OCA - Oceania Group - retirement villages

[ThaiJohn]

21 buyers at 52c for less than $150k of shares or $7.1k average per buyer.
Hardly the big end of town...
What's it costing you? A new main sail. :)
Seriously though, I think it's good buying down here, but it doesn't mean its not without risk or that it wont see 'deeper' value next week...

Told ya..hookers, beer and NTL. ��

[bull....]

And the rest are traders sniffing around for an entry. Stands to reason, seems most people see an opportunity, just coming at it from different motivations.

i dont see any opportunity at moment.
maybe next yr ?

[Cupsy]

Hi Cupsy, do you think the market misunderstands OCA and its mispriced?
Or is the current price reflective of the risk and market conditions?

The answer to that depends on if you believe in efficient market theory I guess. Property market down turn is a highlighted risk, I guess the question for the individual becomes do you believe the market has the correct price built in for that risk, and how long does it last and what are the long term implications.

The misunderstanding I was talking about earlier was academic, we are here trying to learn and improve our craft as investors, and we (me included) are pretty slack on the basic 101 stuff like reading the available documentation. We do really need to do better.

[winner69]

The answer to that depends on if you believe in efficient market theory I guess. Property market down turn is a highlighted risk, I guess the question for the individual becomes do you believe the market has the correct price built in for that risk, and how long does it last and what are the long term implications.

The misunderstanding I was talking about earlier was academic, we are here trying to learn and improve our craft as investors, and we (me included) are pretty slack on the basic 101 stuff like reading the available documentation. We do really need to do better.

Some 101 stuff cupsy

AR says Profit before Tax was $28.4m which included $66.1m of realised gains from ORA sales

Does this mean that day to day operations ran at $37.7m loss?

If so the the current discount to NTA the shares are trading at could be because the market (efficient) expects these to continue and to be the equivalent to NPV of future losses.

[Cupsy]

Some 101 stuff cupsy

AR says Profit before Tax was $28.4m which included $66.1m of realised gains from ORA sales

Does this mean that day to day operations ran at $37.7m loss?

If so the the current discount to NTA the shares are trading at could be because the market (efficient) expects these to continue and to be the equivalent to NPV of future losses.

What is your time period and discount rate used?

[Daytr]

You understand how an average works Day Trader?

Yep, on average you are out of the money...

[ValueNZ]

Yep, on average you are out of the money...
OTM? This isn't an option bud

[Mrbuyit]

Come on one of you must want to flog me your scrip at 52. I'm begging.

No need to beg, just need to pay 1c extra.

I reckon 48 is going to be the bottom based on nothing more than a hunch. Place your bets now!

[ValueNZ]

Got 50k on the close at 52c, nowhere near filled the order but better than nothing.

Think of the poor degenerate who sold me the shares.
Which position did you sell/trim?

[winner69]

Oceania deduct the float when they calculate the Embedded Value

Embedded Value is about 71 cents prt share

[ValueNZ]

Oceania deduct the float when they calculate the Embedded Value

Embedded Value is about 71 cents prt share
Embedded Value is a figure used to show built up unrealised resale gains + accrued DMF.

Of course you'd deduct the float when calculating that figure. What's your point?

[ValueNZ]

3M and it's recent spin off.

Ok, I have a project for you ValueNZ and something I want you to ask your professors.

Look at the trading prices of 3M before and after it spun off its healthcare business which was around 30% of its income and huge part of its revenue. Look at the market value of the shares you got in the spin off the day it spun and the market value of the remaining shares of 3M.

Remember Mistatea has told us how even the NZ market is hyper efficient let alone the US and one of the largest most followed companies in the world.
Nice! What's that, like a 25-30% return in 2 months? EMH is a joke.

I won't be asking my professor that, I decided part way through last year that I wasn't going to argue/debate with teachers about topics they were teaching. It never goes anywhere productive. My economics teacher was a green party voting socialist so that was difficult for me haha.

[Daytr]

Deleted as duped

[Daytr]

OTM? This isn't an option bud

Ya see this is when you should learn to keep your mouth shut.
You understand I traded derivatives for a living right?
So what are you trying to tell me kid?

You said you haven't learnt anything from your lectures.
Perhaps you should be paying more attention.

[ValueNZ]

Ya see this is when you should learn to keep your mouth shut.
You understand I traded derivatives for a living right?
So what are you trying to tell me kid?

You said you haven't learnt anything from your lectures.
Perhaps you should be paying more attention.
That Oceania shares are not a derivative, there is no "out of the money". There isn't a strike price, or an expiration date.

If you bought shares at 80c and a year later the market values them at 52c, who gives a shít, you're not betting on some price movement to make a profit.

[Baa_Baa]

That Oceania shares are not a derivative, there is no "out of the money". There isn't a strike price, or an expiration date.

If you bought shares at 80c and a year later the market values them at 52c, who gives a shít, you're not betting on some price movement to make a profit.

I was confused by this term of phrase, "out of the money" because it applies to derivatives, not equities, stock or shares.

ChatGPT gave this answer to the question:

Can an equity, stock, or share, be "out of the money"?

(after explaining what a call and put option was), it said ...

Summary



Options can be "out of the money" based on the relationship between the strike price and the current market price of the underlying asset.
Equities (stocks or shares) cannot be "out of the money" because they are not derivatives and do not have strike prices.


In summary, the term "out of the money" is relevant to options trading and not applicable to regular stock ownership.

[ValueNZ]

I was confused by this term of phrase, "out of the money" because it applies to derivatives, not equities, stock or shares.

ChatGPT gave this answer to the question:

Can an equity, stock, or share, be "out of the money"?

(after explaining what a call and put option was), it said ...

Summary



Options can be "out of the money" based on the relationship between the strike price and the current market price of the underlying asset.
Equities (stocks or shares) cannot be "out of the money" because they are not derivatives and do not have strike prices.


In summary, the term "out of the money" is relevant to options trading and not applicable to regular stock ownership.
Exactly.

Daytr I think you need to do a little more research on options before telling me to pay more attention in uni lectures (level 100 papers don't even look at derivatives).

[Baa_Baa]

He's a very interesting character that is for sure.

I'll tell you what Baa_Baa, it's a bloody sight easier getting hold of a bunch of OCA shares when they're low 50's eh.

Buying same volumes I was last year but paying way less.

Something any 5 year old would easily understand.

But for a lot of people here it's a massive struggle.

Yeah, because there's no five year olds here, even though some act like it.

Thing is, most people seem to focus on the share price, hoping to buy low, then sell high. Fair enough, but most of them don't know what low or high is, because they don't know or think they know, what the company is worth (value) now, or into the future and rely on the market to tell them. And the market imo is a terrible indicator of current or future company value. Nevertheless, the market does 'price' it. We can use that to our advantage in the right situations, or we can freak out and kill our capital.

For the market price followers, it's all about making a capital gain, preferably quickly, on the share price, they're all hovering around seeing this share price sh1t itself wondering, is this the low, no wait, it might go higher and miss a few cents, no wait, it might go lower and lose a few cents, no wait I haven't any idea what the heck is happening. All because they don't know, or don't have the skills or inclination to try and figure out what a company is actually worth, like what is its value now and what will it's value be in the future. It's like flying blind, informed only by the share price which is notoriously unreliable.

Value investors on the other hand spend most of their investing lives waiting for opportunity, because they put in the effort to decide what the company is actually worth now and into the future, and whether the asset they're buying now is a decent risk reward, and whether the market has completely mispriced it, giving an outstanding long term investment return. Of course they're vilified and ridiculed because, essentially they're contrary investors, they see something others don't and buy what appears to be a dog because the share price has been gutted, but in fact will (or most likely will) pay off handsomely for them in the future.

We the value investors and the traders, are here right now because of the same thing, the share price is ridiculously low compared to embedded and future value. We only differ as to our rationale as to when to get some, or some more.

[Baa_Baa]

Exactly.

Daytr I think you need to do a little more research on options before telling me to pay more attention in uni lectures (level 100 papers don't even look at derivatives).

As far as I can tell, there's no options chain on OCA.NZ or OCA.AX

[ValueNZ]

As far as I can tell, there's no options chain on OCA.NZ or OCA.AX
Even if there were, Daytr was referring to SailorRob's shares being out of the money which makes no sense :lol:

[winner69]

Warriors had awesome 42-12 win over the Cowboys yesterday. Fans really excited now and saying we always do better in the 2nd half of the season so finals footie is almost a certainty now and gettin even more confident of this being ‘our year’ UP THE WAHS

Oceania share price had a bad week and down 3 cents 5% to end at 52 cents. If anything it’s made the fandom even more convinced it’s a good thing. One of the chief fans canvassed the fandom and found that nearly all are keeping the faith ..and that a few new fans might join in. However they might not be saying ‘this is the year’ for Oceania share price to get to $1 but definitely next year or the year after that or maybe 2040even. GO OCEANIA YOU BEAUTIFUL THING

A casual observer possibly sees ‘this is our year’ not happening for either …. But plenty of action at the TAB and NZX betting on it short term

[Daytr]

Oh dear.
All the amateurs come out to play.
Out of the money means exactly that, it's not worth what you paid for it.
Yes the term probably originated from options, but is widely used in finance circles for anything that's.... out of the money.

And can be applied to anything.
You could be otm on a house purchase, as many have been recently.
For shares the 'strike price' is simply the share price.

Fx forward hedge books which are not options are quite often termed in the money,.or .... let's see.... oh yeah out of the money.

It's pretty basic stuff guys, and pretty embarrassing how you all pile in with the huge amount of experience you all have. 🤣
Obviously Chat GPT still has a long way to go on the vanacular.

Interesting that the same people that piled in with their cluelessness are the biggest OCA fans.
I know the Wahs cleaned up last night, but sorry guys it's still not their year.

[Daytr]

That Oceania shares are not a derivative, there is no "out of the money". There isn't a strike price, or an expiration date.

If you bought shares at 80c and a year later the market values them at 52c, who gives a shít, you're not betting on some price movement to make a profit.

Really???
I mean really?
I'm sure you must have meant something else other than what you wrote above.
I hope that's not what you have been trying to debate with your lecturers.

Look at it this way, every purchase or sale you make you are literally taking an option, an option over not to buy or sell, an option to be invested in anything else but what you have selected.

[Daytr]

I think we will all believe ChatGTP over a washed out Day Trader.

'I have a guy who claims to be a finance professional trying to tell me that 'out of the money' means that something is not worth what you paid for it. What are your thoughts'?


"Out of the money" is a term commonly used in options trading and refers to a situation where the current price of the underlying asset is not favorable for the option holder to exercise the option. It does not necessarily mean that the option is worthless or not worth what was paid for it.

In options trading, there are three main classifications for options relative to the price of the underlying asset:


In the money (ITM): An option is in the money if exercising the option would result in a profit. For a call option, this means the strike price is below the current market price of the underlying asset. For a put option, it means the strike price is above the current market price.
At the money (ATM): An option is at the money if the strike price is equal to the current market price of the underlying asset.
Out of the money (OTM): An option is out of the money if exercising the option would result in a loss. For a call option, this means the strike price is above the current market price of the underlying asset. For a put option, it means the strike price is below the current market price.

The value of an out-of-the-money option may not be zero, especially if there is still time until expiration and if there is potential for the underlying asset's price to move in a favorable direction. However, out-of-the-money options typically have lower premiums compared to in-the-money options due to their lower probability of ending up profitable at expiration.
Therefore, while an out-of-the-money option may not be currently profitable, it doesn't necessarily mean it's worthless or not worth what was paid for it. It's essential to consider factors such as time to expiration, volatility, and market conditions when evaluating the value of an option.





I really don't care what ChatGPT or any other thing you need to look up says. The fact that you have to look these things up says it all.
I know, because it was a common phrase used during my career for anything that's was, like it describes, was out of the money.

Thanks for personal digs and insults though. You just can't help yourself, especially when you don't have a leg to stand on, of well at least you will make a good pirate.

[Daytr]

No. It is exactly what he meant and the Sailor backs him up.

Writing in the third person says it all.
Of course you back him up... deep value & all that. 🤣

Have a good one, I'll let the ignorant masses keep squabbling over what they know nothing about as it really displays the OCA Fandom qualities, which are quite entertaining.

[Daytr]

Can you respond to ChatGTP which scoured the entire internet and all of recorded human history?

All of human recorded history and the entire internet database is wrong and you are right?

Really! Wow I never knew that. 🙄
Mate I was there, for over 20 years, worked on some of the biggest trading floors in the world.
But you rely on ChatGPT. 🤣🤣🤣

I think I will now constantly refer to your OCA position as OTM, just to wind you up, well until of course the share price turns by 2040 & you are ATM or even ITM. Good luck on the latter.

No use arguing with fools.
Have a productive day.

[blackcap]

Writing in the third person says it all.
Of course you back him up... deep value & all that. 🤣

Have a good one, I'll let the ignorant masses keep squabbling over what they know nothing about as it really displays the OCA Fandom qualities, which are quite entertaining.

If you buy an asset for $1 and the market values it at $0.80, then in my mind, you are definitely out of the money. Seems really simple to me.

I also know about options and they are out of the money if the strike price has not been met by the head share. This is possibly a more common use of the vernacular.

However if my mate buys Tesla for $400 a share he is currently well OTM!! :)

[Daytr]

If you buy an asset for $1 and the market values it at $0.80, then in my mind, you are definitely out of the money. Seems really simple to me.

