Ft Tre Discussion Threads

[grahamg8] 06/4/2013 10:56

Azalea I looked at AURR some time ago. From memory I was worried that the write downs might continue and this would quickly wipe out any premium.

SPK is new to me and looks interesting.

Both will go on my watch list pending surplus finance.

[azalea] 05/4/2013 18:05

Despite the recent rise,still trading 14% below its 52 week high(32p 11-1-2013) and 50% below its estimated diluted NAV of 55p.

BoD Objective
"To carry out an orderly realisation of the portfolio of carbon and equity assets, distribution of the net proceeds to shareholders and then undertake a voluntary winding up of the company".

[jezza123] 04/4/2013 11:03

a close above 26p would be most pleasing....

[azalea] 04/4/2013 09:17

grahamg8
Have you looked at AURR and SPK? I also hold.

Edit; TRE circa 85% shares in major holders hands

[grahamg8] 04/4/2013 09:12

That,s great news on the finance. In a world where getting any bank to part with money it,s a huge step towards an eventual sale. In the mean time Eur26m cash with 250m shares in circulation says a lot about the next distribution. My estimate I think has just gone up from 6pps to 10pps.

[azalea] 04/4/2013 09:08

Nice tick up on the news with plenty more to come, plus the disposal of the private portfolio.

[azalea] 29/3/2013 11:49

Whatever they do own, the portfolio will be sold by the time it is wound up in 2014.

[edwardt] 28/3/2013 14:06

any views on the bionasa holding - how they can ascribe a value when they don't know what they own..

[grahamg8] 28/3/2013 07:49

The EEA basic fee is only part of the argument.

There is a bonus of £60k for 'ending the CERs completely' by 30 April and just £20k if after that. This tells me that there is a fighting chance that we will exit the CER fiasco earlier rather than later; and that the written down values are reasonably robust because even these worthless pieces of paper are unlikely to seriously depreciate even further from the 31 December value.

There is also a commission of 2.7% on disposal of the investment portfolio. So on the PEP value of £105m they stand to make around £2.8m on top of the basic management fee of £1.3m. I just hope that there are constraints over the actual sale price matching the current valuation. I can't see EEA accepting this restructured agreement unless they thought sales could be achieved and the valuations were realisistic. We certainly had some confirmation of this because part of the loss in asset value in 2012 was due to a write down to match the price currently being negotiated with a prospective buyer.

My estimate is that we will see 6 to 7pps, any more would be great news. The time taken to roll up the rest of the business is perhaps of more interest as this is where the profit over the current share price comes from.

[azalea] 27/3/2013 17:20

27/3/ S.Thompson's latest assessment in a nutshell. "easily worth 30p on any basis and remain a very attractive buy ahead of news on the size of the next capital return".

[edwardt] 27/3/2013 10:53

let's face it £1.3m is still too much - they have done nothing but create wealth destruction here. however welcome news of sorts i suppose.

[jezza123] 27/3/2013 09:14

I liked this bit - particularly the last sentence

Following the conclusion of a selection process, effective from 1 January 2013, EEA was reappointed to provide investment advice in respect of TEP's carbon portfolio and private equity holdings. The new agreement provides for a significant reduction in the fixed costs of retaining EEA's services, while incentivising the maximisation of realisation proceeds. In 2012, EEA was paid an investment advisory fee fixed at GBP 6.0 million per annum. This has been replaced by a new arrangement whereby, if no investments are sold in 2013, EEA's investment advisory services will cost a maximum of GBP 1.3 million. EEA is now incentivised to maximise net disposal proceeds. EEA's reappointment is for an initial period of 12 months.

[azalea] 27/3/2013 07:37

A good Interim report with more money being returned in Q2, whilst progress on further disposals are at various stages of being concluded. Just a question of being patient and collecting the money due until the fund is wound up in 2014.

[azalea] 02/3/2013 08:21

S.Thompson's repeated buy recc based on a NAV of 52p after wind up costs also included a "worst case scenario where spot prices fall to zero". I suspect the combination of those two factors were not lost on buyers yesterday giving rise to a tick up in the share price

[praipus] 20/2/2013 22:16

Views on Obama?

Could he be the reason why the American hedge funds arent so feint hearted?

[jezza123] 20/2/2013 21:59

thanks rooky - well I guess I was hoping against hope that an EU positive outcome might resuscitate (even a little) the patient - but you have convinced me otherwise.

[rooky4] 20/2/2013 12:09

jezza123, not sure what knock on you are expecting, good or bad.

The Global Warming Circus seems to have left town quietly, the only trading block to persist for a while is the EU, as world wide they are now the only ruling elite to be ever prepared to sacrifice their subjects economic well being on the back of a principal (or helping out their mates, if you want to be like that).

CERs have been flat lining for so long now, the patient would normally be pronounced dead.


The nearest historical parallel I can think of is the sale of Indulgences (q.v. Wikipedia), at least they annulled sins generally, rather than just the single sin of producing CO2.
For those indulgences we are still waiting a recovery in the market after 500 years, which is a bit beyond my timeframe for a return!

[edwardt] 20/2/2013 11:05

nav does not factor in deffered performance fee- hence discount is also not as wide as one would envisage.

[azalea] 20/2/2013 10:37

jezza123
You obviously have not read S.T. report." Having renegotiated a number of these CER contracts after the carbon price collapsed, the maximimum possible liabilty to TRE equates 14p a share, the cash pile of 24p a share(before he 6p div0 covers all the 14p liability,so there is no further recourse to shareholders.

[jezza123] 20/2/2013 10:25

hey Rooky4 - yea you are right - but if the EUA's die I figure it'll have a knock on effect to the CERs don't you?

[azalea] 20/2/2013 10:11

Rooky4
There is no point in measuring a company by its record of 5 years ago. TRE has just paid out 6p a share, and unless you can disprove the NAV set out by S. Thompson, there will be more to come as it winds up by 2014. Lets not forget that the major holders (83% of the shares in issue), are not sitting there for the hell of it. Irrespective of the EU, the company's investment adviser EEA Fund Management has calculated TRE net liability at 14p, that together with the 6p payout and costs of winding up the company still leaves a valuable equity portfolio for disposal. That said, if the company is not for you, there are of course several other high NAV to share price ratios out there.

[rooky4] 19/2/2013 19:35

azalea, The problem I have with TRE is 'is there really any NAV'? Because they have been trying to sell for 2 years and there are no buyers for anything other than small bits. Is an asset that nobody will buy really an asset?

At 30November 2010, TRE announced they were selling up and distributing the cash, yes that's 2010.

IC tipped TRE on 31 August 2007 at 135p. By 1/8/11, they said "Keep buying Trading Emissions in spite of the collapse of talks to sell its carbon credits portfolio". At that time the share price was falling off a cliff from 100p to 20, and the real recommendation should have been 'run like hell'. If Simon Thompson always keeps on recommending it then sooner or later he'll get a gain, but that doesn't make up for all the loses. I'm happy to be corrected, but I haven't seen a 'sell' recommendation from the I.C..

The previous board having failed to make any significant sales, the arbs put in another board. Still can't find buyers.
We could sit here forever in the hope some buyers come by, but the managers are burning up the cash left - £6M/year until recently.

By the way, the EU is thinking about rescuing its own scheme for EUA's, not CER's, so it won't help TRE directly.