Hopefully at ASM we’ll get an update on the assets worth $100m held for sale
I do note that $47m of proceeds need to be refunded to clients
Printable View
Hopefully at ASM we’ll get an update on the assets worth $100m held for sale
I do note that $47m of proceeds need to be refunded to clients
might not be a pretty picture for RV's when all these legacy re-sales gains they are printing at the moment run out.
add in the risk people attitudes to RV's is not immune to changing attitudes ie people might one day realize that when you enter a RV your life is on average only 8 yrs to live
Go and tell them all bull!!
Successful businesses operate as follows,
Give customers what they want,and you will get what you want.
At 17, the biggest and most profitable thing you can and will be learning, is the sheer ignorance of your competitors in the market.
It's hard to believe but true.
Having bull$hit on the opposite end of the table is a massive blessing.
How he's managed to retire 25 years ago and live entirely off his investing genius is certainly a mystery.
Steve Ballmer's reaction to the Iphone is a great example of this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eywi0h_Y5_U
The fact is that the RV business in this country is incredibly competitive so far as attracting new/replacement customers is concerned. Reputation is gold and every Board/CEO knows that to diminish/lose it would be a massive set back.
I live in West Auckland and the amount/regularity of advertising/Open Days being delivered by one or other of the RV listed entities to my household is just crazy. The customer really is King/Queen in this industry.
RVs do a great job as God’s waiting room
OK , Perhaps my banging on about this DHB funding increase being significant is getting a bit tiresome. So I'll give it a rest after this one.
In consideration of what's been said I still can't agree with you Bull and Sailor that this DHB “relative improvement of funding to the minimum wage” ( as per the minimum wage chart already supplied) will just get swallowed into the cost increase spiral. Hence not making it to the bottom line.
Here's one more chart before I leave this bone alone.
This chart is the total OCA care profit and then I've broken that down into the 3 income streams that compose it. Plus my forecast for FY24 tacked on for fun. ($m)
The blue line is the juggernaut of premium care revenue. (does not include resale profit- that falls in the village section of accounts)
The red is “other” income and is mostly from the nursing school they run.
Then there's yellow, the profit on DHB fees after all OCA care costs are subtracted.
https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/7n...w3-ZztXoJDDt98
The point of this graph is to demonstrate the powerful effect on profit from a measly increase in DHB fees that only slightly addresses the growing underfunding we have endured, as per the chart , since 2018.
It seems entirely reasonable to think we can return to the scant profitability of DHB funding we had in 2020 and 2021 . I've entered that same level of profitability for FY24 on this chart, although as per my workings shown over the last few posts , I personally think it will be greater than this.
See the incredible effect it has on the care profit ( green ) . This then goes straight to OCAs bottom line because that's the only place it can go from this chart. There are no more expenses or fees to bite into it on the way.
I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything, we can all disagree and still be friends. FY24 Will come soon enough to tell the story but you might indeed have to pay "a little" more for the shares by then.
Other than my forecast of FY24 these are all facts. I've laid them out here in a straightforward way so that anyone who wants to, can read the earlier posts to easily arrive with their own expectations and come out with their own forecasts.
Love all the work you share Maverick. Would expect there is potential that this will result in higher wages being paid by OCA to their staff. Consider it very plausible that they have stated they can’t pay more as part of negotiations but now the staff know they have received more funding they will be expecting a “catch up” OCA might even agree.
Hopefully it is a well run business and half the new funding does flow to the bottom line.
It is my understanding all providers have to "prove" that some of this tagged funding increase goes directly to their staff.
Great in theory but good luck to the Govt trying to sort that out. I think as long as it is seen to be done in the spirit of staff benefit it will be left alone by GOVT. Perhaps only used as a punitive measure for the dodgy providers.
Most likely this rule is purely set to do the PR spin thing to show the NZ tax payer that it isn't going to end up in shareholder pockets. Fundamentally, surely it is only there to stop rest home closures so ultimately it will be used to run the rest home and stop them closing in whatever spending column it ends up in. That's my take on it.