I also know about options and they are out of the money if the strike price has not been met by the head share. This is possibly a more common use of the vernacular.

However if my mate buys Tesla for $400 a share he is currently well OTM!! :)

Cheers Blackcap. Pretty basic stuff really.

Our boys didn't do too well in the T20 yesterday, worst prepared NZ team I have ever seen, it was pretty embarrassing. Hopefully they improve for the Windies.

[Daytr]

Nobody ever uses the term 'out of the money' to describe something that is not worth what you paid for it.

I read 40 hedge fund letters a quarter and thousands of pages of finance, thats basically all I do.

Hundreds of books including about all kinds of trading situations you name it.... Thousands of media articles...

Never once heard 'out of the money' used like Day Trader is trying to use it.

The fact that you have never heard it, says it all. 🤣

It's probably not a term you would get in a report or newsletter, but no reason why not either.
It's how traders talk.
You don't learn everything in a book, in fact real world experience is the best teacher of all, well that's if you learn from it.

You have heard of mark to market right?
Well that tells you if it's OTM, ATM or ITM (not the hardware store for you peasants 🤣).

See there you go, you have had a productive day already and learned something. 😉

[winner69]

Underwater is a good term …esp if talking about about stocks with a float that are ‘sinking’

[Daytr]

Underwater is a good term …esp if talking about about stocks with a float that are ‘sinking’

Haha Indeed!

[ValueNZ]

In 2040, the dividend could easily be 52c a share.
Good morning Rob, could you please show your workings to calculate that? Thanks.

[winner69]

Good morning Rob, could you please show your workings to calculate that? Thanks.

His time period is 16 years …..wonder what discount rates he used?

[Daytr]

Hi Winner.

How do you view the ORA liabilities, economically?

Day Trader has pushed back on the thesis in detail many times. The only one who actually has. He is totally wrong but that's beside the point.

You on the other hand have done nothing but Whinge.

You were all bulled up in 2021, buying and pushing the stock at the absolute top. Now you're crying but you can offer no analysis at all.

I've never seen you post anything remotely interesting.

Wrong like you are not OTM 🤣🤣🤣
I'll take that every time.

[ValueNZ]

Underwater is a good term …esp if talking about about stocks with a float that are ‘sinking’
Hey winner69, how much of a loss did you realise on OCA shares?

As a percentage of your total portfolio at the time.

[Daytr]

Hey winner69, how much of a loss did you realise on OCA shares?

As a percentage of your total portfolio at the time.

Wow with questions like that you really are turning into a SailorBoy mini me.

How about taking the good attributes of the Sailor & leaving the majority I.e the garbage behind.

[ValueNZ]

Wow with questions like that you really are turning into a SailorBoy mini me.

How about taking the good attributes of the Sailor & leaving the majority I.e the garbage behind.
I think it's an important question as it puts the rest of his posts into context. Ie a bitter man who got caught up in the hype and lost between half and two thirds of his capital invested in OCA.

[winner69]

I think it's an important question as it puts the rest of his posts into context. Ie a bitter man who got caught up in the hype and lost between half and two thirds of his capital invested in OCA.

Seeing you ask if you take fotal sales $ less total buy $ over the years and divide that by current number of shares held the answer is $5.25 (is profitable)...was a bit higher at beginning of year. You could say the market has paid me to hold the shares I have at the moment (not really that many in big picture of things)

[winner69]

I think it's an important question as it puts the rest of his posts into context. Ie a bitter man who got caught up in the hype and lost between half and two thirds of his capital invested in OCA.

Not bitter at all Value …as previous post OCA has been kind to me over the years

I have this morbid fascination with how Oceania performs .. operationally and financially and how the market has reacted over time. My database is probably just as big and meaningful as Mavericks. Over the years we have shared many of our workings and thoughts. Shame he’s apparently given up posting on Sharetrader.

If I come across as ‘bitter’ it’s mainly because the financials and the company hype don’t reconcile ….and they disappoint the market. Maybe things will change.

No doubt my morbid fascination with Oceania will continue ….as it will with some other companies. Besides being fascinating I find it educational as well.

[winner69]

In 2040, the dividend could easily be 52c a share.

In case post inadvertently gets deleted

I

[Daytr]

In case post inadvertently gets deleted

I

Hey Winner, what do you think OCA would need to deliver an after company tax divi of 52c?
(Without any further capital raises etc)
I reckon at least $10Bln - $14Bln depending on the percentage.

I wonder what their day to day operating loss will be by then? It doubled in the last year from $20M to $40M, does ot keep doubling 😉 or go up by $20M per year? Whats that $360M per year by 2040?

Flesh wound, what's wrong with ya. 😅

[Daytr]

ValueNZ, in case you missed it, he's talking about market cap 藍. Huge display of ignorance.

Market cap doesn't pay the dividend sport.

Really is that right, who knew.... Gawd you are desperate to score points you will literally say anything no matter how ridiculous it makes you look.. :) But continue to fail again & again.
Be like a Wahs fan, try harder.

How's that OTM position you have, you know the one you don't recognize as OTM. :)
Do you want to refer to ChatGTP? 🤣

See if you were as smart as you think you are, you would understand that's not what I was saying.
Market cap is a reflection of earnings... x a multiple.. ergo... I'm sure you know the rest, its relatively simple...

Up the OCAs doesn't really work, so we will have to think of something new for the OCA core fans...

[Ferg]

I wonder what their day to day operating loss will be ... [snip] ... It doubled in the last year ... [snip] ... to $40M

Can you provide a source for the $40m? In particular, which page on the AR and what calculation you performed?
Thanks

[Baa_Baa]

Can you provide a source for the $40m? In particular, which page on the AR and what calculation you performed?
Thanks

It will be interesting where he think this OCA $40m comes from, though either way it pales in comparison with RYM's measly $4m NPAT and whopping $246m comprehensive LOSS, a -171% from 2023, $39m LOSS in total equity, from total assets of $13b. Which he thinks is a better 'investment'.

[Daytr]

Can you provide a source for the $40m? In particular, which page on the AR and what calculation you performed?
Thanks

Already done when I originally posted it.
From memory it's from the cashflow statement on P29. But according to SailorBoy that doesn't count.

[Ferg]

Already done when I originally posted it.
From memory it's from the cashflow statement on P29.

I couldn't find the post. Walk us through your calculation of operating losses.

[Daytr]

I couldn't find the post. Walk us through your calculation of operating losses.

Sorry it's on P49 top right.
$208M in, $259.6M going out.
So actually I should have rounded it to $50M loss, not $40M loss on operating the villages.

[Ferg]

Sorry it's on P49 top right.
$208M in, $259.6M going out.
So actually I should have rounded it to $50M loss, not $40M loss on operating the villages.

That is a cashflow statement, not a P&L. In accounting parlance an "operating loss" is equivalent to a negative operating profit. Losses and profits are reported in the P&L, not the cashflow statement as pointed out by SR. Either change your numbers or change your terminology because I'm seeing no such "operating loss" in the cashflow statement on p49. I recommend change your terminology because right now the words you are using are not correct for the numbers you are quoting.

[Bjauck]

Oh my god this is gold.


SR to ChatGTP

Have you ever come across the phrase 'out of the money' to mean that something is not worth what you paid for it? Can you scour the internet and the entirety of all of human history.

ChatGTP to SR

I've never encountered the phrase "out of the money" used to mean that something is not worth what you paid for it outside the context of options trading. It's possible that someone may be using the term colloquially or metaphorically in a different context, but in the realm of finance, "out of the money" has a specific and widely understood meaning related to options.

In finance, particularly in options trading, "out of the money" refers to a specific condition of an option contract where exercising the option would not result in a profitable outcome based on the current price of the underlying asset and the strike price of the option.


If you encounter someone using the term "out of the money" in a different context to mean that something is not worth what you paid for it, it may be a colloquial or idiosyncratic usage specific to that individual or group. However, in the broader context of finance and investing, the term has a well-defined meaning related to options trading.
Yikes. It is Certainly a lesson not to rely on AI or ChatGTP just yet. My average purchase price for my OCA ordinary shares is about 75c each. I am definitely “out of the money” or “underwater” with my investment. I have heard for decades both terms used interchangeably by people to refer informally to many types of currently underperforming investments.

ChatGTP is biased to American English usage for a start.

[Baa_Baa]

That is a cashflow statement, not a P&L. In accounting parlance an "operating loss" is equivalent to a negative operating profit. Losses and profits are reported in the P&L, not the cashflow statement as pointed out by SR. Either change your numbers or change your terminology because I'm seeing no such "operating loss" in the cashflow statement on p49. I recommend change your terminology because right now the words you are using are not correct for the numbers you are quoting.

Daytr is not concerned about "words" or their meaning, he makes stuff up that no analyst would agree on, by obfuscating standard accounting and financial terminology and practices. And doesn't seem particularly astute at reading or interpreting financial statements, albeit for most mortals they are pretty complicated.

Today was another example, arguing strongly that OTM is a generic term to mean a holder at their average price is "OTM" if the share price is lower than their average buy price today. Which of course is nonsense, it's a fabricated perversion of standard financial terminology as it applies only to options and at no time ever has it ever applied in general discourse to equities.

[Baa_Baa]

Yikes. It is Certainly a lesson not to rely on AI or ChatGTP just yet. My average purchase price for my OCA ordinary shares is about 75c each. I am definitely “out of the money” or “underwater” with my investment. I have heard for decades both terms used interchangeably for many types of bad investments.

What a load of nonsense. At no time ever has anyone made reference to OTM in terms of OCA equities, that I'm aware of. The fact that you disclose that you are about 33% into a paper loss is not surprising as you have no inkling of when to buy, or probably sell, but to suggest that you have decades (like literally 10's of years) experience of the terms used interchangeably, is laughable. Credibility, none.

[Daytr]

That is a cashflow statement, not a P&L. In accounting parlance an "operating loss" is equivalent to a negative operating profit. Losses and profits are reported in the P&L, not the cashflow statement as pointed out by SR. Either change your numbers or change your terminology because I'm seeing no such "operating loss" in the cashflow statement on p49. I recommend change your terminology because right now the words you are using are not correct for the numbers you are quoting.

Gawd you guys love pointing out the obvious.
I have aleady explained this, so go back through my posts, other than to state the obvious.

Are they getting enough in fees to cover the day to day operating costs of the villages?
Answer: No & its a big over $50M no.
So things like DMF, resales, sales are subsidizing the day to day operation.

That cashflow gap has more than doubled in the last year. What's it going to do this year?

[Ferg]

Daytr is not concerned about "words" or their meaning, he makes stuff up that no analyst would agree on, by obfuscating standard accounting and financial terminology and practices. And doesn't seem particularly astute at reading or interpreting financial statements, albeit for most mortals they are pretty complicated.

Today was another example, arguing strongly that OTM is a generic term to mean a holder at their average price is "OTM" if the share price is lower than their average buy price today. Which of course is nonsense, it's a fabricated perversion of standard financial terminology as it applies only to options and at no time ever has it ever applied in general discourse to equities.

Using a language with agreed definitions is vital for discourse. Otherwise phrases can be OTM (off the mark) or OTM (on the mark). Sensible discourse is not possible if people are going to just make up definitions for words. I try to be precise with my wording to avoid confusion and mis-communication. However, some peoples brains are wired differently such that mis-commuincation can still occur.

I think what he is trying to say is: "If I look at the cashflow statements on page 49 of the 2024 annual report and deduct $259.6m of 'Payments to suppliers and employees' from $207.9m of 'Receipts from residents for village and care fees' but I will ignore changes in accounts receivable and accounts payable and ignore the P&L which is the internationally accepted method of accounting for profits and losses, and if I also ignore other sources of revenue such as deferred management fees which are funded from the $226.3m of 'Receipts from new occupation right agreements' on a different line in the cashflow statement, but an accrued version of such income is reported in note 2.2 on page 58, and if I ignore the accompanying presentation by OCA reporting 'underlying profit' of $62.1m on page 17 and if I also ignore the segment analysis on page 54 of the annual report, and if I also ignore the reconciliation of profit to cashflows on page 50 of the annual report, then I get a number of negative $50m which I will call 'operating losses' ".

I think that is what he is trying to say.

[Daytr]

Well it's not just AI that lacks the knowledge of this term used as by yourself and within Day Traders head. It's the hundreds of books, thousands of fund letters, thousands of media articles, hundreds of podcasts,

The internet in it's entirety...

You must have been Daytraders boy on the trading floor?


What a load of nonsense. At no time ever has anyone made reference to OTM in terms of OCA equities, that I'm aware of. The fact that you disclose that you are about 33% into a paper loss is not surprising as you have no inkling of when to buy, or probably sell, but to suggest that you have decades (like literally 10's of years) experience of the terms used interchangeably, is laughable. Credibility, none.

Keep doubling down fellas.
It's hilarious what you don't know.
This is really basic, but I suppose stubbornness is a core trait of to true OCA fan.

[Cupsy]

Gawd you guys love pointing out the obvious.
I have aleady explained this, so go back through my posts, other than to state the obvious.

Are they getting enough in fees to cover the day to day operating costs of the villages?
Answer: No & its a big over $50M no.
So things like DMF, resales, sales are subsidizing the day to day operation.

That cashflow gap has more than doubled in the last year. What's it going to do this year?

