I better use the HPI numbers
Nationally 2.0% up from August ....last three months +6.4% and last 12 months +30.4%
Whew ... pleased with that
Printable View
"+30.4%"
:eek2:
wall street 1920's , they will be plastered this new years.... dont drink and drive!!!
I've always used HPI, not sure why anyone bothers with median or mean when much more accurate metrics are available. I guess people just pick and choose whichever more aligns with their bias.
Very positive for OCA and the whole sector, especially OCA whom haven't increased their prices by as much as the others in the sector yet. Huge amounts of embedded value.
The average age of entry to OCA is about 85, (they are targeting the older demographic compared to other sector players).
Most residents shifting in are significantly downsizing from a larger home and accordingly the price they pay is significantly less than what they sold their home for.
Most are making needs based decisions irrespective of what's going on the in the market and they are selling their homes and buying an apartment or care suite on the same market.
Only a small fraction of the gains in real estate over the last year appears to have been factored into OCA unit pricing and there is significant headroom for price increases in their units absorbing previous gains in the market overall, (source recent Forsyth Barr report)
A drop in the Auckland market while we are under lockdown surely is already expected by most on here.
I am not expecting a change to level 3 restrictions in Auckland anytime soon.
Two policies, zero cases outside auckland, suppression in auckland.
as interest rates rise cyclical factors come into play.
high prices for land and building now the New Normal.
Amended, here for another year then.
They cant do another 20 percent can they?
Then thing could really get ugly.
Rough concept for you.
The major companies have a 'deferred maintenance fee' of 20-30%.
So you buy a right for $500k
You pay your fees for years
You die, your heirs get $500k minus the DMF (doesn't matter what the place is worth now).
You also only get that once the place is sold.
The company refurbishes the place and sells for lots of $ more.
They share that 'profit' with the shareholders.
Its about now the the gold stuff in the ground starts to look good.
If this stuff goes another 20% in 12 months nerves will start to twitch.
And some draconian tax law will be passed late at night.
Then you will hear a lot of loud barking!
Good summary. If anybody wants to do a bit more research about the retirement village model without scrutinizing the contracts ... here is a good place as any to start:
https://www.moneyhub.co.nz/retirement-villages.html
Thanks buddy for your kind help ...Reading the last post about DYOR ...it will stop me from asking for help here ...I actually thought this is a place to help people with the knowledge we have rather then everyone keeps learning the hard way ...I am happy to share my thoughts ...some mayn't be so forthcoming .
It seems on paper that its win win for companies and unit holders mainly get happy golden years for which they pay . So its not an investment for them but more of service and facilities and like minded , aged fellows .
Thanks again
You've identified the key risk nobody wants to talk about. Spindy and her woke kindergarten cops saying its not fair and all those poor old people have been duped. We have seen from her radical upheaval of the laws pertaining to interest deducibility nothing is off limits when its comes to punishing so called evil capitalists who are perceived to be afflicting the little people.
^^^^^ This - Must read for newbies.
Some excellent reading in there for anyone wanting to get up to speed on this sector.
Also some stuff in here pertaining to Oceania itself https://www.oceaniahealthcare.co.nz/
Good points MR B.
and even greater argument for diversification.
expect FOMO to hit this stock.
Problem with essential services is that they tend to be most on the Govt watch list for control and directives which can translate shareholder's wealth into vote banks for them . Aged people is big group to be pampered or made promises . Capital sharing can be most fair sounding directive possible ahead ....:p
Maybe, but you have to remember two things. Firstly the government pays these providers a lot of money for the care of residents who qualify for subsidized care.
Secondly, the government needs these providers.All of them. There is no way the government can provide this service themselves as part of the public health system. They are 100% dependent/reliant on these providers to meet the growing need for aged care - villas, serviced/unserviced apartments, care beds, hospital care beds, and dementia care. The need for all of these services is going to continue to grow substantially. Forever.
Which means the government has to be very careful in terms of forcing any "requirements" onto providers. If they push them to far, providers will be forced to increase fees significantly (including the fee for subsidized care), and /or reduce their care services (as they are the least profitable side of the business).
The government simply can't afford to let that happen.
Look - this is a valid point and there are some supporting arguments as well as some opposing ... and yes, any investment has its risks - including political interference.
I understand as well that retirement villages are new on your watchlist- and therefore you will go through all the motions everybody else went through when they started to invest in retirement villages.
It might help though if you do some preparation / research and go through the last couple of years in this thread ... this would save us all from keeping to move in circles.
Looking forward to discuss something new with you ... :) :
Agreed, some privately owned retirement village offered commitment to never increase weekly fees for the entire occupation period. Makes sense cos the money is not really in the fees but the sale of units. Give a bit of carrot to incentivise sign-ups I suppose.
While I'm nowhere near the retirement age so I may not fully appreciate the lifestyle offered by these villages, but throughout the different villages that I came across, it is not hard to foresee that for many years to come, the demand for these units will continue to trend upwards which makes the sector very investable.
I’ve been saying there is regulatory risk for sometime. It’s one of the reasons that my holding in this sector has halved. COVID-19 Delta getting away in Auckland may reduce that risk. As in the same way COVID assisted Labour in the last election, it might well work against them in the next one,
IMO and FWIW.
If the current ORA terms were made illegal, I wonder how much less profitable for developers and shareholders would the replacement be? How much extra risk would the residents moving into the villages be expected to shoulder? How much less security of tenure would the residents be expected to suffer?
If the replacement for current ORAs resulted in less profit for developers/retirement village companies then fewer units may be built and fewer care beds supplied as the result of less cross-subsidy from ORA profits. So more retired people may end up staying in their family sized homes, reducing the supply for younger home owners with young families, exacerbating the housing shortage? Also the government may need to find extra beds for the increasing demand from baby boomers for rest home and hospital level care.
At the moment, many of the homeowners buying (of their own free will with independent legal advice) an ORA pocket part of the untaxed capital gain derived from owning their house, while in effect transferring another part of this untaxed capital gain to the owners of the retirement village. How keen would any government be in taking up this cause?
So have Oceania themselves, it would be remiss of them not to. From the 'Product Disclosure Statement - Secured Fixed Rate Bonds':
Page 3 ––Changes in regulation: Given the highly regulated
industry in which it operates, Oceania Healthcare’s
business and profitability could be negatively impacted
by any material change in the current regulatory
regimes applying to aged care and retirement villages.
Such changes could have an adverse impact on the
way Oceania Healthcare provides care to residents
or develops and operates its retirement villages, or
otherwise increase costs or restrict Oceania Healthcare’s
ability to generate revenue.
Page 20 Regulation risk
As noted above, Oceania Healthcare’s business operates
in a highly regulated industry. Future regulatory changes
to the aged care industry in which the care and retirement
village businesses operate may also have an adverse
impact on Oceania Healthcare and the way it and its
subsidiaries provide care to residents or develop and
operate retirement villages. In the care business, a change
in Government funding policy or a public inquiry could
lead to a change in the business model, an increase in
costs or a reduction in revenue and, in turn, adversely
affect Oceania Healthcare’s financial performance.
The retirement village business could become subject
to a greater degree of regulation as a result of additional
consumer protection requirements. A regulatory change
to the occupation right agreement model could restrict
Oceania Healthcare’s ability to generate revenue from its
retirement village units.
Oceania Healthcare is a member of, and has Board
representation on, both the New Zealand Aged Care
Association and the Retirement Villages Association
and this assists in keeping abreast of potential trends
and future regulatory changes in the sector.
I guess a serious investor in OCA would know all this and factor that into their own assessment of the investment.
I agree with all of that.
Let’s say Jacinda (I guess via the vaccine) sorts out COVID, gets re-elected with a resounding majority, well, she might consider she has a mandate to do more or less whatever she wants. Especially as it is unlikely a 4th term is in the offing. I still have a good sized holding….it’s just half what it used to be in the sector.
The sector is already under a comprehensive state approved framework. I am not sure if taking up the fight on behalf of the beneficiaries of wealthier retired folk who feel they may have missed out on the capital gains from what has turned out to be a burgeoning property market, would be a socialist fight. In fact it would be a fight on behalf of the private owners of capital.
I doubt there would be much buyers remorse on the behalf of those who have enjoyed ORA ownership, if covid had resulted in what was the widely forecast property price down turn... The risk of that was of course mostly borne by the shareholders.
The sector is still massively underfunded by the Govt so not as generous as you might think and another reason they won't get too involved in the regulatory side of things, if they did they would need to cough up a whole lot more money for the care side of things.
Well said Couta. Govt need these providers as they can't afford to look after residents. Be careful what you ask for as it will bite them if they push to hard.
Excellent point, though suggest any mandated change would be to future contracts. If the government does bow to heirs who see their unearned inheritance impacted, then reckon the change will happen late in this term so the impact on supply is not noticed for the 2023 election.
Suppose it is too much to expect such a change to be in the 2023 manifesto so voters actually know what they are voting for.
OCA still remains the runt of the pack. SUM, ARV, RYM and OCA a distant last in the eyes of the market. Did OCA miss an opportunity with ARV’s acquisition of Arena?
I feel that OCA will do best without government intervention. As a business wants repeat customers. If legislation comes into it the cost will be greater to the customer. Look what increasing minimum wage does. Ps my almost accurate quote came from Tim Brown from Infratil. Not too sure what you are trying to imply by privatise profits and socialise losses. Sounds like you have gone too deep into something quite simple.
The sector already has a heep of government legislation and "intervention" covering everything from ORAs to tax treatment.
As shareholders we would probably prefer that the regulations and framework not to be tweaked to reduce profitability. I think too it would be in the government's interests not to discourage further investment in the sector by reducing the profitability of independent units, no matter whether it is Labour or National in power. Especially not when there is a demand for more housing and a demand for more care beds.
These ex masters of the universe sometimes have too much conviction in their mastery of spreadsheets in lieu of real world experience and commercial nous so said Moose ...... quite profound and probably has some truth to it
Head Nurse on Exec Team is a nice soul though
Maybe you should ask investors in Summerset's IPO at $1.35 just under a decade ago what they think of ex investment banker Julian Cook's skills after enjoying 1000%+ gains ?
You don't get to be director of investment banking at Jarden without being exceptionally talented. Earl a nice guy, but I think we are extremely fortunate indeed to have Brent at the helm. Arguably the best change that's happened since OCA listed.
He showed he's much more than "just" an extremly talented investment banker here https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/...19b12a0d7d7338 paywalled
I agree to an extent Beagle but in this case I think the board/C-suite needs diverse experience. In a company like Oceania and Summerset I would expect to see good representation of medical professionals and engineers/development professionals on their board/executive team. Good representation of finance professionals is also fine by me, as a long time Summerset holder (albeit not since IPO) I am very happy with Julians work.
I know a listed developer that has no engineers or development professionals on their board/leadership team and it is very much to their detriment.
Does any one know the possible value of rerate on property value. Comparing 2 bedroom villa in hawkesbay you would be lucky to pay 650000. OCA seem undervalued at 500000. Quite a undervalue and from the last report you could almost expect a extra 30% on property value.
What's everyone's opinion
Well, when things go wrong consultants will act in their own self interest first and the clients interests second, I think some level of in house expertise is completely necessary. Further in my experience a client that knows what they are doing pushes and challenges the consultants to find the best possible outcome.
You would be shocked if the board of Xero was all accountants but it doesn’t seem to be as shocking in the construction sector.
The major retirement operators are very much in the construction/development sector.
Agree, hardly any of the property gains in recent years have filtered down to OCA apartment / care suite asking prices so a lot of horsepower to be unlocked here with a smarter investment banker at the helm. I hit Earl up more than once about how underpriced OCA's units were...might as well have been talking in Swahili for all the good it did.
James, OCA development margins are the highest in the industry and their methodology of outsourcing the construction side of the business to highly reputable construction companies means they have a superb track record of getting their villages built on time and on budget. Working like a well oiled Swiss watch.
A legend in his time for sure and still doing awesome work https://www.canterburybraincollectiv...simon-challies but please give Brent a chance to blossom...my sense is he will will prove himself to be an awesome CEO.
Maybe the new ceo will see the quick gain and take the credit 😁
Maybe someone can help me out here because I can't quite get the sales & capacity volumes to work from the annual reports.
In particular, if I compare new builds versus new sales it appears there were an accumulated 180 new units and care suites unsold at the end of the last fiscal year. That feels too high in light of demand in the sector.
Also I see OCA have restated the prior year occupancy % a couple of time - has anyone else noticed that or seen any comments on why?
Lastly, if I take last years capacity and add the new builds, I consistently get lower numbers than OCA provides in terms of total capacity for units and care suites. Have I done something wrong?
Note: items starred with * have come from the annual report. Each row is tagged with a unique identifier starting with A. Calculated rows show the calculation used by referencing the other rows, except items from the annual report which have the *.
