We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Type | Share ISIN | Share Description |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Pacific Ind | LSE:PILR | London | Ordinary Share | GB00BYV8MN78 | ORD 1P |
Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0.00 | 0.00% | 119.00 | 117.00 | 121.00 | - | 0.00 | 01:00:00 |
Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
0 | 0 | N/A | 0 |
Date | Subject | Author | Discuss |
---|---|---|---|
27/7/2017 16:34 | No news that I can see at the moment but should get an update before the week is out. "It is expected that details of the Placing including, inter alia, final size, pricing and the expected timetable of principal events will be announced on or before 28 July 2017." I echo Ninbo's sentiment towards this REIT - namely the returns justify holding it long term. I missed BBOX and am still kicking myself, to me this is a higher risk version of BBOX ... with this prospective transaction mitigating a large portion of this through diversification. I appreciate we're reluctant to see our shares diluted, but I've bought shares at a 2% premium to YE '16 NAV, BBOX trades at close to a 16% premium and has rallied 5p while this placing has been open. My main worry is the transaction doesn't go through but I think that scenario unlikely. To me the management strategy is clear...clone BBOX - 1. Prove slightly tweaked concept - done 2. make the REIT relevant size - in progress through capital raise 3. Aggressively market as BBOX's little brother - let's say management are two thirds as successful as BBOX so this implies a 10% premium to NAV and we arrive at 128p... If I'm right I'll tip my hat to the management team. It's a damn good idea, and they will make themselves very wealthy ... note they are big holders of the fund and in addition the performance fee structure is heavily front loaded out to 2020 (to capture I believe the tailwind of the NAV premium build). | pyufak | |
26/7/2017 19:20 | I won't be selling whatever - I bought for 15% a year capital growth from decent buying and active management and 6% ish income once regears come through. Of course I hope it's not too dilutive. | nimbo1 | |
26/7/2017 17:17 | Looks like this has been a big success. Suspect its not too dilutive then. Anything much below NAV and its time for us to sell, given we were not given the opportunity. | topvest | |
26/7/2017 15:39 | Blimey that was quick - hopefully good news then. They didn't contact me despite me being in on the last one. | spectoacc | |
26/7/2017 15:27 | Results of the bookbuild will be out tomorrow. | tiltonboy | |
26/7/2017 13:29 | Pyufak I agree with your comments. I am a holder in bbox and have also bought in here. BBOX is a guaranteed 4.5% a year income. This has a much stronger return profile potential over the next couple of years. | nimbo1 | |
23/7/2017 18:12 | No real excuse not to give existing holders a chance to participate. Will keep holding for now, but they need to change their ways to gain respect amongst their existing holders. | topvest | |
23/7/2017 09:48 | Building a new long in this. Strong management team, like the fundamentals, 110m is trans-formative for the company and adds significant diversification benefits. My own view is the placing will go well this time given the one year performance. I spoke with Canaccord to attempt to get into the placement as I'm looking to pick up a reasonable clip but unfortunately seems difficult for those who manage their own portfolios (was directed to wealth managers who could facilitate...but i don't like the on-going high fees) - if anyone knows differently please let me know. Overall, buying in the 116-119 range is a slight premium to the NAV & you risk some dilution but given paragraph 1. I think the execution premium is worth paying for what is going in the 'long term hold portfolio'. | pyufak | |
17/7/2017 08:22 | Agreed - noted with interest the NAV of 116p. I benefited from the last placing (in at a discount) but would be less impressed now a shareholder :) What interests me more is whether they're more confident of raising the money this time. They were way off the amount they were hoping for last time. And with market cap c.£25m vs c.£110m they're hoping for, the price they raise at will certainly be interesting. Overall, still giving them the benefit of the doubt - they've done what they said they would so far. | spectoacc | |
14/7/2017 21:51 | Still no open offer. They are not exactly being very nice to existing holders. If this is dilutive I will not be impressed. | topvest | |
14/7/2017 07:19 | Wonder if they'll have more success than last time getting the placing away? Could transform the co if they manage it. "The company said it expects to announce further details of the placing around July 28, and that each member of the board and management team have confirmed their intention to participate. " | spectoacc | |
23/5/2017 07:25 | All positive, but I'd have liked NAV to have been higher. We know they're very shrewd buyers from the roadshow, but not convinced that's really coming through yet. "22.6% total shareholder return over the period compared to 0.0% annual total shareholder return for FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Index to 31 March 2017 Earnings and dividend -- EPRA earnings per share of 7.8 pence, reflecting the rapid deployment of capital into highly income generative assets -- Declaration of dividend of 3.0 pence per share, taking total dividends paid or declared in respect of the period ended 31 March 2017 to 6.0 pence per share, reflecting an annualised yield of 6.2% on the IPO price -- Dividend covered 1.3x by EPRA earnings per share " | spectoacc | |
22/5/2017 12:46 | Was thinking they might be "once bitten" on the fundraising - and I can think of several smaller REITs and ITs they'd fit nicely with instead. Whether all the personalities would fit is another matter! | spectoacc | |
22/5/2017 12:40 | Agreed. I don't think Cannacord would have taken them on without them being able to do something. I suspect there is a deal around the corner. | tiltonboy | |
22/5/2017 11:05 | Same here! Was very surprised when they failed to raise anything like what they thought, but now a bit of no-man's-land with the liquidity/co size. | spectoacc | |
22/5/2017 10:21 | Specto, I was the beneficiary of the last placing, but obviously do not wish it to happen again! | tiltonboy | |
22/5/2017 08:57 | Yes, although that activity could yet be another dilutory placing - they only raised a fraction of what they wanted last time, despite thinking they had quite a bit of it in the bag. | spectoacc | |
22/5/2017 08:54 | Good news about Cannacord coming on board as well. This should be the prelude to more activity. | tiltonboy | |
22/5/2017 08:45 | Results tomorrow, be interesting to see where NAV is at. Can't see the tone of the results being anything but positive. | spectoacc | |
02/12/2016 20:25 | He is a very successful investor though, which is why I bought some in the first place. | topvest | |
01/12/2016 22:19 | I stand corrected. | tiltonboy | |
01/12/2016 21:23 | Not really - he's behind Pacific. | topvest | |
01/12/2016 13:19 | Sir John Beckwith taking a 27% stake is a bit of a coup! | tiltonboy | |
30/11/2016 19:49 | Yes, agreed - it was not good form to dilute holders in this way. I will let them off this time, given their small size, but will sell if they play that sort of stunt again. | topvest | |
30/11/2016 16:25 | I've added PILR to the CP+ Header | skyship |
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions