weeks yet...

[spectoacc] 15/7/2019 17:00

He's on zero @hpcg, as posted above, but there's the "overhang of the overhang" to contend with, a lot of fresh holders floating around.

[hpcg] 15/7/2019 16:58

Still is shawzie - he has only just gone below 5%. Likely another 2-4 weeks of pressure from that source. How can the 15% he has shifted in the last month not have weighed on price. We might see some support when the dividend get paid, doubly so if Woodford supply runs out.

[shawzie] 15/7/2019 14:04

And I thought that posters on this site believed that the share price was also falling due to Woodford selling?
Did the Woodford sell-off really have any influence in the share price fall?