Newriver Reit Share Discussion Threads

[fenners66] 13/11/2019 09:07

A nearby Sports Direct is moving to a larger premises that had been vacant for 8 years.
It looks like a bit of a risk - but the reality is probably that the rent will be lower for more space.

However that means the current landlord will now be left with a fairly large void.....

[spectoacc] 13/11/2019 09:04

@HP - no one thinks those things aren't happening, and most of us think the divi is heading for a cut. Question is - what's in the price, and why is it beaten down so low. If it's because Invesco is a forced seller (due to redemptions running into 10 figures), then there's an opportunity to buy, just as there was on Woody's selling.

NRR has more fingers in pies than many (asset management JVs, 1/3rd of the co is pubs, development) and benefits from among the cheapest rents, but no question they'll be suffering from the CVAs/insolvencies etc.

[fenners66] 13/11/2019 09:04

Agreed Huge Pants

However even disregarding any direct impact , the part that many on here still refute is....
the impact on every other store.

Whenever a store closes and gives up a lease , or a chain renegotiates lower rents (as in 40% cuts above) it adds pressure to those that are still trading and leasing elsewhere.

Any well managed business , (lets face it if you are not closing and not yet in trouble in retail you are probably well managed ) will not just watch from the sidelines whilst its competitors negotiate a 40% rent cut advantage.

The only way to react is to get a piece of that action yourself.

These CVA's are too numerous to ignore and other retailers will have to leverage anything to get a rent cut also.

Whether that's the threat of a CVA ( you can adjust the accounts , be a bit more prudent , add some stock amortisation or whatever to convince landlords you need a hand ) or just that the store next door is vacant and cheaper.

So I still see momentum behind rent reductions and therefore valuation reductions as well.

I have been saying this for a long time - but there is no sign that the High Street crisis is letting up.

[spectoacc] 12/11/2019 19:23

@eeza - not sure it is, but undoubtedly some selling pressure. Fine for us longer term holders banking the divi, tho glad to have lightened a few for potentially buying again in the 150's. Can't see it getting back there but who knows.

Buy when others are selling, sell when others are buying.

[essentialinvestor] 12/11/2019 15:53

For anyone interested in the broader sector, LAND released H1 results today.

[eeza] 12/11/2019 15:43

It's deja vu all over again.

Woody mark 2.

[spectoacc] 11/11/2019 15:39

Must admit I've forgotten where we are with Invesco - now own about a quarter, with the last few RNS's being small sales? So dribbling some out, but unclear if selling all or adjusting.

My strong guess is adjusting, based on similar trades on others. Barnett not making Woody's mistake - when he gets redemptions, he's flogging proportionately across the holdings. Whereas the arrogance of Woodford meant that he sold all the liquid (and income-paying, in the case of WEIF) stuff first, thinking he was such a genius that it'd all work out.

[hpcg] 11/11/2019 14:14

Constant selling can never be in the price. If it were there would be a load of off market bulk transfers like the one between Woodford and Barnett earlier this year. Anyway as I said at this time it is hypothetical, if Barnett can hold then my putative plan never gets to see action.

[chucko1] 11/11/2019 11:01

Hpcg, I’m not sure whether the rumour of Barnett selling is ALREADY (partly?) in the price. With NW, what was clear was that he was selling rapidly and this was by far the more likely reason for the steep fall to 150p (as opposed to the various store closings and CVAs etc. that were being widely cited).

At worst, I see Barnett as a forced reducer, whereas NW was a forced liquidator. What is more is that the effects of NW selling are now clear - steep fall followed by pretty rapid rise (of about 75% of the fall). Some players will be looking for the bounce upon similar falls, so it will not be extreme, in my opinion.

[hpcg] 11/11/2019 10:25

chucko1 - under confidence if anything. I have no position at this time. Invesco had $54 billion of outflows last year, which is a mind boggling number when both stocks and bonds are just about at oil time highs. So potentially I might miss a biggish move down on results. As I say though, my thesis is predominantly around Barnett as a forced seller, so until that appears no short position.

[spectoacc] 11/11/2019 07:00

"They'll have to cut the dividend in the future and there is a path to a lower share price"

Many would agree, but what of the new asset management business? NRR have a new income stream ahead.

[chucko1] 10/11/2019 19:51

Just as difficult with a plan. Overconfidence, hpcg?

[hpcg] 10/11/2019 15:21

SpectoAcc - no, short positions don't need to be held long, and certainly not for a year. At least not for me and not for NRR at this level. If the dividend is still not covered, and with the continuous drip drip of closures and CVAs, Clinton's Cards today, then I think it is time to act soon. They'll have to cut the dividend in the future and there is a path to a lower share price, though some element is priced in.

Chucko - indeed perfect trading relies on a good dose of luck, but it is completely impossible without a plan.

[spectoacc] 09/11/2019 21:21

@eeza - he has been, all over the place.

@hpcg - and supply that c.22p divi? That's the nub on NRR.

[grahamburn] 09/11/2019 15:22

Or (almost) finished if one reads between the lines of the comments he has made via the press. If he hadn't he would sound less confident.

[eeza] 09/11/2019 11:29

I think it is highly likely that Barnett will be reducing his larger positions down to a non-controversial level, and has probably already started.

[eeza] 09/11/2019 11:25

But not 'hindsight' traders.

[chucko1] 09/11/2019 11:17

“I would aim for perfect trading”. Many do, many fail.

[hpcg] 09/11/2019 09:59

Mark Barnett on the front page of the FT for the wrong and familiar reasons. The large position his managed funds have remains an existential threat to the share price if not the business. Were redemptions to pick up and the share price show it I would be shorting the weakness this time rather then buying. Though to emphasise I would aim for perfect trading and a 180 position change at the turn. Hypothetical at the moment.

[hpcg] 08/11/2019 12:25

Back to my approx fair value, well done to those that sold higher. I would be interested in buying in again at below 175, but realistically I'll wait for the aftermath of post xmas trading statements as a sentiment bottom. Looks like the election is going to cause havoc to retailers, but then we have no real need for the nonsense spike in consumption at this time of year. N.B. Yes I know NRR tenants are more staples than consumables, but there will be a lot more empty units out there come February.

[garyg196] 08/11/2019 10:08

hxxps://www.bdo.co.uk/en-gb/news/2019/high-street-to-be-hit-by-perfect-storm-this-christmas

[grahamburn] 06/11/2019 19:53

As well as when Xmas, Boxing and New Year interfere with the scheduling.

[2wild] 06/11/2019 19:23

Cheers 2577, did not know that.

[a0002577] 06/11/2019 17:28

Shares always go ex-dividend on a Thursday.

Except the Thursday before Good Friday