Pantheon Share Discussion Threads

[rambutan2] 16/1/2023 23:27

And the most recent factsheet, which includes half year stats:

[rambutan2] 16/1/2023 23:14

Purely out of interest - noting the 2nd largest stake:

[spangle93] 06/1/2023 07:49

PIN splashing the cash



Monthly NAV is down 2%, driven by adverse Forex.

"Although PIP's portfolio has continued to generate cash, there has been a slowdown in distributions during the period. This combined with PIP's continued deployment of capital into compelling investment opportunities has resulted in PIP's cash declining from £227m at the beginning of the period to £52m as at 30 November 2022."

"In December 2022, following the period end, PIP committed $112.5m to the Pantheon Secondary Opportunity Fund II (PSOF II), which is focused on single-asset secondaries. PIP's commitment, which will be deployed over a three-year investment period, forms part of the Company's strategy to capitalise on attractive opportunities in this fast-growing segment of the secondaries market."


You wonder, if they are buying (rather than buying back shares, which seems to be the rage in every morning's list of RNS's, whether they see it as the time to get back into the market?

[skyship] 12/12/2022 13:06

50day MA could provide support; but more likely this is headed back to support at 240p:


free stock charts from uk.advfn.com

[rambutan2] 11/11/2022 16:15

johntobin, I very much agree with you, and was also a regular at the AGM for a number of years. It was through PIN that I really got interested in PE. Although in the last decade I've preferred HVPE as my core holding.

Re those warrants, I'm sure we need to revisit the 90s for those. I remember doing very well out of them!

[johntobin] 11/11/2022 16:00

I have to disagree with some of the comments that PIN is somehow a "PONZI Scheme" and managers operating in a "dishonest and self serving way".
I didn't attend the AGM this year but I have attended a number. The managers are all very welcoming and more than happy to discus with PI such as myself.
The discount has been an issue for years and they have tried to address it a number of ways during the time I have been a SH.
They had hoped that getting rid of the PIN redeemable shares would help and make the company more understandable, the move into the FTSE 350 was hoped to raise profile, and the 1 to 10 share split last year.

In the last year or so they have engaged Hardman & Co to do and present research and to "educate".

They do not believe in issuing a "fake" dividend is appropriate as the companies they invest in are growth companies and do not pay out dividends but reinvest in growing new business.

As a PI I have benefited from the approach and now have a nice nest egg that I have been selling over the last few years to use up my capital gains.

One year I met a retired fund manager who used PIN as a core holding for his and his childrens pension portfolios because the was so impressed with the team and another who was the companies Inland Revenue Tax Inspector from the 1980s... still there as a PI over 30years on.
Roddy Swires who founded PIN still there.

... the antithesis of a "Ponzi Scheme"

I remember first coming across PIN from a McHattie warrants "Tipsheet" over 20years ago .." always seem to start at the bottom left and end up at the top right of the chart"

And that is what they keep doing. share price is down but if they keep doing what they do with the NAV then the share price will follow.

Another recession looms, the share price may take more of a hit, and maybe the NAV ... but there will be more bargains....

I still think the discount is too wide and they should buy back big time... but in the meantime I have started to buy again...

[riverman77] 09/11/2022 10:34

Interesting reading through the latest AVI Global Trust monthly udpate (which I rate very highly) mentions they have taken a position in a basket of UK listed PE funds as they think the discounts are excessive. AVI can take quite an activist approach when they want to and will be surely pushing to ensure value is returned to shareholders. Indeed, they refer to the commencement of buybacks so definitely worth a read. On the annual report I can see that PIN is one of these positions, along with ICGT, APEO, GROW and a couple of others.

[cartan1blue] 06/11/2022 13:26

I’m pleased that PIN are trying to find new investors, for example through this MoS article. The last sentence re the near 4% annual fee is pretty terrifying though. Unrelated, but I also hugely value the buyback.

