Newriver Reit Share Discussion Threads

[flyfisher] 11/7/2019 07:35

The overall trade looks to be in excess of 25m / 8.2% of the issued equity.
Does anyone other than woodford hold that amount?

Judging by the amount of buyers, i would guess it is short closing / woodford selling.

[spectoacc] 11/7/2019 07:24

Or if you take it as a set of sells + buys (as some appear to be, based on closeness of price), is it the latest mandate transferee getting out? Woody's sold very little from WEIF IMO.

[flyfisher] 11/7/2019 07:07

On the assumption that yesterdays sales were from woodford, it would seem to leave his holding at about 13.5m, and i guess that several shorts would have covered their positions by being the buyer.

Will he be a seller of the residual holding?

[fenners66] 10/7/2019 22:33

Just don't ever sell a share at the top then - you may not be able to forgive yourself.

[minerve 2] 10/7/2019 22:30

fenners

Those companies had less than 20 executives each and thousands of employees. Those thousands of employees should not pay the price for greed/incompetence of a few and the greed of a few shorters, who let's face it, are only able to actually do what they do because too much capital is washing around the system.

It's about time they got proper, meaningful jobs.

There is nothing clever or admirable about a hedge fund owner/manager.

You can continue excusing the inexcusable if you like but my mind is made up. Has been for a long time.

[fenners66] 10/7/2019 22:25

"This is starting to be the case in the construction sector."

With a bloody good reason

Did you read the litany of mismanagement of those companies ?
I did.
I read the 240 page accounts with their identified risks.

The real risks were ignored.

I read their 60 pages of directors remuneration reports.

I read every misleading RNS in the years leading up to their failure and proactively discussed them and you think someone who sold their shares at say £4 is to blame for them reaching zero - but would you at the same time applaud the companies if they could plunder hard earned pension fund money from Joe Bloggs just so they could go on collecting their salaries whilst overstating profits and prospects ?

[minerve 2] 10/7/2019 22:15

fenners66

"What about the shorters who identified CLLN IRV and DEBS years ago - are they responsible for their collapse or was the inept management, overpaying dividends , over-borrowing and failing at basic contracts ?"

Two wrongs do not make a right. If you have masses of capital just intent on killing the share price without any regard to the underlying prospects of the company then you are deliberately killing any opportunity for a company to raise capital at a fair price which could be used for turnaround under new management. Surely we should use best endeavours to protect jobs and investors??? If shorters jump on every mistake and poor stewardship of a company and ruin the opportunity for equity to repair you will eventually end-up with investors shying away from certain sectors all together, or asking for a greater return on capital which will cost business more. This is starting to be the case in the construction sector.

If an investor sells out to another investor and that investor loses because the share price suddenly falls then it affects only the investor who bought at too higher price. Investors generally are wealthy, relatively, or they wouldn't be here. If you short, you are risking the jobs and futures of those who perhaps have no interest in the stock market and just want to do a good day's work for a fair wage.

It gets worse...

These hedge fund managers build-up such wealth that they suddenly start to sponsor certain political groups and activist groups to the extent that they influence politics and our futures when they have had no mandate from society to do so. Their greed is generally not in tune with the objectives and aspirations of society and you can see that everyday with these characters - Soros and Odey are good examples.

[fenners66] 10/7/2019 22:02

What about the shorters who identified CLLN IRV and DEBS years ago - are they responsible for their collapse or was the inept management, overpaying dividends , over-borrowing and failing at basic contracts ?

The shorts could read the signals and saw a way to make money.

Surely a capital gain is never a capital gain for a long - unless he finds someone to sell to , a la short?

Worse still if the long gets it right he sells at the highest price and thus the poor mug who bought them from him will be stuck holding the baby - no compassion from the exploitative long there then.

[chucko1] 10/7/2019 21:51

PropInv, NRR’s locations tend to be where there are multiple reasons to go. Not sure if that would be deemed “an experience”, though that may be part of the thinking for some of them.

The problem INTU seem to have is that they need to invest in order to bring such experiences to their shopping centres, and they are short of capital. The concept makes total sense, I do agree, but you have to have the financial room to get there.

Minerve, you are clear as ever!

[minerve 2] 10/7/2019 21:16

chucko1

My views on shorting and people like Odey are well known on ADVFN. I think society is better off without both and I have no time for men like Odey whatsoever. Personally, I think they are parasitic scum. No amount of philanthropy makes up for the initial poor set of personal values IMO. The execution of action that could jeopardise futures for the few to make unnecessary, vulgar and obscene levels of money should not be tolerated in what should be a civilised society.