Maybe you should step back and relax, some time off of social media is a healthy thing sometimes.

[Bjauck]

Keep doubling down fellas.
It's hilarious what you don't know.
This is really basic, but I suppose stubbornness is a core trait of to true OCA fan. The OCA thread is a modern day classic! Posters disagree; that is expected, but are the angry personalised attacks from some really necessary? I understand “out of the money” has a particular meaning with respect to options. However as an informal term it has also referred to any investment with a book loss.

Collins online dictionary: https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/out-of-the-money#:~:text=(aʊt%20əv%20ðə%20m,if%20out%20of%20t he%20money.

[Daytr]

The OCA thread is a modern day classic! Posters disagree; that is expected, but are the angry personalised attacks from some really necessary? I understand “out of the money” has a particular meaning with respect to options. However as an informal term it has also referred to any investment with a book loss.

Collins online dictionary: https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/out-of-the-money#:~:text=(aʊt%20əv%20ðə%20m,if%20out%20of%20t he%20money.

Amazing ol ChatGPT that apparently picks everything up missed a publication like to Collins Dictionary.
Who would have thunk...

[Daytr]

Using a language with agreed definitions is vital for discourse. Otherwise phrases can be OTM (off the mark) or OTM (on the mark). Sensible discourse is not possible if people are going to just make up definitions for words. I try to be precise with my wording to avoid confusion and mis-communication. However, some peoples brains are wired differently such that mis-commuincation can still occur.

I think what he is trying to say is: "If I look at the cashflow statements on page 49 of the 2024 annual report and deduct $259.6m of 'Payments to suppliers and employees' from $207.9m of 'Receipts from residents for village and care fees' but I will ignore changes in accounts receivable and accounts payable and ignore the P&L which is the internationally accepted method of accounting for profits and losses, and if I also ignore other sources of revenue such as deferred management fees which are funded from the $226.3m of 'Receipts from new occupation right agreements' on a different line in the cashflow statement, but an accrued version of such income is reported in note 2.2 on page 58, and if I ignore the accompanying presentation by OCA reporting 'underlying profit' of $62.1m on page 17 and if I also ignore the segment analysis on page 54 of the annual report, and if I also ignore the reconciliation of profit to cashflows on page 50 of the annual report, then I get a number of negative $50m which I will call 'operating losses' ".

I think that is what he is trying to say.

Ferg, I think I was pretty clear in what I said and actually if you had read the original posts I was also clear what I was referring to, nothing more, nothing less.

You might want to think accounts receivable/ payable as well considering residents fees are payable in advance.

[Cupsy]

Originally Posted by Ferg View Post
Using a language with agreed definitions is vital for discourse. Otherwise phrases can be OTM (off the mark) or OTM (on the mark). Sensible discourse is not possible if people are going to just make up definitions for words. I try to be precise with my wording to avoid confusion and mis-communication. However, some peoples brains are wired differently such that mis-commuincation can still occur.

I think what he is trying to say is: "If I look at the cashflow statements on page 49 of the 2024 annual report and deduct $259.6m of 'Payments to suppliers and employees' from $207.9m of 'Receipts from residents for village and care fees' but I will ignore changes in accounts receivable and accounts payable and ignore the P&L which is the internationally accepted method of accounting for profits and losses, and if I also ignore other sources of revenue such as deferred management fees which are funded from the $226.3m of 'Receipts from new occupation right agreements' on a different line in the cashflow statement, but an accrued version of such income is reported in note 2.2 on page 58, and if I ignore the accompanying presentation by OCA reporting 'underlying profit' of $62.1m on page 17 and if I also ignore the segment analysis on page 54 of the annual report, and if I also ignore the reconciliation of profit to cashflows on page 50 of the annual report, then I get a number of negative $50m which I will call 'operating losses' ".

I think that is what he is trying to say.


Ferg, I think I was pretty clear in what I said and actually if you had read the original posts I was also clear what I was referring to, nothing more, nothing less.

I dont like to weigh in on things like this, but this is just not a credible response to what ferg has posted imo.

[Ferg]

Ferg, I think I was pretty clear in what I said and actually if you had read the original posts I was also clear what I was referring to, nothing more, nothing less.

What you have posted is not 'operating losses' by any definition. The first and last bits of my interpretation of what you are trying to say is true, and the rest are your unstated assumptions. Do we agree on this?

Also, as Baa_Baa has already pointed out eons ago, why are you ignoring other sources of revenue? We don't do that for any other business.

Consequently, your definition of 'operating losses' is nonsensical. Hence, I go back to my earlier post and suggest you change your terminology because it is a) misleading to the uninformed and b) incorrect.

[Daytr]

I dont like to weigh in on things like this, but this is just not a credible response to what ferg has posted imo.

Well as I wasn't referring to the P&L and referred to a particular section of the cashflow statement what Ferg said is irrelevant.

[Ferg]

What a mixed up world we live in. DT thinks a cashflow is a P&L, and my stating a cashflow is not a P&L is "irrelevant". Oh dear. As you were.....keep shouting into the void.

[Cupsy]

.pointless post.

[Balance]

“It is damn hard to win an argument or debate against a wise person. It is impossible to win an argument or debate against a fool.”

Apply as appropriate.

[winner69]

OMG …Mike did a huge rave this morning in Mikes Minute on the radio. He was super excited and told hundreds of thousands of listeners how great the Warriors are and now team back to full strength and in the groove and got momentum that they are definitely heading to a. ‘This is our year’ season. UP THE WAHS

Forbar did a rave last week and said OCA will be $1 soon. But Forbar are light weights really. What Oceania need is for Rob to use his wide network of gurus and get somebody like this guy Gill and do a Roaring Kitty to get the market excited ….would go well past a buck if he got social media in a frenzy. GO OCEANIA YOU BEAUTIFUL THING

However will fandom win out at the end of the day …that’s still the big question

[Daytr]

What a mixed up world we live in. DT thinks a cashflow is a P&L, and my stating a cashflow is not a P&L is "irrelevant". Oh dear. As you were.....keep shouting into the void.

That's most disingenuous, but nice try.
All I have pointed out is fees aren't covering the day to day operation of the villages and by some margin and the deficit has grown significantly.
This deficit needs to be covered by other income.

On P58 as you point out its being covered by the DMF. So the DMF that the likes of Sailorboy & his first mate rave about as the golden goose is basically being chewed up by funding the day to day operations.
DMF only increased by $2M, fees by $ 11M
Payments to suppliers & employees however increased by $30M.

Rather than put downs which is the go to defence on this thread.
Please explain why this deficit shouldn't be a concern to shareholders?

Ferg?
Cupsy?

[Toddy]

OMG …Mike did a huge rave this morning in Mikes Minute on the radio. He was super excited and told hundreds of thousands of listeners how great the Warriors are and now team back to full strength and in the groove and got momentum that they are definitely heading to a. ‘This is our year’ season. UP THE WAHS

Forbar did a rave last week and said OCA will be $1 soon. But Forbar are light weights really. What Oceania need is for Rob to use his wide network of gurus and get somebody like this guy Gill and do a Roaring Kitty to get the market excited ….would go well past a buck if he got social media in a frenzy. GO OCEANIA YOU BEAUTIFUL THING

However will fandom win out at the end of the day …that’s still the big question

Yes, I got 120 percent return from my investment in the Warriors over the weekend.

Mike is right 60 percent of the time, all of the time.

[Daytr]

That is a cashflow statement, not a P&L. In accounting parlance an "operating loss" is equivalent to a negative operating profit. Losses and profits are reported in the P&L, not the cashflow statement as pointed out by SR. Either change your numbers or change your terminology because I'm seeing no such "operating loss" in the cashflow statement on p49. I recommend change your terminology because right now the words you are using are not correct for the numbers you are quoting.

If the cashflow statement I referred to displayed a surplus of $50M rather than a $50M deficit what impact would that have had on the P&L?
You can't act like this deficit does not impact the PL substantially.

What would the share price be if the resident fees covered the day to day cost of the villages?
$1.20ish?

[alokdhir]

“It is damn hard to win an argument or debate against a wise person. It is impossible to win an argument or debate against a fool.”

Apply as appropriate.

Real Gem ...applies here to many many convos going on...Believers like OCA with total disregard to Mr Market's musings over a long period now ...so cant be temporary lack of concentration types ...also nah sayers keep rambling to no avail ...argument is still as strong as it was 6 months ago ...maybe thats the fun ..un winnable debate ...but are there any un winnable debates when money is concerned ...either u make money or u loose ...so as per that standard believers are loosing and nah sayers winning currently .

But it's always fun to enjoy reading both sides ....I have learnt to my peril many times ignoring Mr Market never ends well ...SML !!

[Toddy]

Real Gem ...applies here to many many convos going on...Believers like OCA with total disregard to Mr Market's musings over a long period now ...so cant be temporary lack of concentration types ...also nah sayers keep rambling to no avail ...argument is still as strong as it was 6 months ago ...maybe thats the fun ..un winnable debate ...but are there any un winnable debates when money is concerned ...either u make money or u loose ...so as per that standard believers are loosing and nah sayers winning currently .

But it's always fun to enjoy reading both sides ....I have learnt to my peril many times ignoring Mr Market never ends well ...SML !!

Everyone who invests in OCA will eventually win. And good for them investing, for whatever reason.
And the fact that they are in here debating, learning etc puts everyone well ahead of the pack.

I could show you plenty of examples of people who drink their weekends away socialising, yapping on about how much money they make, their golf handy cap etc but squander it all away.

So as far as I'm concerned, if we all participate and learn, then we can all become better investors together.

[winner69]

Real Gem ...applies here to many many convos going on...Believers like OCA with total disregard to Mr Market's musings over a long period now ...so cant be temporary lack of concentration types ...also nah sayers keep rambling to no avail ...argument is still as strong as it was 6 months ago ...maybe thats the fun ..un winnable debate ...but are there any un winnable debates when money is concerned ...either u make money or u loose ...so as per that standard believers are loosing and nah sayers winning currently .

But it's always fun to enjoy reading both sides ....I have learnt to my peril many times ignoring Mr Market never ends well ...SML !!

Oh dear alokdhir …you haven’t been paying attention ….it’s ITM or OTM ….or something like that

[Daytr]

Everyone who invests in OCA will eventually win. And good for them investing, for whatever reason.
And the fact that they are in here debating, learning etc puts everyone well ahead of the pack.

I could show you plenty of examples of people who drink their weekends away socialising, yapping on about how much money they make, their golf handy cap etc but squander it all away.

So as far as I'm concerned, if we all participate and learn, then we can all become better investors together.

Yep good sentiment Toddy

[mistaTea]

Everyone who invests in OCA will eventually win. And good for them investing, for whatever reason.
And the fact that they are in here debating, learning etc puts everyone well ahead of the pack.

I could show you plenty of examples of people who drink their weekends away socialising, yapping on about how much money they make, their golf handy cap etc but squander it all away.

So as far as I'm concerned, if we all participate and learn, then we can all become better investors together.

Amen brother.

Some really good points from both ‘sides’.

Those buying now will do just fine. Those who bought at 70/80c will also do just fine I am sure if they sit on their arse doing nothing.

Whether or not OCA is undervalued now or fair value but with good growth prospects is academic at this point.

If you like the business, buy and hold long term and you will do just fine I am sure.

[winner69]

If the cashflow statement I referred to displayed a surplus of $50M rather than a $50M deficit what impact would that have had on the P&L?
You can't act like this deficit does not impact the PL substantially.

What would the share price be if the resident fees covered the day to day cost of the villages?
$1.20ish?

Hey mate ..the other day I posted that day to day operating loss was $37m before tax …..numbers that thing called the P&L too lol

Nobody responded so it must have been right eh …and you in ball park with your number

[alokdhir]

Oh dear alokdhir …you haven’t been paying attention ….it’s ITM or OTM ….or something like that

If u want to treat OCA SP as an option with ITM or OTM ways of thinking then what about MTM losses or gains buddy ??

[Daytr]

Hey mate ..the other day I posted that day to day operating loss was $37m before tax …..numbers that thing called the P&L too lol

Nobody responded so it must have been right eh …and you in ball park with your number

Cheers Winner.
But apparently cashflow doesn't impact the PL.. 🤣

Fees received & DMF increased by $13M
Expenses to employees & suppliers increased by $30.5M, but apparently there's nothing to see here as it's not the PL. 🤣

Ignore cashflow statements at your peril.
I assure you & I'm sure you know anyway, it's a big deal for banks & analysts.

[Daytr]

If u want to treat OCA SP as an option with ITM or OTM ways of thinking then what about MTM losses or gains buddy ??

Exactly, as mentioned in one of my earlier posts.
Run a mark to market over your portfolio, that will tell you if you are ITM, ATM or OTM.

My share investment account just refers to it as a loss. Much harsher term, I would prefer OTM, suggests I still have a chance. 🤣

[Cupsy]

Hey mate ..the other day I posted that day to day operating loss was $37m before tax …..numbers that thing called the P&L too lol

Nobody responded so it must have been right eh …and you in ball park with your number

I responded, I asked you what your discount rate and time period was for your npv comment based on what you believe are the losses.

[Cupsy]

That's most disingenuous, but nice try.
All I have pointed out is fees aren't covering the day to day operation of the villages and by some margin and the deficit has grown significantly.
This deficit needs to be covered by other income.