[skyship] 04/11/2022 10:18

I’ve had a fairly extensive and fruitless exchange with Vicki Bradly (IR) as Helen Steers, the partner who made the IM presentation, ducked the issue. IMO because she palpably lied in the Q&A session.

This was part of what I wrote on 1st November:
==================================
# PARA 2: Agreed – the whole PE sector is undergoing a period of poor relative performance. Nevertheless, there are winners and losers. It is not a large sector, so comparisons are simple.

- The 2 PEITs with the highest yields (APAX & PEY) are, not coincidentally, the 2 trading on the lowest discounts of c30%.
- The 2 PEITs with NO yields (HVPE & PIN) are, not coincidentally, the 2 trading on the highest discounts of c50%.

The facts speak for themselves. The facts are incontrovertible. Yet you are required to spout the same old ”….the evidence is that the payment of a dividend does not appear to be the solution given that they too continue to trade at significant discounts….221;. Surely it is a matter of degree – see above!

===================================
The very next day Princess PE (PEY) proved my case, so wrote again as follows:
===================================

“Further very timely proof, if proof were needed, of the inevitable link between yield and discount.

Today, Princess PE (PEY) announced that their high dividend would henceforth be less secure, just 2 days after revealing a further 1% rise in NAV for September.

The Market's immediate response has been to slash the share price from 9.54 to 8.24; so that the discount widens out from 33% to 42%

Further proof of the incontrovertible link between yield and discount.

If PIN were to reveal a new dividend policy, say at 4% of NAV. The share price would just as rapidly rise from a discount of 49% (250p) to perhaps a discount of 35% (320p).
That would deliver a 28% uplift in the share price; and further progress likely from there in view of PIN's great long-term history.

See if Helen can refute any of the above in her anticipated response to yesterday's email.

=====================================

PIN continue to duck the issue, so I will be attempting to publicise my views elsewhere. As I may have said already, I view PIN as a sophisticated PONZI scheme, operating to shamelessly boost the managers’ fees whilst refusing any return to shareholders. It is a disgrace; and it is about time they were outed. I believe they are great PE managers; but operating in an entirely self-serving and dishonest way.

Come on Edward Bramson. You did well bidding for Electra; time for a re-run with a bid for PIN.

[skyship] 04/11/2022 09:26

jt 35 - re yr writing to institutions; I am about to widen the debate. Can you assist? There is a website which shows the main shareholders in any plc; but not sure what it is. Could you or anyone else post please? More...

edit - pls ignore. Obviously found all I need to know in the Annual Report!

[spangle93] 03/11/2022 23:57

Just to add, Kepler has released research recently



"Our evidence hasn’t shown that trusts with more frequent dividend payments will benefit from narrower discounts; however, there is evidence to show they exhibit more stable discounts."

In other words, frequent dividends (e.g quarterly) exhibit discount stability that would help those who invest/drawdown regularly, but for those who seek to take advantage of anomalously high discounts, those without dividends offer better opportunities.

[riverman77] 02/11/2022 17:26

There has been talk of increased activity in PE space - funds languishing on 50% discounts and doing nothing to return anything to shareholders probably need an activist to come in and push for liquidation, as happened a few years ago with Electra. Something like PIN and HVPE should see more than 100% upside when fully realised, albeit this may take a few years.

[1968jon] 02/11/2022 16:58

I said I would not comment again, but I can't help myself.....I think it is a nuanced and far from simple debate and I am lucky to be able to be ambivalent....however....if you substitute "stock" for "fund" in the sentence "how you can justify a fund growing exponentially, without ever giving back some of that growth to the shareholders", I wonder how disappointed the early investors in Berkshire Hathaway or Amazon were at the lack of dividend, haven't had a return to this day......I know it is glib to make a point with a meagre two success stories but dividends are clearly not everything to everyone.....I shall now absent myself from the board...

[jt35] 02/11/2022 16:07

Sky have you ever written to the actual institutional holders with your thoughts on a dividend ? I have found in the past that I've got a much better response from them then the actual manager and in some cases those holders run with the issue and got the manager to change their approach.