Firstly , how I see this working for OCA is that those wages levels are already being paid for by OCA set at levels needed to attract and retain staff. As Winner always suggests ," selling villas to subsidy the care." So in effect that cross subsidizing can now reduce proportionally. In OCAs case its the premium charges subsidizing the care.
Secondly , The key to this whole thing for me is not that the DHB rates went up, rather , its that they went up to an extent that the "Relative gap between wages and DHB subsidy" has finally actually narrowed for the first time in since 2018 . As opposed to always increasing. That's the game changer. So rather than more funds each year being sucked from the premium revenue to pay staff, some of that underfunding will now come from DHB. There is still going to be unacceptable returns on basic care but it will be better than it was.
Yes , we all expect pay rises for the staff and so will they but this is the GOVT is stumping up for more of this burden than they were and more than the standard wage inflation. There is a partial long term catch up component in this latest increase that wont all need to be spent on staff.
The Government budgeted funding allocated to providers to reduce pay disparity for nurses and caregivers, $200m for year to 30 June 2024, in my understanding must be used for that purpose, so none will "flow to the bottom line" as you put it. We don't know how much OCA will receive from that source and OCA probably don't know either, but we/OCA do know that for the quarter 1 April-30 June OCA received $1.4m for that purpose and I am sure will have not hesitated to raise wages to reflect that.
The other change to revenue is the increase in the weekly sum paid as the Rest Home Care Subsidy, about 9% from 1 July 2023. This is the maximum amount chargeable to bed occupants absent any premium add-on charge for additional amenity, and because it is to cover all overhead costs some portion can be taken to the bottom line as profit/return on capital invested. In many instances even non-profits cannot make ends meet from this payment, which is why we have had media reporting closures in all parts of NZ.
Many operators are pivoting to the RV model and ORA's for care suites, and minimising the traditional care beds component. So in fact, perversely, the solution, as with The Helier, is to go upmarket and deal exclusively with those who can afford to pay outside of the RCS system and whose asset base excludes them from eligibility. Even the significant non-listed private operators, Sanderson Group, Generus Living Group et al know this and most operators are building/developing accommodation and supporting facilities of much higher quality than the early villages that are still on foot and will remain much cheaper to enter. In that respect it is a good result for occupiers who can afford it but nationally the deficit in care beds is increasing because there is no margin for owners/developers. The fact that the listed entities openly say this, albeit discretely still, is proof that the future of aged care in this country (and in Australia) is quite bleak.
Worries me a bit this talk about a chunk of Govt pay increases flowing through to the bottom line instead of going to staff …I might have misinterpreted what some are saying but that’s the impression
Oceania seem a pretty honourable lot ….I recall they repaid the covid wage subsidy they got
If the DHB funding increase was going to pay for the increased expenses only, OCA would end up being a Government Department or cost recovery only operation. They have to get a margin on top of that, to pay for increased overheads and profit margin. I think everyone understands that.
Sorry Winner … I`m not seeing what you are.
NZ upcoming elderly needs loads of new elderly accommodation built, this underfunding improvement isn't even close to encouraging that.
Currently , respectable retirement is only available for the rich, that`s you and I ( a long way off yet:))) but definitely not some of my siblings :(.
The foot on our neck as OCA care providing investors has released slightly. No more than that. Yes, material for OCA which has meanwhile learnt to live on fumes but certainly not enough to for anybody else to bother building new stuff.
I think you're being disingenuous and acting thick, for what reason I wouldn't know as we all know you aren't. As Mav has already explained, OCA (and the others) are already covering the care cost increases, so it stands to reason that increases in govt funding diminish the costs already being paid for, hence the govt increase flows to the bottom line, or if you like, reduces the losses on funding care.
Sorry, I was not clear.