On P58 as you point out its being covered by the DMF. So the DMF that the likes of Sailorboy & his first mate rave about as the golden goose is basically being chewed up by funding the day to day operations.
DMF only increased by $2M, fees by $ 11M
Payments to suppliers & employees however increased by $30M.

Rather than put downs which is the go to defence on this thread.
Please explain why this deficit shouldn't be a concern to shareholders?

Ferg?
Cupsy?

Based on your logic, how do you explain the net cash inflow of 85m from the same cashflow statement?

[Daytr]

Based on your logic, how do you explain the net cash inflow of 85m from the same cashflow statement?

Seriously?
ORAs increased by $48M & yet total net cashflow increased by only $15M.
Thanks for underlining my point.

You really need to think before you post.
You tried disingenuously suggest for mental health reasons I should take a break.
That's disgraceful way to try and shut someone up just so the spruikers get their way.

I don't own stock, not looking to own stock in the at the moment and there is nothing wrong with promoting stock, but spruiking absolute fantasy land by some posters on here to lure investors in is disgusting and they need to be challenged. The fact they constantly use personal attacks & put downs as a constant form of defence, should ring alarm bells.

That goes for the question you asked Winner as well. It just displaying your lack of understanding.

Remember Cupsy I am actually positive overall on the stock, but that's not to say there aren't 'challenges' that need to be highlighted.

[Cupsy]

On P58 as you point out its being covered by the DMF. So the DMF that the likes of Sailorboy & his first mate rave about as the golden goose is basically being chewed up by funding the day to day operations.
DMF only increased by $2M, fees by $ 11M
Payments to suppliers & employees however increased by $30M.

Ferg?
Cupsy?

The ipo document talks about them moving the care part of the business towards an ORA and DMF model of funding, meaning as the company has been growing (costs being a portion of that), you would assume to see more of the costs being covered by DMF.
This additionally increases the risk in the event of a property downturn imo, but you can read the risks section of the AR or IPO doc you judge for your self.

[Cupsy]

Seriously?
ORAs increased by $48M & yet total net cashflow increased by only $15M.
Thanks for underlining my point.

The cashflow doesn't account for timings of the year, and now your trying to use ora difference between last year and this year to work out the profit or loss???? I don't understand your point, not at all.

[winner69]

DMF get consumed by costs over their duration …all spent, nothing left at end of the day

And it seems other income (along with accrued DMF) don’t cover costs ……hence ‘operating loss’

[Daytr]

The ipo document talks about them moving the care part of the business towards an ORA and DMF model of funding, meaning as the company has been growing (costs being a portion of that), you would assume to see more of the costs being covered by DMF.
This additionally increases the risk in the event of a property downturn imo, but you can read the risks section of the AR or IPO doc you judge for your self.

Again seriously? The IPO document?
Both are sales pitches.
Either way, yep costs are rising much quicker than fee revenue so the drivers of the lofty expectations for the share price of Sailorboy etc are being whittled away by subsidizing operating costs.

RYM are recognizing this and looking to change their fee & DMF structure. Perhaps the new CEO of OCA will look to do similar.

Anyway, beautiful day here, I'm off to enjoy it.

[allfromacell]

DMF get consumed by costs over their duration …all spent, nothing left at end of the day

And it seems other income (along with accrued DMF) don’t cover costs ……hence ‘operating loss’

Are you including development expenses to calculate the operating loss?

[Bjauck]

Everyone who invests in OCA will eventually win. And good for them investing, for whatever reason.
And the fact that they are in here debating, learning etc puts everyone well ahead of the pack.

I could show you plenty of examples of people who drink their weekends away socialising, yapping on about how much money they make, their golf handy cap etc but squander it all away.

So as far as I'm concerned, if we all participate and learn, then we can all become better investors together. I am invested in OCA for the long term, despite having bought at higher prices than today’s.

Good sentiments. Unfortunately there are some posters who expect other posters not to be able to learn, but to have the advanced analytical skills they think they themselves already have. They unleash their bile on those whom they think are irrelevant, disagree with, or those they consider to have inferior skills. How many keen learner posters or amateur investors have they already repulsed or frightened away?

[Cupsy]

Again seriously? The IPO document?
Both are sales pitches.
Either way, yep costs are rising much quicker than fee revenue so the drivers of the lofty expectations for the share price of Sailorboy etc are being whittled away by subsidizing operating costs.

RYM are recognizing this and looking to change their fee & DMF structure. Perhaps the new CEO of OCA will look to do similar.

Anyway, beautiful day here, I'm off to enjoy it.

Ok I think I'm getting it, your like the guy from crankyankers or punkd yeah?..... ie your trying to wind me up?

[Daytr]

Ok I think I'm getting it, your like the guy from crankyankers or punkd yeah?..... ie your trying to wind me up?

Nope, not at all. With Sailorboy at times, definitely. But he deserves everything he gets.

I don't think highlighting real risks is punking anyone. If I was an investor I would actually appreciate someone pointing them out.
But that's up to you.
Cheers Daytr

[winner69]

Are you including development expenses to calculate the operating loss?

Maybe some but a lot of development costs will be capitalised

[Cupsy]

You really need to think before you post.
You tried disingenuously suggest for mental health reasons I should take a break.
That's disgraceful way to try and shut someone up just so the spruikers get their way.


I was referring to the ongoing argument you appear to have with Rob and others, the intent wasn't so much around mental health but life enjoyment in general (as in like you said earlier about it being too nicer day to be on here). But granted the two are very closely linked, so you are right, regardless of intention I should have thought about it a bit more and considered how it might be percieved. I have No problem apologising and removing the post if it upsets you, just let me know (i appologise).

[ValueNZ]

Hey Daytr, I recommend taking some time off ST, not for your mental health but to learn about accural accounting and option trading basics.

Quick question. If you buy a out of the money call option, and immediately the underlying asset increases in price but not enough to reach the strike price, resulting in a higher market price for the call option, do you have a call option that is simultaneously in the money and out of the money? :lol: Schrodinger's option perhaps.

[Daytr]

I was referring to the ongoing argument you appear to have with Rob and others, the intent wasn't so much around mental health but life enjoyment in general (as in like you said earlier about it being too nicer day to be on here). But granted the two are very closely linked, so you are right, regardless of intention I should have thought about it a bit more and considered how it might be percieved. I have No problem apologising and removing the post if it upsets you, just let me know (i appologise).

It doesn't upset me, but I appreciate the post above.

[Daytr]

Hey Daytr, I recommend taking some time off ST, not for your mental health but to learn about accural accounting and option trading basics.

Quick question. If you buy a out of the money call option, and immediately the underlying asset increases in price but not enough to reach the strike price, resulting in a higher market price for the call option, do you have a call option that is simultaneously in the money and out of the money? :lol: Schrodinger's option perhaps.

Why would you value it twice as you don't own the shares?
An option value is measured in premium.
If you own shares it's valued by the share price.

Stay in school kid & keep an open mind.

[ValueNZ]

Stay in school kid & keep an open mind.
I'm not the one that thinks dividends are paid out of the market cap.

Please answer my question. Is it OTM and ITM simultaneously?

Or will you just admit that you've used a term incorrectly.

[winner69]

Might spend an hour or so listening to Buffett …Jimmy that is

Full of wisdom and pretty cool

[Daytr]

I'm not the one that thinks dividends are paid out of the market cap.

Please answer my question. Is it OTM and ITM simultaneously?

Or will you just admit that you've used a term incorrectly.

I've answered your question you don't value it twice. You value the option you own, like you value the shares in OCA you own that are OTM.

[Cupsy]

Might spend an hour or so listening to Buffett …Jimmy that is

Full of wisdom and pretty cool

Semper Augustus? I'm just reading that atm, I was supposed to read it when it first came out but got distracted.

[davflaws]

Quick question. If you buy a out of the money call option, and immediately the underlying asset increases in price but not enough to reach the strike price, resulting in a higher market price for the call option, do you have a call option that is simultaneously in the money and out of the money? :lol: Schrodinger's option perhaps.

A puss option?

[ValueNZ]

SailorRob's been banned again.

[Ferg]

SailorRob's been banned again.

A real shame given he is clearly well read, knows his way around the commercial impacts of financial statements, and understands long cycle trends. I would much rather read what he has to say than someone who doesn't know the difference between a cashflow statement and P&L, and makes up his own definitions. It's no wonder this thread is trash - and it's no wonder Maverick doesn't post. I respect that given there is nothing to be learned from the contributions to this thread by the argumentative uninformed financially illiterate loudmouth.

[psychic]

Well said, agree

[Baa_Baa]

A real shame given he is clearly well read, knows his way around the commercial impacts of financial statements, and understands long cycle trends. I would much rather read what he has to say than someone who doesn't know the difference between a cashflow statement and P&L, and makes up his own definitions. It's no wonder this thread is trash - and it's no wonder Maverick doesn't post. I respect that given there is nothing to be learned from the contributions to this thread by the argumentative uninformed financially illiterate loudmouth.

Agree ....

[winner69]

SailorRob's been banned again.

And posts gone as well?

[Ferg]

And posts gone as well?
Yes - they disappeared last night when he was banned. I went to quote a post and it disappeared. Despite the fact he gave you a bit of a ribbing, it was in jest AFAIK and not from a place of malice.

[Daytr]

A real shame given he is clearly well read, knows his way around the commercial impacts of financial statements, and understands long cycle trends. I would much rather read what he has to say than someone who doesn't know the difference between a cashflow statement and P&L, and makes up his own definitions. It's no wonder this thread is trash - and it's no wonder Maverick doesn't post. I respect that given there is nothing to be learned from the contributions to this thread by the argumentative uninformed financially illiterate loudmouth.

Seriously, you think that's why he has been banned?
And it certainly wasn't down to me.
He shut down so much discourse with various posters with his insults etc I would suggest that was his undoing.

I agree he could have added value if he had stuck to the debate but he seldom did.

[alokdhir]

And posts gone as well?

Financial literate with poor people skills ...very abrasive style of teaching ...liked to rub it in ...lol

[blackcap]

Financial literate with poor people skills ...very abrasive style of teaching ...liked to rub it in ...lol

Yeah he was financially literate. Would have been good to debate but far too abrasive and not open to other's less educated ideas.

[Daytr]

Yeah he was financially literate. Would have been good to debate but far too abrasive and not open to other's less educated ideas.

Financially imaginative is a better description.

[Baa_Baa]

Financially imaginative is a better description.

A better description, of yourself.

[Daytr]

A better description, of yourself.

Very clever. 🙄
No you are are, no you are... 😅

[Daytr]

And posts gone as well?
Seems like only his posts on this thread have been deleted. Perhaps the moderator saw his spruiking as a risk.

[Rawz]

No surprises. He attacked anyone who didn’t agree with him.

[mistaTea]

Damn it.

SR is his own worst enemy with the insults etc, for sure.

He really does know his stuff though, and it is a shame he couldn’t get the balance right.

Do we know how long he is banned for this time?

As much as I really dislike some of the posts he makes, I am eternally grateful to the sailor for helping me get set up on IBKR etc. He does really nice things for people too.

It is a real pity and I don’t feel good that he is banned again (even though I have been on the receiving end of his wrath many times lol).

[Snow Leopard]

SO a few days trading at 52/3c and the patent pending buyitGPT - AI rates it as 'bargepole' but has 55c, 57c & 63c as prices it would get increasingly more enthusiatic about the stock, tomorrow it will dream up different prices.

Fundamentaly? Well they seem to be a going concern :mellow:

[Daytr]

A real shame given he is clearly well read, knows his way around the commercial impacts of financial statements, and understands long cycle trends. I would much rather read what he has to say than someone who doesn't know the difference between a cashflow statement and P&L, and makes up his own definitions. It's no wonder this thread is trash - and it's no wonder Maverick doesn't post. I respect that given there is nothing to be learned from the contributions to this thread by the argumentative uninformed financially illiterate loudmouth.

By the way Ferg, don't hold back on how you feel. It makes me laugh how upset people get over semantics or just because they aren't aware of something, so it can't be true if I don't know it.🤣 Discussion should be held with agreed definitions or whatever. 🤣 Who are you, the Collins dictionary? Oh no that's right if you were you would actually know.

How many times was it SailorBoy was banned? Once? Twice? Thrice?
And what's the definition of trying the same thing again & again and expecting a different outcome?

I've seen it many times, it's usually down to big fish small pond syndrome. And when the ignorance is exposed they double down etc. The extent of the obvious bitterness, anger if you will, gives away the underlying motive. And I'll admit I can be terse & that can evoke a reaction.

Its amazing you never pulled up SailorBoy on some of his very interesting, to say the least, definitions. Is that because he was spruiking and you are long and wrong?
Or as we would say in the trading floor, OTM.

Cashflow, hmmm nothing to see here...
Please don't highlight that otherwise shareholders might really get to understand what's going on. But hey what's a $52.6M deficit between friends.

I hope Mav does post again as we had some good discussions & without the insults & slanging match. Or perhaps he has folded like ThaiJohn. Who knows.

The Wahs have a tough match this week against Melbourne. Although the recent string of wins hasn't been reflected in the OCA SP.
Perhaps OCA is breaking the relationship.
The die hard fans won't stop believing though, as it's their year.
And I hope it is.

[Toddy]

I've worked with my fair share of people in banking over the years who were too intelligent for their own good. That's what drove me away from it.

SailorRob acted the same way.