CAPACITY & UNIT SALES ANALYSIS FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 *per A/R Sales of New Units A* 37 73 76 75 87 Sales of New Care Suites B* 15 27 57 114 107 Total New Sales
C=A+B
52
100
133
189
194
New Builds (Units & Suites) D* 44 131 272 176 217 Unsold (New Builds - Total New Sales) E=D-C 0** 31 139 -13 23 Cumulative Unsold F=Sum(E) 0 31 170 157 180 ?? Capacity Units G* 1,022 1,054 1,102 1,202 1,285 1,367 Care Suites H* 230 242 340 542 679 847 Care Beds I* 2,519 2,580 2,540 2,112 1,882 1,807 Total Capacity J=G+H+I 3,771 3,876 3,982 3,856 3,846 4,021 Average Occupancy % (Restated) K* 91.3% 90.4% 91.0% 91.5% 92.4% Average Occupancy # L=J*K 3,539 3,600 3,509 3,519 3,715 Unoccupied - All M=J-L 337 382 347 327 306 Less Cumulative Unsold Units & Suites N=F 0 31 170 157 180 Unoccupied Care Beds & Resales O=M-N 337 351 177 170 126 Units & Suites Capacity - prior year P=G+H (PY) 1,252 1,296 1,442 1,744 1,964 New Builds Q=D 44 131 272 176 217 Calculated Capacity R=P+Q 1,296 1,427 1,714 1,920 2,181 Reported Capacity - this year S=G+H (TY) 1,296 1,442 1,744 1,964 2,214 Difference T=S-R 0 15 30 44 33 ??
**Note: I forced FY17 to zero for unsold given new sales exceeded new builds and we can't start with unsold < 0.
Hey Ferg ….those numbers. Sort of get what you showing
They demolished / written off quite a few units in the past few years as they go down the care conversion path ….maybe that’s the missing number
Inflation print at 2.2% for the quarterly. Multiple by 4 quarters and were running at 8.8%.
The 10 year is spiking as it should, interest rates can only go up from here.
That's correct Biscuit - I am coming up with lower capacity figures versus what was reported in the AR. I'm also unsure about the other number I tagged red being the vacant new builds. I have zero sense if that is correct or if it is out by miles. I don't think I am comparing apples with oranges.....or maybe reported capacity is weighted for being available for only part of the year....?
Sorry mate, looking back would hurt my head too much. I am happy to accept the numbers at face value.
Interesting inflation data out today with inflation up a whopping 2.2% in just the last quarter (8.8% per annum) and the cost of building a house up a whopping 4.5% this quarter (annual rate of 18% !).
What does all this mean for OCA with its flash recently built villages at Meadowbank and the Sands and the one in Nelson ? It means the cost to build these as new buildings that are already built has gone up quite dramatically and this must flow through to resale prices.
Please Brent, be far more confident in pricing the units with the wonderful facilities you are offering residents and price them more appropriately for the safe and secure lifestyle we are providing residents. A 4.5% across the board price increase now to reflect the revised cost to provide these facilities is about 6 cents per share in asset backing. Lets do this !
I presume by worst you mean quarterly inflation and I agree that genie has been well and truly let out of the bottle and its going to be devilishly hard to get that back under control as everyone else adjusts their prices.
That's a mighty load of work there Ferg, awesome layout too.
I think I can see 2 or 3 questions in there but let me at least tackle one of them for now.
Winner has hit the nail on the head with conversions throwing your numbers off. OCA has been gutting about 50-60 beds/rooms per year and built about 40-50 cares suites in their shells. This effectively removes the count of beds and replaces them with a smaller number of renovated cares suites.
Now here's where it just muddy and essentially the nub of your stock imbalance. OCA don't count/report a newly converted care suites as a new DELIVERY in the investor presentation but they do get lumped in with the care suite NEW SALES (and do materially bring down the average new C/S sale price as they are much cheaper). OCA have been doing this in older villages since they listed but these conversions are now all but wrapped up this year. This kind of lines up with your out of balance amounts of about 30 each year( yes , they sometimes pull down the odd old care suite too , but lets no go there today)
OCA reported these conversions separately one year but quickly gave up. I don't believe for a moment its anything dodgy ,to me ,It appears they have just tried to simplify their reporting as it all just gets too much( as noted many times on ST). You are the only person I'm aware of who has picked up this anomaly in such detail, so well done for your thoroughness Ferg!