I agree it will make it to the bottom line.
What I'm saying is if the bottom line is growing at around 7%, it's actually going nowhere. So the bottom line must outpace inflation and by plenty.
Profit growth of 6 or 7% a year is now nothing.
Everyone harping on (and some world class investors too) about Berkshire now earning a decent sum on their cash pile... Missing the point entirely.
Maverick / Ronald …..do you know how many premium care beds there are …say over FY23
Just that I’ve created this ‘jigsaw’ using Mav’s and Ron’s thinking and numbers to see if I can get a picture I can understand of Oceania care revenue and ebitda ,,,,,but that key piece is missing so picture not complete yet
Thanks,
The problem with the 'premium care model' is that while you might be initially able to fill your units with non-subsidized 'pay out of my own resources' residents, there is no guarantee that after those initial residents 'gain their upstairs promotion', there will be others similarly well off to take their place. Thus there is no guarantee that this model will work down the years. Granted it may be that above a certain population level, there will be a large enough cohort for such a model to work. It may be that 'Auckland' is that population base level and Oceana's 'St Heliers' is an example of this. But I can tell you that in Wellington such a model is not perceived to be sustainable (the view of the now retired manager of what is regarded as a top quality Kapiti Coast retirement village for those who are 'wealthy').
Part of the problem of course is that what was seen as premium accommodation in the day is no longer - as time marches on and expectations change. An obvious example of this is the Waterloo Hotel in Wellington, which was celebrated as one of the finest hotels in the city at the height of its popularity in the 1940s and 1950s and is now a backpackers. How long will the like of St Heliers retain their premium halo?
SNOOPY
Snoops ….the Waterloo eh ….never stayed there but frequent visitor lol. Probably had a drink with you once.
When built described just like The Helier …like words used were ‘zenith’ , ‘new standards’, ‘ chrome’, ‘modern appearance’ in this bit of history. (Descriptive language not changed much the other years eh) -
When completed, the hotel overwhelmed the immediate area. It had 102 rooms and accommodation for 125 and it was regarded as the zenith in hotel design. A contemporary account considered that it set "new standards in furnishings and interior decoration as well as in other appointments". The liberal use of chrome in many of the building's fittings was an integral part of the hotel's modern appearance. While the building was still being erected, plans were drawn up by Atkins and Mitchell to lengthen the Waterloo Quay elevation to provide more staff accommodation.
https://wellingtoncityheritage.org.n...hotel-waterloo
I thought the $20.4m breaks down to PAC revenue (Premium Accommodation Charges for accommodation provided above the mandated minimum) of $5.5m in FY23, along with $14.9m from care suite DMF collected.
I don't think PAC revenue is necessarily solely income from care suites but can be from occupants of care beds also where there are additional benefits/services provided. Which may be the case at some OCA facilities? My modest knowledge base with regard to Rest Homes is that every effort is made to justify charging at least some minor on-cost above the subsidy whilst still remaining in compliance with Government contract requirements.
Thinking about OCA's cash position going forward I note in FY22 $72.5m was spent on acquisitions (rather than development capex) and $61.6m in FY23. So simply ceasing purchases of land/facilities can mitigate cash outgoing significantly.
Additionally, the FY23 Financials show assets held for sale at $101.7m which seem to be 10 existing facilities which are effectively "on the block" and we know two of these have subsequently been on sold with settlement by end August. And most importantly unsold stock (being care suites/ILUs not under contract) as at 31 March 2023 were $409m, which is a much higher figure than the equivalent number at the previous year end. With the property market moving a bit more freely now that figure should be reducing. No doubt Brent will update us at the ASM later this month. Given there was already considerable headroom with cash on hand/banking facilities it doesn't seem there should be a cash problem.
Nicely said as always... that's an excellent segway from the recent focus on care subsidy onto ( far more importantly ) village sales.
While care profit will do its thing, its the new sales turnover that gets this model cranking. We can see on any other days newspaper that nation wide house sales volumes are lifting. The main limiter now seems to be low supply...boom.. our potential residents can help with that... win win.
Anyway, just wanted to say excellent post Ronaldson, your contributions here are top notch.
I disagree that they should have repaid it. Oceania received the subsidy as it was intended. Why shouldn’t those who provide care earn a reasonable profit on their capital invested? It is disgraceful that the gains on investment in real estate, and real estate values surged as a result of Covid measures, cross-subsidise the lack of a reasonable profit on assets used for care. Why shouldn’t it be the other way round? The NZ investment environment, and government revenue raising, has messed up priorities. And it is chronic!
A younger care worker earning double the income would boost NZ’s economy much more than an older real estate investor earning half the capital gains would detract from it. Likewise OCA earning twice the care profit would boost the tax take more than if it earned untaxed capital gains.
Hey Winner,
Been thinking about your care quandary yesterday and the best way to answer it in a way that is understandable and within reach of more everyday analysis. I'm talking here now, not about the GOVT fee profits anymore but now solely about OCAs other care profit component , PREMIUM FEES.
Govt fee profit ( discussed last week) + PREMIUM FEES + other ( always flat and about $1.4m) = $total care profit.
I've had a sleep on it and have had an idea which is simple and has incredible back testing results.
I was going to private message you all this as not to further bog down this thread with more graphs and tech stuff. But this is actually really good and some others might find it useful.
Here's how the rule of thumb formula works.
We currently have 1021 premium beds valued at $331k each = total value $338m
This asset base, if 100% full, should yield an average DMF total of 10% p/a .
$338m x 10% = maximum annual premium care profit of $33.8m. ( if they were 100% occupied by paying residents)
We know it was only $20.4m
Let's turn that into a percentage …20.4/33.8= 62%
So for 2023 we only got an actual yield of 62% on the asset base.
It wouldn't be right for one of my posts not to have a graph somewhere so here's the history of that percentage calculated for the last 6 years
https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/vc...p5ztFVQrsT9DEg
This stacks up nicely with what I said yesterday that about a third of OCAs haven’t been sold which implies a return of just under 66% is about right. These unsold units are either occupied by a grandfathered client or in a delivery still in the sell down phase.
Forecasting from here;
OCA tells us they want to build another 667 caresuits and at their historical build rate of 135 p/a that tells us they should be done by 2028.
We have observed it then takes about 2-3 years to bring a new delivery to maturity and for waiting lists to form.
So 2028 + 3 years = 2031 all these units are all up and running at maturity.
The last steps are to value the asset base and then to anticipate the possible efficiency of the DMF return on it.
1688 units at today's nominal value $324k = $547m
Annual maximum DMF + PAC return is 10% so that's a maximum premium revenue potential of $54.7m.
Logically, occupancy on mature deliveries will rise to OCAs usual rate of 92%.
let's make it 90% instead as the kids might slow the sign up process a little while they balk for a few weeks over the ORA costs. Plus there will be a few grandfathered folk who just have incredible genes.
Therefore premium care revenue in 2031 should be $54.7m x 90% = $49.2m
I would expect this profit growth will be fairly linear which mean extra premium care revenue of $3.6m P/A ( then any inflation adjustment to sale prices on top of)
Here's the unbelievable thing for me , I have very elaborate spreadsheets built over 5 years with every morsel of OCA intel known to man packed into the it. I $hit you not, my complex system has the forecast as $49.1….
Hey Winner …Now that's spooky eh?
Did anyone else notice that a quarter of a million shares traded on-market at $0.80 at the open this morning?.
That will have addressed most of an overhang in the orderbook that has persisted for some time now and while new sellers will be tempted at that price it does represent something of a marker. Bring on the ASM later this month and a few positive comments from the Chair/CEO could easily lead to the re-rate many posters on this thread (myself included) have been anticipating.