It well and good to understand what's under the hood of a F1 engine. But it takes good management decisions, sound finance, the right driver, and some luck etc to come out on top.

My point being, I could debate the accounting theory all day long with regard to valuations etc. (the F1engine) with SailorRob. But chose not too, because it's an argument that you could never win.

I like others, got his point, but did not appreciate it being rammed down my throat like I was some employee working at the Bank.

Im sure that he will be back under some other user name soon enough.

[mike2020]

No Toddy last time he was gone no one filled the unmistakable gap. You cannot hide an opinion that strong. It is a loss, Mav and SR both add value to the forum.

[Toddy]

No Toddy last time he was gone no one filled the unmistakable gap. You cannot hide an opinion that strong. It is a loss, Mav and SR both add value to the forum.

What's his user name on the other Channel?

Just like OCA, he will be back. Just not today.

[Toddy]

I hold the record for the longest period of not commenting on Sharetrader between 2008 and 2023.

That's one record that won't be under threat from SailorRob.

[mike2020]

I don't think he is on the other channel. Maybe like Mav he will give up now and keep his insights to himself.

[Balance]

I don't think he is on the other channel. Maybe like Mav he will give up now and keep his insights to himself.

Thank goodness for that!

Amen!

[bull....]

haha this is the greatest thread over the yrs ......... for proving how gullible people are from basil & co to mav to sailor lol

[Daytr]

No Toddy last time he was gone no one filled the unmistakable gap. You cannot hide an opinion that strong. It is a loss, Mav and SR both add value to the forum.

Yeah I mean who is going to scroll through members old posts from three years ago?
Or lambast anyone that apparently was involved in SKY TV, a constant for him. Such illuminating stuff.

Toddy, imo he wouldn't cut it at a bank, his strategy certainly wouldn't as it goes against every risk management policy written.
And banks wouldn't buy into his accounting lunacy either.

He more reminded me of one of those preachers that rove the Bible belt looking for a gullible audience that he can perform his 'miracles' on and brother, did he find the faithful. Yes sir indeed Amen.
I didn't see once the likes of Ferg, Baa_Baa or others question anything he put it out.
Because you don't question the lord. Or maybe it's you just don't question what you want to believe.
Hallelujah

Anyway onward & upward, well hopefully for OCA. US equity markets hovering around record highs. NZ market still in the doldrums & the retirement sector one if the biggest laggards.
The sector has been quite a drag on the NZ bourse overall. If it does rebound it will be interesting to see what impact it has on the NZX50 etc.

[Rawz]

wrong thread

[winner69]

wrong thread

Yep no 3 cent dividend here eh Rawz

[Grimy]

I certainly hope Maverick hasn't gone for good.
His opinions I value highly, not just from the numbers, but his well-rounded perspective of the whole operation.
And he never got into mud-slinging, which is so unnecessary and childish.
Come back Maverick!

[alokdhir]

Yep no 3 cent dividend here eh Rawz

He is already missing SR mate ...keeps looking for him here :p

[alokdhir]

I certainly hope Maverick hasn't gone for good.
His opinions I value highly, not just from the numbers, but his well-rounded perspective of the whole operation.
And he never got into mud-slinging, which is so unnecessary and childish.
Come back Maverick!

Totally agree Mav was the perfect example of knowledge and perfect public forum manners ...he won many hearts with his details and amiable ways :t_up:

[Rawz]

Yep no 3 cent dividend here eh Rawz


He is already missing SR mate ...keeps looking for him here :p

lol........

[mistaTea]

Yeah I mean who is going to scroll through members old posts from three years ago?
Or lambast anyone that apparently was involved in SKY TV, a constant for him. Such illuminating stuff.

Toddy, imo he wouldn't cut it at a bank, his strategy certainly wouldn't as it goes against every risk management policy written.
And banks wouldn't buy into his accounting lunacy either.

Anyway onward & upward, well hopefully for OCA. US equity markets hovering around record highs. NZ market still in the doldrums & the retirement sector one if the biggest laggards.
The sector has been quite a drag on the NZ bourse overall. If it does rebound it will be interesting to see what impact it has on the NZX50 etc.

Yes it is the petty stuff that is his undoing in the end. The insults, the bringing up old posts or referencing other investments that didn’t work out as a way to discredit etc.

And a damn shame because I do like the way he views investments, and he does know a lot about it. Lots of good stuff with the sailor but ultimately you end up having to tune him out when he becomes too manic.

Anyway, we box on. Onwards and upwards.

[bull....]

if people like float's they should have been in TWR not OCA

[winner69]

If you take the number of sales/resales and average prices as in the preso you get total ORA sales of $267m

Cash Flow Statement says cash received from ORA sales was $226m

Is the difference those on the never never scheme or just a timing issue?

Still trying to figure this out

Dropped email to Oceania but no response

[777]

Cash flow is just that. Receipt of sales monies would be after sale agreement.

[Lego_Man]

if people like float's they should have been in TWR not OCA

TWR need to do a bit more with their float - 6% return doesn't cut it. Might i suggest they invest in developing some retirement villages? :p

[Bjauck]

Cash flow is just that. Receipt of sales monies would be after sale agreement. A timing difference. Given sales of $267m versus receipts of $226m, If the cash flow receipts at the beginning of the period were for sales signed towards the end of the previous period, then sales at the end of the reporting period would have been quite a bit higher than the end of the previous year. So cash flow receipts would have got a good boost at the beginning of the current period. Have I interpreted that correctly?

[iceman]

Totally agree Mav was the perfect example of knowledge and perfect public forum manners ...he won many hearts with his details and amiable ways :t_up:

Couldn't agree more. He has my utmost respect.

[Snow Leopard]

Still trying to figure this out

Dropped email to Oceania but no response


If you take the number of sales/resales and average prices as in the preso you get total ORA sales of $267m

Cash Flow Statement says cash received from ORA sales was $226m

Is the difference those on the never never scheme or just a timing issue?

Note 5.3 in the accounts has a near $20M increase in ORA receivables but that still leaves you another $20M+ to account for.

[winner69]

A timing difference. Given sales of $267m versus receipts of $226m, If the cash flow receipts at the beginning of the period were for sales signed towards the end of the previous period, then sales at the end of the reporting period would have been quite a bit higher than the end of the previous year. So cash flow receipts would have got a good boost at the beginning of the current period. Have I interpreted that correctly?

Thought of that but working through F22, F23 and F24 the differences have been $14m, $$33m and then the $41m

If we assume that the F22 $14m was sales made in F22 and not paid until F23 then the F23 difference is $47m (22% of sales outstanding at balance date) ……assume this paid in F24 then the difference between F24 report sales and cash collected in F24 is now $88m (33% of sales) …probably higher as the starting F22 difference doesn’t include a carry over from F21

Must be using wrong logic/methodology as the 33% carried over can’t be the case but then they show $93.8m as still receivable from licence agreements so it might be right after all.

My gut feel is they’ve changed how they report sales …assuming the Cash Flow Statement doesn’t lie.

[Bjauck]

Not wishing to stray too much off topic, but a poster now banned had asked ChatGPT what was the meaning of the expression “out of the money”. They posted the result on this thread.

I asked the question of ChatGPT “what does ‘out of the money’ mean in every sense?” It came up with an answer that was quite different from the original poster’s result. The answer I got included four definitions for 1. Options trading 2. Betting and gambling 3. Investment and business and 4.Metaphorical usage.

My conclusion is that currently ChatGPT is a useful tool. However much can depend on the wording of a question. So caution is needed before definitively relying on responses.

[mistaTea]

Not wishing to stray too much off topic, but a poster now banned had asked ChatGPT what was the meaning of the expression “out of the money”. They posted the result on this thread.

I asked the question of ChatGPT “what does ‘out of the money’ mean in every sense?” It came up with an answer that was quite different from the original poster’s result. The answer I got included four definitions for 1. Options trading 2. Betting and gambling 3. Investment and business and 4.Metaphorical usage.

My conclusion is that currently ChatGPT is a useful tool. However much can depend on the wording of a question. So caution is needed before definitively relying on responses.

Said poster was very critical of GPT until it gave him an answer he liked lol.

Then the output was absolute truth and not to be questioned! Ha!

[Balance]

Not wishing to stray too much off topic, but a poster now banned had asked ChatGPT what was the meaning of the expression “out of the money”. They posted the result on this thread.

I asked the question of ChatGPT “what does ‘out of the money’ mean in every sense?” It came up with an answer that was quite different from the original poster’s result. The answer I got included four definitions for 1. Options trading 2. Betting and gambling 3. Investment and business and 4.Metaphorical usage.

My conclusion is that currently ChatGPT is a useful tool. However much can depend on the wording of a question. So caution is needed before definitively relying on responses.

GIGO.

In the context of Sharetrader, there is really only one answer which is :

The phrase "out of the money" is specifically used in the context of options trading rather than directly describing share values. It refers to the relationship between an option's strike price and the current market price of the underlying asset, not the share value itself.

[mistaTea]

GIGO.

In the context of Sharetrader, there is really only one answer which is :

The phrase "out of the money" is specifically used in the context of options trading rather than directly describing share values. It refers to the relationship between an option's strike price and the current market price of the underlying asset, not the share value itself.

I asked my mate “Greg”: Tell me all the ways the term ‘out of the money’ is used.

Greg answered:

The term "out of the money" (OTM) is primarily used in the context of options trading, but it can also be referenced in other financial instruments and contexts. Here are the key ways it is used:

1. **Options Trading**:
- **Call Options**: A call option is considered out of the money if the current price of the underlying asset is below the strike price of the option. For example, if a call option has a strike price of $50 and the underlying stock is trading at $45, the call option is out of the money.
- **Put Options**: A put option is considered out of the money if the current price of the underlying asset is above the strike price of the option. For example, if a put option has a strike price of $50 and the underlying stock is trading at $55, the put option is out of the money.

2. **Structured Products**:
- In the context of structured products like equity-linked notes or similar instruments, "out of the money" can refer to the condition where the embedded option (either call or put) within the structured product is not beneficial to exercise because the strike price is unfavourable relative to the current market price.

3. **Derivatives Markets**:
- In derivatives markets, "out of the money" is often used to describe options or other derivative contracts that currently do not have intrinsic value. This term helps traders and investors quickly assess the potential profitability or risk of these contracts.

4. **Financial Analysis and Reporting**:
- In financial analysis, particularly when evaluating the performance or risk profile of a portfolio containing options, "out of the money" options are considered in scenarios where potential losses or lack of gains are analysed. For example, an investor may calculate the potential impact of holding a large number of OTM options in various market conditions.

5. **Risk Management**:
- For risk management purposes, especially in hedging strategies, "out of the money" options may be used as part of a strategy to protect against adverse price movements. Though they have lower premiums, they can still offer protection in extreme market moves.

Understanding these different contexts is crucial for anyone involved in trading, investing, or managing financial instruments that involve options or other derivatives.

*****

I then asked Greg: Is it ever used for stocks?

His answer:

The term "out of the money" (OTM) is not typically used to describe stocks themselves. Instead, it is primarily associated with options and other derivatives. Stocks do not have a strike price or an intrinsic value based on a contract, which are key elements in defining whether an option is in or out of the money.

However, there are a few contexts where the concept might tangentially relate to stocks:

1. **Warrants**: Warrants are similar to options and can be issued by companies. Like options, warrants can be "out of the money" if the exercise price of the warrant is higher than the current stock price (for call warrants) or lower than the current stock price (for put warrants).

2. **Convertible Securities**: Convertible bonds or convertible preferred shares have an option-like feature. They can be considered "out of the money" if the conversion price (the price at which the bond or preferred share can be converted into common stock) is above the current stock price.

3. **Employee Stock Options**: Employee stock options (ESOs) are a form of options given to employees as part of their compensation package. These can be "out of the money" if the strike price of the ESO is above the current market price of the company's stock.

In summary, while "out of the money" is not a term used for stocks directly, it can apply to financial instruments related to stocks, such as warrants, convertible securities, and employee stock options.

[Cupsy]

OMG, you lot bang on about how bad sailor is, and you're still arguing with him when he's not even in the room 😂

[Balance]

On this thread, we discuss OCA shares - not options, not warrants, not convertibles. But if someone can point us towards where one can trade options on OCA, that would be appreciated!

Hence, use of OTM here for OCA shares is inherently wrong and inappropriate.

[Bjauck]

GIGO.

In the context of Sharetrader, there is really only one answer which is :

The phrase "out of the money" is specifically used in the context of options trading rather than directly describing share values. It refers to the relationship between an option's strike price and the current market price of the underlying asset, not the share value itself. Sorry. I have not seen that glossary of expressions as defined by Sharetrader.

[Balance]

Sorry. I have not seen that glossary of expressions as defined by Sharetrader.

You here to learn something or play at being a fool?

[mistaTea]

OMG, you lot bang on about how bad sailor is, and you're still arguing with him when he's not even in the room 😂

Yes, yes we know you are his boy 🤭

[Cupsy]

Yes, yes we know you are his boy 🤭

Yup, proudly so.

[Bjauck]

You here to learn something or play at being a fool?
Actually I have learnt from some of the posters, including your good self. However in this instance I would rely on the dictionary definition of the expression.

[Balance]

Actually I have learnt from some of the posters, including your good self. However in this instance I would rely on the dictionary definition of the expression.

Please do so. Ignorance is bliss.

