Petershill Partners Share Discussion Threads

[tania67] 14/2/2022 09:18

Also odd: AIC quotes a NAV of 350p. I don't know where they get that from.

[donald pond] 14/2/2022 08:27

I've been thinking about that Jon, and while it sounds intuitively correct to say that valuations of unquoted businesses are inherently uncertain, I wonder whether the depth of private capital these days makes it more certain than we might believe. PHLL seems pretty opaque, but lots of the PE companies value on metrics like PE and EBITDA multiples, and have been more conservative than listed prices.

[jonwig] 14/2/2022 07:07

NAV based on valuing unquoted businesses has to be less accurate than quoted ones. On th other hand, there might be a tendency to value unquoted holdings conservatively - I don't know.

It's good to see a discussion developing here: more people probing the odd valuation.

[tania67] 13/2/2022 21:40

Odd that the IPO appears to have been at such a large premium to NAV. This suggests that initial investors either regarded NAV as conservative, or considered NAV less important than prospective cashflows.

Consistent with the latter, last week’s presentation tried to stress that PHLL’s earnings should be less volatile than other similar funds, but should grow. The prospectus spoke of a “progressive” dividend starting at USD30m/qtr. I make this a DY of 3.5% pa. (at current 2.18p price). This is in line with some other listed PE fund-of-funds (although others are still zero). But if this div really is progressive then it would look more attractive.

Thoughts?

[byzantine626] 12/2/2022 18:18

I bought at an average of 265 and consider to buy more below 210, this would be 40 percent below the IPO. I think it's a real bargain.

[jonwig] 12/2/2022 17:59

There was some criticism (in the FT, for example) that the IPO prospectus was thin on detail, and GS has a reputation for being "opportunistic", but even if the IPO price was overblown, the chairman purchases and latest trading statement were pretty encouraging.

I bought at 250, but might add at these levels. the wider market is key.at this level

[byzantine626] 12/2/2022 17:26

Thank you very much!

[jonwig] 12/2/2022 16:46

Here - the Jan 2022 one (I haven't read the Feb one yet:



Page 38.

[byzantine626] 12/2/2022 15:38

This is very interesting. Have you a source? Unfortunatley I cannot find it.

[tania67] 11/2/2022 18:54

This week’s presentation includes a pro forma Q3 NAV of USD 4255m (=GBP3136m at current exch rate). Using Jonwig’s 1,157m shares in issue => GBP2.71 per share: a discount of 20%.

[jonwig] 07/2/2022 09:07

Chairman bought at 307 and 244, so it's obviously a tough one to evaluate.

[donald pond] 07/2/2022 09:01

Jon, the valuation is so subjective here but I have to start from the assumption that IPO was around fair value. But I've clearly made a mistake buying in at 244. I'm going to wait until the next results and try to work out what NAV might be.

[jonwig] 07/2/2022 08:50

donald - in #19 I estimated the nav to be 207p. What's your calculation please, for a much higher figure? (Genuine question.)

[donald pond] 07/2/2022 08:39

Interesting dynamic here. Discount looks absurdly large and if tide is turning against risk on assets then it's not entirely negative with PHLL looking to buy in that market

[divmad] 04/2/2022 18:56

It's a leveraged play on those who manage risk assets, basically.

[cc2014] 02/2/2022 13:28

I have just found this stock. Not really my usual bag but of course the decline in share price attracts me as a fly to fly-paper.

A worrying scenario as once the fly gets stuck to the paper it can't get off and I wonder if the whole market pulls back whether this will see another step down.

The decline is severe though and must (surely?!?) have a bottom.

I best do some proper research on this one.

[jonwig] 21/1/2022 16:19

winnet - no, I meant the maths.

I took the assets at 30/06, added new money raised and divided by number of shares.
We don't know what their P&L will look like at 31/12 - ie. their intermediate profitability.

They will make some cash, as they intend paying a small dividend, but most profits will go into carried interest, I would think.

[winnet] 21/1/2022 15:12

I think you've missed the fact they arent making any money?

[jonwig] 21/1/2022 08:32

I calculate the opening NAV on IPO to be 207p, but the way they value their 'partner assets' is a bit mysterious.

Calculation:
Assets at 31/06 $2,506m + new money raised £547m = £2,390m.
1,157m shares in issue.

Have I missed something?

[donald pond] 21/1/2022 08:12

What a terrible IPO. Can only assume the market wants to see some results before deciding whether to buy. But GS have every incentive to make this work. Very odd

[divmad] 20/1/2022 15:52

You'd think that the Chairman, being a savvy GS type, would have a better handle on market timing his buys.

[donald pond] 18/1/2022 09:10

I've just bought a few. It's not the simplest business to understand but looks a good diversifier, still has a lot of cash and is well below where the chair bought in some size.

[jonwig] 18/1/2022 07:09

Acquisitions update, busy -

[jonwig] 05/1/2022 08:15

I'd go along with that strategy, and the Symphony Tech stake is just in the right place.

[mrscruff] 04/1/2022 20:26

I have been accumulating sub 370p as the discount is attractive. Still a large seller since IPO as I suppose was the plan to always exit. This is a unique trust containing a mix of assets that should provide smoother returns over many cycles other than crash where it will suffer from the same issues. Lots of private equity property, credit all the way to tech. The discount narrowing is what I am looking forward to and will exit when narrowed however long that takes.