You’d have to say downward selling pressure since opening at 80 cents …..much higher volumes going down than up since
Another hour or so to go today and tomorrows another day so no real worries
Yes, over 563k traded today so far at VWAP of 78.25c notwithstanding the significant opening trade. The market is an interesting phenomenon.
I long ago learned that even when you are optimistic there are always sellers despite being unable to fathom why. Clearly it will take some news for a breakout, and depending on the nature of the revelation it could go in either direction. But I still feel the odds favour the upside.
I’m not expecting much in the way of how things going so far in F24…maybe a ‘sales ahead of same period last year’ and maybe an update on how the disposal of the unwanted sites going.
Key thing is half year in November and what Underlying Earnings are ……hopefully heaps more than $30m as anything less will be a big fail and major disappointment …….and an indication that free cash flows are tracking as per Mavericks chart (the one that showed future +ve cash flow)
I have a feeling they may have sold another surplus property, thus cash flow has improved. We should see a return to higher percentage of profit dividends. But unfortunately for every buyer there is a seller, so who is in the know, the buyers or sellers. A bit uneasy about the yoyo prices, but still have longer term confidence in this stock.
Bull...U are right...rinse and repeat....lol
Open with a bang at 80 cents …close with a whimper at 76 cents
VWAP declined over the day and end up at 77.76
TA experts could getting interested ….Fridays candle was green with no shadows …todays red with no shadows. Must mean something but at least no hammer time …I think
I listened to this podcast over the weekend and the host and guest were talking about how the thicker the research folder on a stock is, the more of a dog it is.
Then I wondered if this could correlate to number of posts on sharetrader..
OCA has over 16,000 posts vs say great performer MFT has 1,300 posts.
Kinda interesting. Probably means nothing..
I hold OCA and don’t hold MFT lol
Don't say a dog stock Rawz....U will get slaughtered here!!!! Delete your post before all the fans here give red button!! Bad omen!!!?
MFT is in smelly grinding haulage. OCA is in beloved real estate development along with tax funded and government price controlled care. So more emotional involvement perhaps with lots to love and hate…even if not personally invested therein. OCA thread seems also to be a proxy thread for the sector as a whole, along with general frustration with property and the government!
Disc: Shareholder in both.
Here we go bull...where from now? Down to 50c?
who knows lol but fundamentally maybe one could argue its not worth more than 80c at the moment considering it gets pummelled everytime recently it nears it
REINZ property sales data for July
Median price hanging around 770k/780k last few months ….at least not collapsing
But sales volumes aren’t too flash still …trend in chart ……I’d hazard a guess that OCA (and others) are still struggling to see much in way of sales increase at the moment.
Maybe Brett will tell us that soon
Just received from Craigs.....
You are a holder of Oceania Healthcare (OCA) shares.
OCA is one of the largest aged care/retirement operators in New Zealand. OCA’s weighting towards aged care has differentiated it from others in the sector. However, the company’s development pipeline is now focused on increasing the share of retirement units and moving to a continuum of care model. With the company indicating it plans to further lift its greenfield build rate as its brownfields pipe is completed, sustainable cashflow breakeven still appears to be years away – possibly putting pressure on their balance sheet.
Given this, we believe that investors would be better served having their funds in Ryman Healthcare (RYM). RYM has one of New Zealand’s most attractive retirement/aged care portfolios in terms of locations and mix of assets within villages, while the expansion into Australia remains promising. They managed the COVID-19 period very well, both from a resident safety and operational point of view. However, the disruptions caused by intermittent lockdowns, followed by a softening in the housing market have highlighted some of the inherent risks faced by the business as it looks to grow. With a needs-based offering, an ageing population, and a growth runway into the larger Australian market, the long-term outlook remains attractive for RYM. Following the capital raising earlier in the year, with their repaired balance sheet, change in capital management policy, and adjustments to its future development mix, RYM is taking the right steps to recover after a disappointing period of share price performance.