[davflaws]

Couldn't agree more. He has my utmost respect.

Mav has my respect, OCA has my money.

[Baa_Baa]

Mav has my respect, OCA has my money.

Mav certainly has my utmost respect as well, a truely selfless contributor who probably knows more about the company Oceania Healthcare than any other member here, I'll miss his posts.

That said, OCA doesn't have your money, unless you bought all or some of your shares through the IPO or cap raises. More likely is some other punter has your money, the ones you bought the shares from.

It might seem a trivial distinction but the market where we buy and sell shares has no benefit to OCA. Like you'll see people say "I support the company, and buy shares", well sadly that's not support at all unless it's a cap raise, on market it's just our funds going to someone else who is selling, or visa versa.

The current share price, on market, is quite confounding for holders looking for some upside. It show no TA signs of capitulation despite its lowly SP. The volume of shares traded is only about average, there's no capitulation event evident there. The RSI actually ticked up on a one cent gain and is not oversold by technical standards.

It's encouraging for holders that in the immediate short term there is a bounce off the low trend line at .52 (nice move SR), but I wouldn't bank that as a turnaround, yet. At 67% below ATH and 62.5% below NTA, the SP is pretty much fecked against any other fundamental valuations. Whether this is a trigger for investment depression or a trigger for 'let the dogs out', is upto the individual.

It's confounding only because the TA is defying the FA. The market is saying OCA is worth feck all, but the FA is saying whoa, hang on a minute we've got billions in assets, a future development pipeline, heaps of revenue, manageable debt, making a profit, but you the market think we're doomed! Go figure, it won't change what we do at OCA.

Like someone said, hypothetically if you owned the whole company yourself, and you were not listed on the share market, what would you consider the company to be worth, or its value now? I think you'd probably think it's doing pretty well, it would be good if more of the backlog got sold down, and if they can close the gap between care specific costs and care revenue, that would be good too.

The regulatory risk is minor as we're already doing most of that. Government care subsidies are ridiculously low, but the pressure is building to change that. Demographics are obvious, a stark reality staring at us that the government must address aged care funding that is now and coming.

But as a listed RV company, clearly, like all of the others, the whole sector is currently screwed, OCA included. None of them are doing well, even the bellweather SUM is sideways soft, RYM is hurting, ARV are panicking. OCA is teasing capitulation.

Is there not a better time to get some, get some more, or ... give up and gift us your shares? Either way, Oceania won't benefit from it, it's just the market, not the company that will benefit from it.

[Entrep]

What’s the odds of a cap raise within 12 months?

[Snow Leopard]

....
That said, OCA doesn't have your money, unless you bought all or some of your shares through the IPO or cap raises.
....

This is one of those fallacies up there with 'float' and OCA liabilities are really an asset.

Ask this simple question: If OCA buy the share back who do they pay, he who first bought them or whoever owns them now?


Stay tuned to this channel folks there is more to come...

[Daytr]

This is one of those fallacies up there with 'float' and OCA liabilities are really an asset.

Ask this simple question: If OCA buy the share back who do they pay, he who first bought them or whoever owns them now?


Stay tuned to this channel folks there is more to come...

Spot on.
When reading Baa_Baa's post I was thinking where do they get this stuff?

And the confidence to explain in detail a fallacy.
It reminds me of Sailorboy always arguing that there can't be more buyers than sellers or visa versa, it's such a myopic view.

I look at the equity as a company liability or debt, and no matter who that liability is passed to, the liability remains directly with the company.

When you say more to come? Do you mean more fallacies or more straight to the point logic from you?

[Balance]

Spot on.
When reading Baa_Baa's post I was thinking where do they get this stuff?

And the confidence to explain in detail a fallacy.
It reminds me of Sailorboy always arguing that there can't be more buyers than sellers or visa versa, it's such a myopic view.

I look at the equity as a company liability or debt, and no matter who that liability is passed to, the liability remains directly with the company.

When you say more to come? Do you mean more fallacies or more straight to the point logic from you?

Equity is a liability?

Stop posting garbage.

[Rawz]

Equity is a liability?

Stop posting garbage.
Equity is a liability, some liabilities are an asset and most assets are just unreleased profits (i.e. we can just move them to the PnL today). You get it? lol

[Daytr]

Equity is a liability?

Stop posting garbage.

You have misunderstood me.
I'm not talking about company valuation, balance sheet accounts etc.
I'm talking about in the situation Snow Leopard pointed out.
If you want to buy the equity of a company i.e the shares you have to pay the shareholder.
If the company wanted to privatize, again they would have to pay the shareholder.
In this instance equity is the same as debt, something that would have to be paid back.
Understand the garbage now?

[Rawz]

You have misunderstood me.
I'm not talking about company valuation, accounts etc.
I'm talking about in the situation Snow Leopard pointed out.
If you want to buy the equity of a company i.e the shares you have to pay the shareholder.
If the company wanted to privatize, again they would have to pay the shareholder.
In this instance equity is the same as debt, something that would have to be paid back.
even if it goes private its still a shareholder paying a shareholder.

[Daytr]

even if it goes private its still a shareholder paying a shareholder.

Yep and that shareholder being the company. It doesn't matter where the money comes from, its just a transfer of the liability. Shares in a sense a similar to a promissory note.
Ok, lets put it another way. The company goes broke and after all liabilities are paid, there is enough to pay shareholders 1c in the dollar.
Where does the money come from?

[bull....]

to all muppetts on this thread this is all that matters

New Zealand house prices plummet in May, Trade Me says
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/money/2024/06/new-zealand-house-prices-plummet-in-may-trade-me-says.html

[Toddy]

to all muppetts on this thread this is all that matters

New Zealand house prices plummet in May, Trade Me says
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/money/2024/06/new-zealand-house-prices-plummet-in-may-trade-me-says.html

The OCA portfolio in Gizzy will be in hot demand.

[winner69]

OCA near top of NZX leaderboard just now

That’s good

[davflaws]

it's just the market, not the company that will benefit from it.

Thanks for that clarification.

[Rawz]

to all muppetts on this thread this is all that matters

New Zealand house prices plummet in May, Trade Me says


https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/money/2024/06/new-zealand-house-prices-plummet-in-may-trade-me-says.html

yes agree this is the number 1 short term issue. And how long will it take to fix. I personally see no help until early 2025 when rates start to drop. Therefore no rush to buy, better to be invested elsewhere imo

[psychic]

All priced in muppet, bottoms in :)

[ValueNZ]

yes agree this is the number 1 short term issue. And how long will it take to fix. I personally see no help until early 2025 when rates start to drop. Therefore no rush to buy, better to be invested elsewhere imo
When you're ready to jump in it'll be a buck fifty and rising.

Try not to do what you did last time.

That is, buy high sell low.

[Rawz]

When you're ready to jump in it'll be a buck fifty and rising.

Try not to do what you did last time.

That is, buy high sell low.

Not going to try catch a falling knife that’s for sure

[ValueNZ]

Not going to try catch a falling knife that’s for sure
I look forward to selling you my shares at way higher prices in the ensuing years.

[Daytr]

When you're ready to jump in it'll be a buck fifty and rising.

Try not to do what you did last time.

That is, buy high sell low.

To play SailorBoy your mentor
When will it be $1.50?

[ValueNZ]

To play SailorBoy your mentor
When will it be $1.50?
I'd be a fool to give you a timeline, because I have no clue.

Just a rough idea of Oceania's worth and an understanding that share prices move towards intrinsic value with time.

[mistaTea]

I'd be a fool to give you a timeline, because I have no clue.

Just a rough idea of Oceania's worth and an understanding that share prices move towards intrinsic value with time.

Yes long term the share market is a weighing machine as BG said all those decades ago.

Has the stock market really just been a voting machine for OCA over the past…THREE YEARS though?

[ValueNZ]

Has the stock market really just been a voting machine for OCA over the past…THREE YEARS though?
Ask that question yourself.

What would you be willing to pay for Oceania in a private transaction? The whole company.

[winner69]

Yes long term the share market is a weighing machine as BG said all those decades ago.

Has the stock market really just been a voting machine for OCA over the past…THREE YEARS though?

Possibly been a weighing machine mrT …after all this intrinsic value thing is really just an individuals perceived value ..a price they hope itvwill get to one day

[allfromacell]

Possibly been a weighing machine mrT …after all this intrinsic value thing is really just an individuals perceived value ..a price they hope itvwill get to one day

How about a liquidation. How much would shareholders be left with? I'd wager more than the current share price.

[Daytr]

I'd be a fool to give you a timeline, because I have no clue.

Just a rough idea of Oceania's worth and an understanding that share prices move towards intrinsic value with time.

Fair enough, but a price prediction means little without time value. Option trading 101.

And yet SailorBoy asked that question again & again.

[Daytr]

How about a liquidation. How much would shareholders be left with? I'd wager more than the current share price.

You are dreaming.
In that situation all secured creditors who become the clients of the liquidator care about is getting their money back.

Even with 150% value paid I.e the debt, the shareholders get nothing.

What did Branson pay for the channel tunnel? 1 pound.

Edit: sorry to be brutal but that is the reality in that situation, not that I think it will come to that.

[ValueNZ]

Fair enough, but a price prediction means little without time value. Option trading 101.

And yet SailorBoy asked that question again & again.
I made no price prediction.

Can you point out one example where SailorRob gave a short term price prediction.

[Daytr]

When you're ready to jump in it'll be a buck fifty and rising.

Try not to do what you did last time.

That is, buy high sell low.


I made no price prediction.

Can you point out one example where SailorRob gave a short term price prediction.

Looks like a price prediction to me, but hey it's less than your other prediction of $2.50 or whatever it was.

SailorBoy wanted a timeframe on anyone else's prediction, although he mentioned several lofty price targets including what he thought it was worth now, which is instantly a lot higher that it is currently.

I've done the same, with my current price target of 90c. And I'm happy to wrap a time frame around that of 15 months or so.

[Daytr]

When you're ready to jump in it'll be a buck fifty and rising.

Try not to do what you did last time.

That is, buy high sell low.


I made no price prediction.

Can you point out one example where SailorRob gave a short term price prediction.


Looks like a price prediction to me, but hey it's less than your other prediction of $2.50 or whatever it was.

SailorBoy wanted a timeframe on anyone else's prediction, although he mentioned several lofty price targets including what he thought it was worth now, which is instantly a lot higher that it is currently.

I've done the same, with my current price target of 90c. And I'm happy to wrap a time frame around that of 15 months or so.

Anyway, I'm just toying with ya.

[Bjauck]

You are dreaming.
In that situation all secured creditors who become the clients of the liquidator care about is getting their money back.

Even with 150% value paid I.e the debt, the shareholders get nothing.

What did Branson pay for the channel tunnel? 1 pound.

Edit: sorry to be brutal but that is the reality in that situation, not that I think it will come to that. Have you got a source for that? I thought he was just interested in operating a competing train service to Eurostar. I thought the actual infrastructure (the tunnel itself) was the subject of a concession granted by The UK and French governments. That concession until 2086 is operated by Getlink, listed on the Paris Bourse. I may have missed something.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/eurostar-channel-tunnel-richard-branson-elizabeth-ii-margaret-thatcher-b2540104.html

[Daytr]

Have you got a source for that? I thought he was just interested in operating a competing train service to Eurostar. I thought the actual infrastructure (the tunnel itself) was the subject of a concession granted by The UK and French governments. That concession until 2086 is operated by Getlink, listed on the Paris Bourse. I may have missed something.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/eurostar-channel-tunnel-richard-branson-elizabeth-ii-margaret-thatcher-b2540104.html

I can see references to the deal in 1996, but it doesn't state the price. It was strapped with around 12Bln pounds of debt when it only cost 9Bln to build, so from memory one of his companies paid 1 pound & took over the debt.
I remember the headlines in the UK papers back then.

To be honest I can't remember if it was for the Chunnel itself, the train service or all of it. It was 28 years ago.

The Euro Tunnel had a shocking start with all sorts of issues. I was on it in 1995 and a trip that was supposed to take 3 hours ended up taking about 8!

[Balance]

I can see references to the deal in 1996, but it doesn't state the price. It was strapped with around 12Bln pounds of debt when it only cost 9Bln to build, so from memory one of his companies paid 1 pound & took over the debt.
I remember the headlines in the UK papers back then.

To be honest I can't remember if it was for the Chunnel itself, the train service or all of it. It was 28 years ago.

The Euro Tunnel had a shocking start with all sorts of issues. I was on it in 1995 and a trip that was supposed to take 3 hours ended up taking about 8!

The Branson deal never happened - he tried a cheeky bid to take over the chunnel but it did not go through.

When you are in a hole, stop digging.

[Daytr]

The Branson deal never happened - he tried a cheeky bid to take over the chunnel but it did not go through.

When you are in a hole, stop digging.

Cheers, not digging anything. I just remember the headline in the UK papers, must have been referring to the offer not a done deal.
Didn't a company he owned a fair chunk of end up taking it over?

[Daytr]

Here it is.
https://www.europeanceo.com/business-and-management/the-story-of-eurostar/

[Toddy]

The Branson deal never happened - he tried a cheeky bid to take over the chunnel but it did not go through.

When you are in a hole, stop digging.

Since you guys are talking about Branson.

He would walk away after about a minute over the discussions over valuations.
He loves basic cashflow statements.

He would just ask, will OCA be a dollar in two years time. If the answer is yes, then let's not waste anymore time talking about this.