Note to newbies . Care "beds" are not the same as care "suites"
I think OCA should be really bold and put up prices by 25% across the board. Its a needs based business and you either want what they offer or you don't and does it really matter to an 85 year old who's just sold their $2 million mansion whether a care suite is $500K or $625K ?
Thanks Maverick. I don't for a minute think there is anything dodgy, my first reaction on seeing something I don't understand is to think there is a gap in my knowledge, rather than a gap in someone else's integrity! :)
I think that answers the question about total capacity not reconciling. Where care beds are converted to suites but not counted as new builds in the presentation, then this would lead to OCA reporting a higher capacity than I am calculating - which is what my analysis shows. It also makes sense that if you have surplus demand in one area and an excess of capacity in another to undertake conversions.
However, you raise a point that these converted beds (into suites) are included in the new build sales volumes. Comparing new build sales volumes in my analysis (which may be inflated by the conversions) with the number of new builds (which exclude conversions) then that would make my calculations above worse where I reckon there were 180 unsold new builds at the end of the last fiscal year. If that is correct then maybe their pricing is about right? The vacant units+suites being less than the total vacancies suggests 180 *could* be correct but once again I'm not sure if I have missed something e.g. the time factor whereby new builds take on average x months to fill which may be beyond the last reported year end.
Ferg, perhaps you weren't around in the 80s sharemarket. I learnt from that to treat everything as suspicious.
Back to OCA.....question 2
The empty units you've got figured at 180 or so is a little high on mine at 166 but certainly close enough between us.:)
Note that of these 60% are C/S . These are my calcs so don't take it as gospel but it is good enough for this exercise.
I spent time with Mudfish who lives nearby. We came up with a rather brilliant chart tracking and predicting cares suits sales. As you are a detail guy you will be interested. I have developed a good pre-covid formula which has proved reliable.
Rule 1. New apartments deliveries basically fully sell down over 1.5 years , heavily tilted to the summer. (hence hy2 is always much better than hy1)
Rule2. OCA has a sale rate of 20% of new C/s delivered per HY to fill up within 2.5 years. These sales continue at this regular , unseasonal pace for 5 HY periods. Beyond that , the block is full and as one empties(every 2.5 years) there is the right stream of replacement clients needing to move in.
C/S however are a different animal to apartments. As needs based they take time to sell down only as they are required ( regardless of price). Nobody lines up to get one on open day.
To give an example , Bayview(Tauranga) opened a block of c/s back in early 2019 and in theory they should have just recently sold the last new one. In fact they have sold much faster and there is now a waiting list there. There should actually still be brand new empty ones in Meadow bank (Auckland) which were delivered way back mid 2019.
I have calculated ( thanks to the graph Muddy and I made- he`s a deep thinker like you) OCA are selling them slightly too fast but investors will be pleased to hear that they are now ramping the prices second time around ( ie c/s re sale prices up 19% this year , remember that is only after 2.5 years.)
So the fact OCA have around 170 or so units is to be expected. But rest easy folks, price points are being ramped already.
Also don't forget that its not as important to squeeze every last dollar out of the sale price of a C/S The lion share of profit comes from a full efficiently staffed building that you can constantly churn every 2.5 years. That's a sh*t load of DMF continually flowing in regardless of what the HPI is doing.
Some excellent prognostications guys but here we are at $1.41 down 4 cents (3%) for 2021 year to date and RYM down about the same while ARV and SUM are both up ~ 17% in the same period.
Care suite prices up 19% on where they were 2.5 years ago doesn't give me any comfort Mav when the real estate market is up ~ 40% on where it was 2.5 years ago.
OCA the only share I have lost money on this year...
Need to see something in next months report...this dog is getting restless.
Did a bit of research today. Very different prices.