[skyship] 02/11/2022 15:45

dp - as you know, I always respect your financial views as they are well based from real experience.

So, pleased to hear how you can justify a fund growing exponentially, without ever giving back some of that growth to the shareholders.

What would be the point of holding such a fund. If you are never to receive a return; and the only beneficiaries are the managers growing fat on ever increasing fees, surely it smacks of a well-presented PONZI SCHEME.

IMO the logic is surely irrefutable...

[donald pond] 02/11/2022 13:36

I think you can make the case either way on dividends, and I am certainly neutral if they are paid from capital. However, if they reflect the underlying profitability of the holdings, then not only do they attract income investors, but they also provide an objective sense check on valuations. Given that a lot of PE involves mature businesses rather than start-ups, many will get those distributions which they could pass on.
Though, on the other hand, a lot of the underlying funds are structured as fixed life limited partnerships, and so focus on providing a bullet payment at the end, which the investors have often structured in order to receive a specific tax treatment. So its always more complex than you might hope.

[skyship] 02/11/2022 13:32

free stock charts from uk.advfn.com

[skyship] 02/11/2022 13:31

PIN struggling to gain momentum beneath the falling 50day SMA and the long-term downtrend. I'm sure it will do so; just taking time...


free stock charts from uk.advfn.com

[skyship] 02/11/2022 13:14

1968jon. Never heard of Princess (PEY)? Obviously not delving very deeply. Have you never visited the PE site here on ADVFN?

As for income - you will find it is tax-free in SIPPS & ISAs

Consider this as of yesterday:

The 2 PEITs with the highest yields (APAX & PEY) are, not coincidentally, the 2 trading on the lowest discounts of c30%.

The 2 PEITs with NO yields (HVPE & PIN) are, not coincidentally, the 2 trading on the highest discounts of c50%.

Also consider 80%+ (Morningstar) of trusts and funds inc. pension funds, require INCOME, require YIELD.

If you deny it, you limit your pool of potential investors and you sentence the stock to a poorer rating QED.

[1968jon] 02/11/2022 12:37

Skyship, I really do not want to get into a ding-dong here and I most likely will step away from this topic after this post - and I repeat "different folks, different strokes" - but PEY? Really?

I confess I am only invested in three PE trusts and had never heard of PEY until your post just now. Please forgive me if I have the wrong end of the stick, but are you referring to Princess Private Equity? I think the statement in the RNS accompanying the suspension......... "This suspension has been deemed necessary in light principally of the significant reduction in the Company's liquidity due to the strengthening of the US Dollar against the Euro, which led to outflows of more than EUR 60 million year-to-date to settle currency hedging contracts. In addition, challenging debt markets are currently limiting the facilitation of asset sales across the industry.".....is the reason for the share price fall not the income investors ditching it???

At offer price currently, PIN 48.7% discount. Dividend paying ICGT 45.1% discount.
I know, I know, small sample size, different firms etc.....but PE trusts have been beaten up this year - I am hopeful they will come through it. I think that the idea that PIN announce a dividend and income investors will narrow the discount meaningfully is unlikely.

Dividends are a pain for non-income institutions and unless PIN institutes a SCRIP (which is an administrative nightmare) they're a pain for me as I incur frictional costs on the re-investment. Clearly not the case for all investors.

[starpukka] 02/11/2022 12:19

So basically PIN aren't paying a div because it would bite into management's payouts. And their institutional investors aren't requiring divs from the co. And PIN don't care about the large discount to NAV so they don't care if the share price rises or not. And us PIs have no real power to force a div or a buyback. Is that about right ?

[skyship] 02/11/2022 11:49

Incidentally, PIN responded to my email. Helen Steers delegated the task to a member of staff (Vicki) who trotted out the same old guff one has learned to expect - institutions not requiring income, no correlation between dividend & discount etc.

I've responded with the evidence; and again today with PEY's timely evidence - as above.

We'll see whether Helen puts her head above the parapet this time.