If no, then sell.

[Daytr]

Since you guys are talking about Branson.

He would walk away after about a minute over the discussions over valuations.
He loves basic cashflow statements.

He would just ask, will OCA be a dollar in two years time. If the answer is yes, then let's not waste anymore time talking about this.

If no, then sell.

Smart guy. Ignore cashflow at your peril.

[ValueNZ]

Since you guys are talking about Branson.

He would walk away after about a minute over the discussions over valuations.
He loves basic cashflow statements.

He would just ask, will OCA be a dollar in two years time. If the answer is yes, then let's not waste anymore time talking about this.

If no, then sell.
This puppy cashflows alright.

Just look at how much they are pumping into developments and how they finance those assets.

Will OCA be a dollar in two years time? :lol: Get out your magic 8 ball and find out!

[Bjauck]

Here it is.
https://www.europeanceo.com/business-and-management/the-story-of-eurostar/ As far as I can tell.
It is a fascinating story of huge construction projects (of international significance in this case) and the involvement of private finance. Thatcher who was a free marketer and all for privatisation was UK PM at the time it was it being planned. It seems Eurotunnel (now called Getlink) has the long running Tunnel concession. With Branson having had a stake in the train operator Eurostar through being a large minority shareholder of a company that bought Eurostar.

It is a tale of cost overruns, fires, and falling passenger volumes. Eurotunnel itself had a twenty year period of no dividends but is currently paying them. Oceania has a bit of catching up!

”The headaches started with the UK’s insistence that the Channel Tunnel and (initially) its connection to the rest of the UK railway network should be built with private finance”
https://eu.boell.org/en/2024/03/06/thirty-years-channel-tunnel (Opens a PDF)

[limmy]

This puppy cashflows alright.

Just look at how much they are pumping into developments and how they finance those assets.

Will OCA be a dollar in two years time? :lol: Get out your magic 8 ball and find out!
It's been under a dollar for almost 2 years already and still trending down. Hard to see the turn around, unfortunately.

[Daytr]

As far as I can tell.
It is a fascinating story of huge construction projects (of international significance in this case) and the involvement of private finance. Thatcher who was a free marketer and all for privatisation was UK PM at the time it was it being planned. It seems Eurotunnel (now called Getlink) has the long running Tunnel concession. With Branson having had a stake in the train operator Eurostar through being a large minority shareholder of a company that bought Eurostar.

It is a tale of cost overruns, fires, and falling passenger volumes. Eurotunnel itself had a twenty year period of no dividends but is currently paying them. Oceania has a bit of catching up!

”The headaches started with the UK’s insistence that the Channel Tunnel and (initially) its connection to the rest of the UK railway network should be built with private finance”
https://eu.boell.org/en/2024/03/06/thirty-years-channel-tunnel (Opens a PDF)



I went on it a couple of times in the 1990s with that one hiccup, even still it was a great experience & to be delivered right into Gare du Nord is brilliant.

[Balance]

Open kimono by Ryman's Chairman on what happened - lots of smoke and mirrors in the past and finally reality.

Arvida has joined Ryman in facing reality (to a certain extent - still more downside yet).

Oceania is waiting for a new CEO to do a big and necessary clean up. How big a mess is there to be revealed!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=de...e8Ju2JRICXmEuz

[Daytr]

I think it's the first time I have seen the OCA thread off the front page!
Just goes to show once the chief spruiker is gone, there is little to say at this juncture other than up is up, down is down...
Tough match up this week for the Wahs against Melbourne, although the TAB has them at evens.

[mistaTea]

Just goes to show once the chief spruiker is gone, ...

Does anyone know what specifically Sailor Wallace got banned for this time, and how long for?

[Balance]

Does anyone know what specifically Sailor Wallace got banned for this time, and how long for?

Who cares?

[winner69]

Does anyone know what specifically Sailor Wallace got banned for this time, and how long for?

Maybe requested admin that he be wiped off Sharetrader …


.but there is a post of his still on Me Today thread …and the comments in the Reputation part of his profile are still there ….they are interesting

[Daytr]

Does anyone know what specifically Sailor Wallace got banned for this time, and how long for?

Throw a dart at virtually any post and it will have a 50:50 shot at landing on a childish insult.
A bit like the odds for the Wahs this weekend!
Can OCA get off the floor to close the week? Currently trading 52c!
Plenty of DEEP value there.

[ValueNZ]

Maybe requested admin that he be wiped off Sharetrader …


.but there is a post of his still on Me Today thread …and the comments in the Reputation part of his profile are still there ….they are interesting
Even if his posts are wiped off the Me Today thread, your posts pumping a worthless stock will be there forever.

[winner69]

Even if his posts are wiped off the Me Today thread, your posts pumping a worthless stock will be there forever.

Yeah mate ……sold and seen the share price go down heaps ….more than your 50% you mentioned the other day

[Daytr]

Even if his posts are wiped off the Me Today thread, your posts pumping a worthless stock will be there forever.

Well, there is always the Sailorboy minime, or the cabinboy...

[Balance]

Open kimono by Ryman's Chairman on what happened - lots of smoke and mirrors in the past and finally reality.

Arvida has joined Ryman in facing reality (to a certain extent - still more downside yet).

Oceania is waiting for a new CEO to do a big and necessary clean up. How big a mess is there to be revealed!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=de...e8Ju2JRICXmEuz

Going to be very interesting to watch how CEO Suzanne Dvorak's background as an external advisor at Bain & Co is going to manifest itself at OCA.

It would be very very surprising when she assumes the CEO role in late July that she does not go through the accounts and operations with a fine tooth comb, does a wholesale purge (like Ryman) and clean out of all the smoke & mirror practices of the past.

She would be dumb not to do so (as the market has clearly given its assessment already that OCA's numbers are untrustworthy) so it is going to be an interesting and fascinating to see what happens when OCA announces its H1 results.

If she does not do a proper clean out, RUN!

[ValueNZ]

Thanks to whoever sold me their shares for 52c. Your loss is my gain.

[Toddy]

Thanks to whoever sold me their shares for 52c. Your loss is my gain.

Where do you get your capital from to keep investing?

[ValueNZ]

Where do you get your capital from to keep investing?
Wages from working part-time.

I don't really spend any money on myself.

[Toddy]

Wages from working part-time.

I don't really spend any money on myself.

It's good that you are managing to earn funds to invest. However, if I was young again I would be taking on alot more risk than investing in OCA.

My eldest son is at Uni. We run as many costs through his own company (did a stall at the Armageddon show in Wellington) and the likes. Then he plays around investing in anything from Bitcoin to IT Companys.

Soon I will be confident enough to throw a chunk of capital his way.

I have 3 boys, all will go to uni. I always tell them that I'm not going to buy them a house but will fund each time they start a business, even if fails, go again.

My point, while you are young make as many mistakes as possible, lose often, but try to win more. Leverage up big time.

There has to be better stocks to learn from, better management to learn from etc.

[ValueNZ]

It's good that you are managing to earn funds to invest. However, if I was young again I would be taking on alot more risk than investing in OCA.

My eldest son is at Uni. We run as many costs through his own company (did a stall at the Armageddon show in Wellington) and the likes. Then he plays around investing in anything from Bitcoin to IT Companys.

Soon I will be confident enough to throw a chunk of capital his way.

I have 3 boys, all will go to uni. I always tell them that I'm not going to buy them a house but will fund each time they start a business, even if fails, go again.

My point, while you are young make as many mistakes as possible, lose often, but try to win more. Leverage up big time.

There has to be better stocks to learn from, better management to learn from etc.
Depends on how you're defining risk I guess. Academia says that risk is volatility. In that sense I have no problem with risk.

But the risk of permanent loss of capital? I am very risk averse in that sense.

I wouldn't touch Bitcoin ever, it's worthless junk.

[allfromacell]

Where do you get your capital from to keep investing?

I've been DCAing crypto gains into OCA. Plenty more to go, hoping to get OCA in the 40s. I'm genuinely hoping for it which bizarrely is a difficult concept for some here to grasp.

[Toddy]

Bitcoin etc teaches you about trading patterns. Which is difficult to do in the likes of OCA because a trading pattern normally means some junior trader at Jarden has gone on an extended lunch break so the selling stops. Or is off sick for the day.

Once you get married have have a bunch of kids then your risk profile goes out the door because you are so cash poor. So go hard while you are young.

Im all for OCA doubling in price. But just like the GFC, this could drag on for another year. And it's not looking like good old farming will drag the economy out of the slump this time.

[Toddy]

Oh, I was an accountant and worked around a bunch of risk adverse people. They could never grasp the concept that you have to spend money and take risks to make money. But were very good at pointing to the risks on spreadsheets.

[Cupsy]

Well, there is always the Sailorboy minime, or the cabinboy...

How many posts of yours today haven't been at least partially about Rob? Maybe there needs to be a sailor rob thread so you can post to your hearts content 😆😆😆

[Daytr]

How many posts of yours today haven't been at least partially about Rob? Maybe there needs to be a sailor rob thread so you can post to your hearts content 😆😆😆

Fair call. RIP SailorBoy.

[Entrep]

I have 3 boys, all will go to uni. I always tell them that I'm not going to buy them a house but will fund each time they start a business, even if fails, go again.

Awesome idea, thanks!

[Daytr]

Interesting interview with the Chair / interim CEO of Ryman. Facing the music which is why I prefer them. Very interesting what he says about valuations, something I'm not sure OCA has faced up to yet. As Balance mentioned I wouldn't be surprised to see the OCA's new CEO do similar, but that's conjecture. If they do watch out below.

Definitely worth a listen.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/rescuing-ryman-chairman-reveals-his-plan/RWY64IFCURHAHC2MKP5VHRRYOY/

[allfromacell]

Interesting interview with the Chair / interim CEO of Ryman. Facing the music which is why I prefer them. Very interesting what he says about valuations, something I'm not sure OCA has faced up to yet. As Balance mentioned I wouldn't be surprised to see the OCA's new CEO do similar, but that's conjecture. If they do watch out below.

Definitely worth a listen.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/rescuing-ryman-chairman-reveals-his-plan/RWY64IFCURHAHC2MKP5VHRRYOY/

There is no evidence to suggest that OCA or any other listed property company directors have directly influenced the methodology of external valuers, as RYMs did. While skepticism is understandable, it is just that to suggest that other operators have anything to 'clean up' in this regard

[Bjauck]

There is no evidence to suggest that OCA or any other listed property company directors have directly influenced the methodology of external valuers, as RYMs did. While skepticism is understandable, it is just that to suggest that other operators have anything to 'clean up' in this regard
I remember in an interview some years ago, the Chairman (I think) of Ryman stating that one day they would be the company with the largest capitalisation on the NZX. A vacuous ambition I thought, and perhaps an attitude that fuelled their push for development and over-valuation (at all costs.)

Not what I was looking for, but this item from 2015 indicates the Ryman strategy of Grow baby! Grow!
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/ryman-sets-70-growth-target/RHQGES6P22LTEEF22BMITFHPHY/

I found the item from 2013: “Challies has stated that Ryman has the intention to become the No 1- listed firm by capitalisation” At least Oceania never stated such an ambition publicly.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/business/8999032/Rymans-rise-to-the-top

[Daytr]

I remember in an interview some years ago, the Chairman (I think) of Ryman stating that one day they would be the company with the largest capitalisation on the NZX. A vacuous ambition I thought, and perhaps an attitude that fuelled their push for development and over-valuation (at all costs.)

Not what I was looking for, but this item from 2015 indicates the Ryman strategy of Grow baby! Grow!
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/ryman-sets-70-growth-target/RHQGES6P22LTEEF22BMITFHPHY/

I found the item from 2013: “Challies has stated that Ryman has the intention to become the No 1- listed firm by capitalisation” At least Oceania never stated such an ambition publicly.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/business/8999032/Rymans-rise-to-the-top

I found the comment that the 15% compounding growth they were trying to achieve was unsustainable, as it's a similar target that some on here have been calling for with OCA.

In a rising market growth is easy, build em, and by the time you have finished the build its worth another 5% - 7% maybe more. Resales are flying out the door at huge capital gains.

But when the market changes the operating model of the actual villages comes under the spotlight as costs have risen & fees haven't kept up, so right at a time when the sales program isn't delivering what it used to, the operating business is bleeding.

[Cupsy]

I found the comment that the 15% compounding growth they were trying to achieve was unsustainable, as it's a similar target that some on here have been calling for with OCA.

In a rising market growth is easy, build em, and by the time you have finished the build its worth another 5% - 7% maybe more. Resales are flying out the door at huge capital gains.

But when the market changes the operating model of the actual villages comes under the spotlight as costs have risen & fees haven't kept up, so right at a time when the sales program isn't delivering what it used to, the operating business is bleeding.

Except you're maybe missing a little bit of context, he was referring to the size they have increased to, being unmanageable in terms of doing developments in maintaining those growth targets (sounds like their annual targets of new units was alot higher than oca, and all the documentation ive seen OCA dont specify a percentage target but a number target being a slice of predicted increase in demand.)


But when the market changes the operating model of the actual villages comes under the spotlight as costs have risen & fees haven't kept up

And I'm pretty sure he was referring to care here not village, care is the segment requiring the nursing, and other services. Interestingly OCA have discussion around strategy of moving (or partially moving) their care to an ORA and DMF funding model (part of the refurbishment plan if I'm not mistaken?), so it would be interesting to understand how this is going for them, maybe ferg or mav might have more of a clue than me?.