2 Bedroom apartment at Lady Allum an OCA village in central Milford - just $650K https://www.trademe.co.nz/a/property...ing/3270418590
Birkenhead, far less upmarket suburb - Ryman 2 Bedroom $955K https://www.trademe.co.nz/a/property...7?bof=v4ykNBVr
Mayfair village 1 bedroom $815K https://www.trademe.co.nz/a/property...9?bof=v4ykNBVr
Devonport 2 Bedroom - Ryman $1.9m https://www.trademe.co.nz/a/property...8?bof=v4ykNBVr
and finally the one that makes the least sense to me of all in terms of relative pricing with its competitors at OCA's premier development the Sands on the waterfront at Browns Bay a 2 bedroom apartment for just $780K https://www.trademe.co.nz/a/property...5?bof=v4ykNBVr
Lady Allum is a very old established village and having been there I can sort of understand that its not in the A league so maybe the pricing isn't too far off the mark, (great suburb though and extremely handy to all sorts of things on the shore including North Shore hospital and all sorts of specialists just literally down the road), but the Sands unit pricing looks ridiculous to me and probably not much more, if anything, than when it was first built. Its hard in this rampant property market to understand OCA's pricing, go figure ? Like I said earlier today someone needs to take this by the scruff of the neck and make some bold pricing decisions...no point in selling up a storm if you're giving them away ! Why do I bother though ? (probably just venting a bit of frustration)..told Earl the same thing at least twice when he was in charge...like water of a ducks back.
You make valid points Beagle. However, regarding the point I have quoted: in my experience when I see such reactions (as in no reaction or "noted") from a CEO it is because they often know something I don't; as in they have some information which changes the outlook and/or conclusion but are not willing to share it at that time. People in such positions have worked hard to get there and in my experience can be months or even years ahead of others in their outlook on the business and what is coming up. Have faith Beagle - there will be a method to the madness that is not immediately obvious to us folk.
Thanks for the encouragement mate, to be quite honest, I need it.
Cindy's Kindy lockdown Covid meat-grinder goes on and on and on and...
nice post Ferg.
I checked out those trademe listings Beagle and it's frightening how many of theses things are out there but obviously the demand is there because they are all selling faster than ever.
Beagle, I do get your current frustration with OCA share price. But you do know you love the cut and thrust of momentum trading don't you? (Albeit only in solid, dividend paying companies-no rocket lab for you!)
ARV just bought a shinny new thing , SUMs share price is rocketing away. Meanwhile OCAs SP has the momentum of a beached whale occasionally flapping its tail , doing nothing, going nowhere.
The damn Auckland lockdown (2.5 months is unbelievably long) must exacerbate things as you guys up there probably spend more time than ever watching markets and covid updates with little else to do.
Tell ya what mate, I'd just love to buy you a beer sometime in December when you are out on the ran-tan when AKL is humming once again and OCA is at $1.65.
Hang in there mate, not long for both of those things now.
Alot of patience with this one. But if you got in early April last year your doing well
Hey Beagle - your frustration re Oceania low (relatively) selling prices
You seem to lay blame at Earl for this and say Brent will sort it out
Hasn't Brent been in charge of the purse strings for a while now - I would have thought he would have had been very influential in how they set prices (as some would say the keeper of the spreadsheets ;)
Maybe it was the old geezer (Development guy) who got the shove just had too much power and it's all fixed now
Whatever Oceania doesn't tell a very good story to the market and that's why the share price is what it is ..... come November and another glossy presentation trying to explain life away the share price will go up to say 160 (fair value) and then give holders another six months of frustration and making us hope that one day Oceania will be seen as great stock to hold (ie re-rated)
But I thought Oceania had the highest sales margin of any of the operators? Could it be that you can easily fudge the margin by attributing more of the costs to shared facilities (e.g. roads etc). and capitalising those?
Not sure if Oceania is doing this but it’s something I would compare with sum and ryman if I could be bothered. I certainly know that this sort of thing happens on other developments.
There's no denying that sp is still low so stop complaining and just keep on buying.
I got a parcel at 47c last year. Still feeling pretty pleased with myself TBH. That took my average cost to about 85c.
I’m still naturally keen for the SP to move higher that present. But there is a lot of shares on offer in the “ask” depth column so I will have to use the patience you mention.
The upside which still has to come through is their villa occupancy will be at highest they have had. Plus now there's a wait list.
As people have said next year will be the year it all starts flowing through
"I would buy more"
or look farther a field across the globe.. sun rising in the east.. go west young man.
and has the fat lady not stepped up to the stage on this one.
I felt your pain (and some of my own). We got it wrong, and the three Bs got it right - the bastards! But Beagle (bless his paws) has also been known to let his politics cloud his judgment with this paricular share, so as long as the beached whale doesn't actually start to stink, I'm hanging in at 40% of my portfolio.
Relax, everybody. The RV spotlight has turned to Arvida, for the present. OCA will have its turn again in due course.
:cool:
What the heck are you talking about ?...the endless spin coming from Spindy and her woke team is having no effect on me whatsoever :lol:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_6Yu_LlFno