[edit] Nothing against you chucko by-the-way. :)

Your actions are probably much smaller than these hedge funds and if you are using spread-bets you are probably not shorting anyway. I agree they push the share price down, and in that regard it helps us, but I can invest just as well without 'help' from shorters.

[propinv] 10/7/2019 21:05

Thanks chucko. I get that argument. But in a world where people are moving to shopping as part of an experience, do you agree that they have more positives than NRR on that key point

[chucko1] 10/7/2019 20:53

PropInv, INTU trades dirt cheap because significant capital will be required to bring their locations up to standards that will allow them to be rented at any level. Recognition of this is why they’ve been jilted twice, so far, at the M&A altar.

[propinv] 10/7/2019 20:39

Essential a look at discount to NAV for Intu and Hammerson - expect 60-70% Discount to NAV

[chucko1] 10/7/2019 20:25

Minerve, I am more than happy the shorters are kicking this. I get them cheaper and whether or not they short, the prospects of the company remain unaltered.

I’m not aware of them proposing a capital raise!

M-Kerr, the point about rent affordability, especially at the very low absolute levels, and likely as a percentage of the turnover of the shops on the premises, is one of the more important factors in the investment case for NRR. As I say, there are bad retails REITs (most), and then there are those that deserve more thoughtful consideration. But with Woody and all that, the waters are truly muddied. Sorts out the men from the boys.

[nisbet] 10/7/2019 20:06

m_kerr

You’ve misread the trades. What you are looking at is a placing with reports taking place after the market close. Adding up the numbers would suggest circa 25,500,000 sold and placed probably taking out the entire remaining holding of Mr Woodford.

The shorters might be a touch worried in the morning and some/many may be running for cover.

[chucko1] 10/7/2019 20:03

I am an investor with Odey and that is where my INTU short comes from (and an NRR one for that matter, but I am far longer than that short). He loathes INTU with a passion, nearly as much as Metro Bank!! He dislikes U.K. retail as well, as a whole.

But he certainly makes mistakes, and he also shorts certain things from a relative value aspect, so a short does not necessarily indicate a major dislike. The time to worry is if he puts on a short and increases it as it falls. Like INTU and Metro Bank! And TSLA.

The short on NRR is more likely a trade against the overhang, given the timing of Odey’s position announcement (exactly 0.5%). About 1.5% of the 7.37% overall short was put on after Woodford’s implosion, with 5.5% having been the overall short level the past 15 months or so.

[m_kerr] 10/7/2019 19:56

lots of large sales of the stock today showing up, placing further downwards pressure on the share price.

i think it's telling that there is very little CVA / administration impact happening at NRR. for instance, minimal impact from the arcadia mess, with no rent reductions. that shows a) that retailers are by and large trading profitably at NRR sites. it's because rents are already at a realistic level. NRR assess rent affordability when they acquire assets.

[minerve 2] 10/7/2019 19:50

Typical shorter's game: Call contacts in City, generate fear. Exploit ignorance.

Remind me what value these people add to society?

Oh yeah, I forgot, price discovery etc..

How on Earth did they manage without it under the Buttonwood tree?

ROFLMAO!

[minerve 2] 10/7/2019 19:25

Odey has made the wrong call a few times and he may just have selected this because of the very large overhang. What is important is intrinsic value, Odey may help us buy significantly under it. ;)

[hugepants] 10/7/2019 19:16

FYI I'm a holder here and well underwater. I keep hearing the argument that NRR is different from the likes of INTU,HMSO and CAL. Ive already mentioned the deteriorating footfall but also why is there such a large short position against this stock (google it) from the likes of Odey. These guys usually get it right and they don't target strong companies.

[zccax77] 10/7/2019 17:44

150 incoming

[chucko1] 10/7/2019 17:23

“... recession is looming ...”. It’s not a fact! Even if it is [looming] (which I tend to agree with), no two are the same.

In any event, it’s sensible to differentiate between the REITs. There are those (like INTU), which are likely doomed as they have capital issues (and I am short), or there are those like NRR which have ample capital. In fact, arguably too much capital which has been a factor in preventing them from covering their EPRA dividend - something they can address by buying the cheap stuff out there now. Or more pubs.

[minerve 2] 10/7/2019 17:08

"This fall is because of the nutter with too much money."

By-the-way, that isn't me! LOL

[minerve 2] 10/7/2019 17:06

People become skint they go to pound shops.
People become skint they stop eating at Iguanas and start visiting pub chains.
People become skint they do regular shopping at discount grocers and top up the milk and bread at convenience stores during the week.

I actually think there is a reasonable chance that foot fall increases during a recession and NRR as landlords will have some degree of pricing power because they have some monopoly on bargain retail location which will become the consumer retail target of choice. Intu Trafford Centre will become a luxury day out - if not already.

This fall is because of the nutter with too much money.