Interesting also was the discussion of the covid period and development costs blow outs at that time, and the choice of leaving developments half finished or pushing through to completion (is there really a choice?), i think (from memory) the timeframes for the development discussed in oca documentation is almost 2 years for development and consenting then almost 2 more years for completing??

Edit comment: It appears like you haven't read any of the available OCA documentation, maybe you should do if you haven't, there is plenty of interesting info available.

[Daytr]

Except you're maybe missing a little bit of context, he was referring to the size they have increased to, being unmanageable in terms of doing developments in maintaining those growth targets (sounds like their annual targets of new units was alot higher than oca, and all the documentation ive seen OCA dont specify a percentage target but a number target being a slice of predicted increase in demand.)

And I'm pretty sure he was referring to care here not village, care is the segment requiring the nursing, and other services. Interestingly OCA have discussion around strategy of moving (or partially moving) their care to an ORA and DMF funding model (part of the refurbishment plan if I'm not mistaken?), so it would be interesting to understand how this is going for them, maybe ferg or mav might have more of a clue than me?.

Interesting also was the discussion of the covid period and development costs blow outs at that time, and the choice of leaving developments half finished or pushing through to completion (is there really a choice?), i think (from memory) the timeframes for the development discussed in oca documentation is almost 2 years for development and consenting then almost 2 more years for completing??

Edit comment: It appears like you haven't read any of the available OCA documentation, maybe you should do if you haven't, there is plenty of interesting info available.

I wasn't referring to any OCA target but targets some have mentioned on here to justify their lofty valuations.

The interview was a very good insight into what challenges all the retirement village operators are facing, but particularly RYM, OCA & ARV.

Considering OCA already have the highest DMF at 30% there's probably no room to move, not sure how they can justify a DMF on care beds.
Most of the care fees are funded by Government, so to extract more outside of that is going to be an interesting challenge.

[Cupsy]

I wasn't referring to any OCA target but targets some have mentioned on here to justify their lofty valuations.

The interview was a very good insight into what challenges all the retirement village operators are facing, but particularly RYM, OCA & ARV.

Considering OCA already have the highest DMF at 30% there's probably no room to move, not sure how they can justify a DMF on care beds.
Most of the care fees are funded by Government, so to extract more outside of that is going to be an interesting challenge.

Refurbishing an existing care unit to a level that's much higher than a standard care unit is what would enable them to move to the ORA model as the resident would be paying over and above what the government is funding is my assumption (and bearing in mind that is just my assumption, read the OCA listed documentation for the correct details, i still have more reading to do).

The added benefit I guess is the the ORA less the dmf presumably assists with funding for the refurbishments.

[winner69]

Oh dear, Warriors go down 38-24 (after leading 14-0 early on) to the Storm…… 25,000 fans braved the rain to watch the game. Chief fan Jason Paris of One fame proclaimed “a great �� man �� The better team didn’t win tonight. Proud of the team. This is the Warriors year. #UpTheWahs” and went on ‘..whenwe make the finals no team will want to play us”. Most fans agree …real fandom. UP THE WAHS

Oceania saw it’s share price go up 1 cent but it remains pretty low. Fandom out in force again this week in spite of a sin binning. One of most loyal fans bleated on about the current situation doesn’t make any sense at all from both a FA and TA angle (akin to Warriors fans blaming the referee) and made the cry out that there is no better time to buy Oceania shares because Oceania is a great company b(l)aa b(l)aa b(l)aa. This is our year. GO OCEANUA YOU BEAUTIFUL THING

A casual observer has to think both are in a dream world about ‘this being our year’ thing. Maybe the only realist is a young Oceania fan who says it might be middle age before he says ‘yes, this was our year’

[Daytr]

Oh dear, Warriors go down 38-24 (after leading 14-0 early on) to the Storm…… 25,000 fans braved the rain to watch the game. Chief fan Jason Paris of One fame proclaimed “a great 👍 man 👨 The better team didn’t win tonight. Proud of the team. This is the Warriors year. #UpTheWahs” and went on ‘..whenwe make the finals no team will want to play us”. Most fans agree …real fandom. UP THE WAHS

Oceania saw it’s share price go up 1 cent but it remains pretty low. Fandom outin force again this week in spite of a sin binning. One of most loyal fans said the current situation doesn’t make any sense at all from both a FA and TA angle (akin to Warriors fans blaming the referee) and made the cry out that there is no better time to buy Oceania shares because Oceania is a great company b(l)aa b(l)aa. This is our year. GO OCEANUA YOU BEAUTIFUL THING

A casual observer has to think both are in a dream world about ‘this being our year’ thing. Maybe the only realist is a young Oceania fan who says it might be middle age before he says ‘yes, this was our year’

Haha very good!
I made an absolute motza on Melbourne, I couldn't believe they were paying evens before the game & when the Wahs went up 14 nil, I had an epiphany & saw the deep value that I have heard so much about, so doubled down and again. Happy days.

And don't knock Jason, he did me a flavour this week. He might be blind when it comes to the Wahs, which is a great marketing ploy by the way, but he's the most responsive CEO I have ever come across. Maybe it's who RYM should go after...

[mistaTea]

Oh dear, Warriors go down 38-24 (after leading 14-0 early on) to the Storm…… 25,000 fans braved the rain to watch the game. Chief fan Jason Paris of One fame proclaimed “a great �� man �� The better team didn’t win tonight. Proud of the team. This is the Warriors year. #UpTheWahs” and went on ‘..whenwe make the finals no team will want to play us”. Most fans agree …real fandom. UP THE WAHS

Oceania saw it’s share price go up 1 cent but it remains pretty low. Fandom out in force again this week in spite of a sin binning. One of most loyal fans bleated on about the current situation doesn’t make any sense at all from both a FA and TA angle (akin to Warriors fans blaming the referee) and made the cry out that there is no better time to buy Oceania shares because Oceania is a great company b(l)aa b(l)aa b(l)aa. This is our year. GO OCEANUA YOU BEAUTIFUL THING

A casual observer has to think both are in a dream world about ‘this being our year’ thing. Maybe the only realist is a young Oceania fan who says it might be middle age before he says ‘yes, this was our year’

Haha this is gold. Thanks winner.

[winner69]

Hey Value …..when you mention the prospectus I assume you are referring to IPO one in 2017.

Oceania have changed strateg a few times since ….do you think if they came up with a prospectus today it would be much different?

[Cupsy]

Hey Value …..when you mention the prospectus I assume you are referring to IPO one in 2017.

Oceania have changed strateg a few times since ….do you think if they came up with a prospectus today it would be much different?

What post are you Referencing to here, i cant find it?

[winner69]

To be fair though, it does depend on the story as viewed by the individual as to how inspiring it is, and there is an element of beauty being in the eye of the beholder i think. The prospectus talks about them targeting a medium term build rate, presumably to soak up demand from declining not-for-profit operators (and any growth in demand), with a demand period from 2016 to 2026 of estimated annual required extra beds.
So one could look at growing assets over this time frame as a measure of how inspiring the story is. Also one can look at price to personal view on intrinsic value, others who have been holders for a longer period and at higher prices will have there own point of view also. And there is probably a large number of other views with regard to how someone looks at it as to how inspiring it is or isn't.

Cupsy …might have been you and not Value mentioning prospectus

[Cupsy]

Cupsy …might have been you and not Value mentioning prospectus

Ok yeah I was wondering, and yes I was referring to the ipo document.
Well hindsight is 2020 vision so I reckon (opinion only) if they did it again starting today they would slow their development rate down to reduce their exposure to cost blow-outs, maybe be tighter on non ora liabilities like borrowings, maybe re-consider the proportion of care, but then again, being good at care is partially in my opinion what helps make them be attractive to residents.
What about you?

[ValueNZ]

A casual observer has to think both are in a dream world about ‘this being our year’ thing. Maybe the only realist is a young Oceania fan who says it might be middle age before he says ‘yes, this was our year’
If you aren't investing in equities with at least a ten year horizon, you're probably speculating.

[Daytr]

If you aren't investing in equities with at least a ten year horizon, you're probably speculating.

I would suggest the exact opposite of that is true.
The more time the more unknowns can happen. Within a 1 - 2 year period you are far more likely to know what could happen than a 10 year horizon.
Quite likely a management change at a minimum.

[winner69]

REINZ Chief Executive Jen Baird says the market shows a general theme of more this month with higher sales counts, increased stock levels, more listings, and properties selling more quickly than a year ago. These annual increases contrast with current challenges in securing finance, changes in the job market, and the wait on OCR and interest rate changes

Prices might be flat but activity getting stronger by month … OCA have no excuse for not growing sales volumes and reducing that debt

[allfromacell]

REINZ Chief Executive Jen Baird says the market shows a general theme of more this month with higher sales counts, increased stock levels, more listings, and properties selling more quickly than a year ago. These annual increases contrast with current challenges in securing finance, changes in the job market, and the wait on OCR and interest rate changes

Prices might be flat but activity getting stronger by month … OCA have no excuse for not growing sales volumes and reducing that debt

Sales must be booming eh Winner. Lots of pent up demand for our units.

[winner69]

REINZ sales volume trend

Annual volume now just under 70,000 ….steadily getting back to normal levels

OCA sales should be doing OK

[Toddy]

Another twist worth some consideration.

The Government is relaxing rules around second dwellings (granny flats) being built on the same property of a main dwelling. Upto 60 sqm.

Time will tell if this will have any effect on the familys decision making when it comes to looking after the olds.

[winner69]

Good report from Oceania

http://nzx-prod-s7fsd7f98s.s3-website-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/attachments/OCA/433012/420932.pdf

[nztx]

Deep ever discounting value apparently resides with OCA - folks .. you didn't hear it from me first ;)

[X-men]

Bull sheet report....10 years....if U invested 10 years ago...U lost 50% of your investment....

10 fxkg years!!!

[nztx]

Bull sheet report....10 years....if U invested 10 years ago...U lost 50% of your investment....

10 fxkg years!!!


Did you add in 10 years of Opportunity Lost / Cost ? .. probably as much again on top :)


Remember also that the updated value is now measured in devalued Crisis worn & torn Robbo Peso's, not the pre Crisis Silver Kiwi Cinderella Sheikel that got replaced :)

[bull....]

Good report from Oceania

http://nzx-prod-s7fsd7f98s.s3-website-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/attachments/OCA/433012/420932.pdf

lol that decrease there EPS

[X-men]

10 fxkg years! All management should be sacked and this sheet should be sold to PE at 60c a share

[Habits]

Another twist worth some consideration.

The Government is relaxing rules around second dwellings (granny flats) being built on the same property of a main dwelling. Upto 60 sqm.

Time will tell if this will have any effect on the familys decision making when it comes to looking after the olds.

50/50 call, probably by the qualifying age for entry to an ILU they will already have been 10+ years in the granny flat and the family wanting to repurpose the flat for 18yo johnny or jane or have a paying tenant

[kiwikeith]

Bull sheet report....10 years....if U invested 10 years ago...U lost 50% of your investment....

10 fxkg years!!!


I am flabbergasted by this report. Imagine the manhours put into that.

[Cupsy]

I am flabbergasted by this report. Imagine the manhours put into that.

Imagine the hours put into everyone of these reports required by law throughout the whole country.

[kiora]

Good report from Oceania

http://nzx-prod-s7fsd7f98s.s3-website-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/attachments/OCA/433012/420932.pdf

Key KPI achieved?
"Remuneration
Performance metrics are included in Executive
and other senior management remuneration.
A number of KPIs under Oceania’s Remuneration
Policy is collective delivery against Oceania’s
strategic pillar priorities, including a KPI that is
specific to sustainability (including climate) as
outlined further on page 35"

pg 35 "Oceania established a $500m, five-year,
sustainability linked loan in July 2022.
One of the key Sustainability Performance
Targets (SPTs) is the establishment of, and
meeting a, GHG emissions target verified
by the SBTi. Meeting this SPT attracts an
interest margin discount and not meeting
this SPT incurs an interest margin penalty.
In this reporting period, Oceania met all SPTs
and will receive an interest margin discount. "

Q: Who pays for the interest margin discount?

[ValueNZ]

51c fellas. How low can it go? :t_up:

I'm loving it.

[850man]

51c fellas. How low can it go? :t_up:

I'm loving it.

You topping up?

[ValueNZ]

You topping up?
Always (at these prices ;)).

[Daytr]

Always (at these prices ;)).

At 42c I might get tempted.
Deeper value.

[ValueNZ]

At 42c I might get tempted.
Deeper value.
42c seems arbitrary. What's with that?

We may never see 42c... But I hope we do.

[ValueNZ]

At 42c I might get tempted.
Deeper value.
Hey Daytr, does this mean you agree with SailorRob and I that lower prices are in fact better than high.

Because you have spent a lot of time in the past arguing the opposite.

[Entrep]

42c seems arbitrary. What's with that?

We may never see 42c... But I hope we do.

You’d be ecstatic at 0.1c then?
And also gutted with $10?

[ValueNZ]

You’d be ecstatic at 0.1c then?
And also gutted with $10?
Ecstatic would be an understatement.

That would mean the market valuing Oceania at $724,000, a company with $2.8 billion in assets. Basically like winning the lottery but a hundred times better.