Raven Prop P Discussion Threads

[spectoacc] 08/9/2021 12:35

Presumably where they spend all the money they squeeze from the co/from juicy far-below-market purchases.

[igbertsponk] 08/9/2021 12:32

Raven's office is above a nightclub near Red Square, just near the Lamborghini dealer!

[my retirement fund] 08/9/2021 09:58

In the next decade Russians are going to find themselves in a position of vastly growing wealth. They will never have had it so good. For them it will be like at imported deflation of goods we all experienced in the 90s on steroids.

[my retirement fund] 08/9/2021 09:56

Pretty much China's biggest trading partner. Several large infrastructure schemes, railways bridges etc under construction to link the two countries together at high speed.

[my retirement fund] 08/9/2021 09:43

Russia sure has a far brighter future regarding growth and prosperity given its ever closer links with the prc

[ceaserxzy] 08/9/2021 07:19

Avi.A and Avi.b trade at about 5.5% yield. Is ravp much risker than avi.A and avi.B? considering the history and the future of warehousing, and the Aviva preference share fiasco, one may think not by much. So on a more comparable but still significantly higher yield than Aviva prefs, like 6 to 8%, ravp should trade between 150 to 200 p.

[cc2014] 07/9/2021 11:52

Well it looks like after some considerable thought the market has decided the recent results were good enough to lift the share price of the prefs slightly.

I'm with Monty - these should easily be 140p but the market has it's way of doing things. I guess a few more of those flipping from 90p are now out the way.

A quick look at the 10 year chart shows 160p might be more reasonable given interest rates are even lower now than at any time before.

Ords' seem to have pulled back a bit now. Can't say I'm really interested in buying them as I prefer the prefs but I guess something below 30p might tempt me.

[montyhedge] 07/9/2021 10:35

I know we said it before but these should be 140p.

[spectoacc] 03/9/2021 18:50

Legal costs are ridiculous - and the fact no PI's or existing holders got any chance at the cheap shares & bonds. I don't mind skinning Invesco, but the co belongs to all shareholders, not a select few, and not to management.

[holts] 02/9/2021 22:56

What , if any , was the proposal for the repayment of the debt ?

[montyhedge] 02/9/2021 17:35

Also to become an Isa millionaire, pick a growth share with growing dividends, mine is Clarkson Plc the shipping broker.18 years of continuous growing dividends even through all the stockmarket crashes.

[montyhedge] 02/9/2021 16:37

Compounding the eight wonder of the world, this is the one to make you a Isa millionaire just like myself.

[my retirement fund] 02/9/2021 16:28

Shame we are not seeing any recovery in the laughable value of the prefs, I guess the entitled significant parties are furiously off loading their 90 ninty pence ill gotten freebies as we speak.

[zangdook] 01/9/2021 10:04

He's good at being filtered though.

[igbertsponk] 31/8/2021 14:39

You've just posted on the thread, not very good at filtering are you?

[igbertsponk] 31/8/2021 12:53

The eco stuff with the solar panels etc is good to see. More and more funds are turning green so wouldn't be able to invest in a "dirty" company.

[my retirement fund] 31/8/2021 12:51

I couldn't agree more, and to think there are some investors who dont seem to care about this shocking treatment of its shareholders funds. To say "stop winging move on" beggars belief, and with such attitudes, is it any wonder the share price is down the toilet!

[kenny] 31/8/2021 12:30

I note that the company bore the entire legal and transaction costs of the buyout of the Invesco shareholdings. This cost £1.254m but surely most or all of this cost should be borne by the joint venture - because the JV is the main beneficiary of the transactions.

The company whilst having a 50% interest in the joint venture put up £51m in cash, while the directors invested only ordinary shares and zero cash.

It is not reasonable for the company to bear 100% of the cost of the JV and only benefit to the tune of 50%.

Once again, a case of the directors benefitting themselves to the detriment of all other shareholders.

We need institutions to object to this and for the directors to reimburse the company for their half of the costs - ideally by the time the full year 2021 results are presented.

[kenny] 31/8/2021 11:07

I am relieved to see that the results contain no mention of seeking purchases of more warehouses. Prices are rising so this is not a time to purchase. However, the primary reason is the obvious fact the company's gearing is already very high - not least because of the debt taken on by the company to finance the joint venture.

[igbertsponk] 31/8/2021 09:18

Equity Development update:-

An attractive total return outlook is underpinned by the prospect of further underlying NAV growth from a near ideally placed portfolio. Despite that the shares are 46% below end June NAV/share, supported by a 7.4% prospective yield. That discount should narrow if the second half sees some stabilisation of the political backdrop and firmer RUB/GBP. As an alternative, the Cumulative Preference Shares provide exposure to the core property case and an assured 10.7% yield.

[cwa1] 31/8/2021 08:21

Equity Development update:-



An attractive total return outlook is underpinned by the prospect of further underlying NAV growth from a near ideally placed portfolio. Despite that the shares are 46% below end June NAV/share, supported by a 7.4% prospective yield. That discount should narrow if the second half sees some stabilisation of the political backdrop and firmer RUB/GBP. As an alternative, the Cumulative Preference Shares provide exposure to the core property case and an assured 10.7% yield.