Our analysts rate Ryman Healthcare an ADD, with a 12month target price of $7.87 versus the current $6.60 share price.
If you would like to discuss this further, please do not hesitate to contact us.
That's interesting. Craigs just initiated on ARV as Overweight, which has replaced OCA as their foil for RYM (which they also have as Outperform). "We strongly prefer ARV" (to OCA).
Craig's recommendations tend to move the market (just look at what happened to Winton when they initiated) so this is definitely short term negative for OCA.
Wonder how big Craigs research folder on OCA is?
Obviously Craig’s guru analyst have a different model to Mavericks to come and say - However, the company’s development pipeline is now focused on increasing the share of retirement units and moving to a continuum of care model. With the company indicating it plans to further lift its greenfield build rate as its brownfields pipe is completed, sustainable cashflow breakeven still appears to be years away – possibly putting pressure on their balance sheet.
Market don’t like this sort of talk …big challenge for Brett at ASM to allay market fears over cash flow and debt
That announcement could indeed account for the current price "flop" weakness from 80cps on Monday. I don't think cashflow is at imminent risk in the near term thou.
Perhaps another negative factor is Labours' proposal to fund the GST zero rating of fruit and veg by eliminating the deductibility of depreciation on buildings used commercially. I see OCA charged just over $11m depreciation on buildings and care suites in FY23 so is that affected?
I realise this depreciation is not a cash expense but if it can't be taken as a charge against profits then tax is higher. I notice the ARG share price is very weak presently and all the listed property entities would take a hit.
I presume that won't happen if a National/ACT coalition takes office but still it needs to be factored in presently as uncertainty prevails. Labour clearly has no regard for tax principles, and Green/Te Pati Maori policies would need major tax raises if ever implemented.
These brokers really all are a bunch of crooks.
Listened to Chris Bishop speak to a group I attend, he said it's difficult for National to commit to some policies as it's going to depend on how cooked the books are currently. At the time we were discussing whether National would commit to bringing back tax deductions for interest and getting rid of ring fencing for residential rentals.
this just out from inghams
Similar to Australia, underlying total cost growth (+12.9%) was driven by an increase in feed costs (+$24.8 million), and growth across a range of other input costs including ingredients, fuel, freight, cooking oil, utilities, and repairs and maintenance costs all exceeding general inflation.
looks like those increased funding fund's going to be eaten up by higher chicken prices
Sorry for this late comment ... while not particularly enjoying the weather overseas over the last 4 and a half weeks, I did enjoy to reconnect with family and to focus on other things than the NZ sharemarket.
... and now I am back :t_up: ;
Just came across this recent set of OCA posts (only 10 days ago but already so far removed :):
Great work Maverick. You are certainly right about the impact of the increased care subsidies on OCA's (and other RV's) books.
On the other hand ... future NPAT is obviously impacted by many factors: Sales volumes and prices, development margins, other cost, legal changes due to RV review, (changes in) Taxation as well as the next black swan event.
Not sure I would be brave enough to predict the coming NPAT's ...
Mav said — I have always said 2024 is going to be OCAs awakening
Oceania have always been a bit like the Warriors …this is our year etc
Bugger the Warriors have to wait another year to be champions ……and they are looking so good this year
https://basehitinvesting.substack.co...m_medium=email
'This is another misunderstood point in conversations I have with people: everyone is focused on either growth (engine 1) or multiple (engine 2) but forget about capital returns (engine 3) and how low valuations enhance returns (lower multiple means higher value creation per share)'.
As I have said. OCA lower share price for longer (hopefully many more years) is better.
When’s this turkey gunna fly? Get through Christmas turkey dinner and we might see 2024 take off maybe.
I have this desperate need to put money somewhere it will do at the very least nothing for an extended period of time. Any suggestions or tips would be welcome.
Welcome home BP and I really appreciate your feedback of the govt funding increases.
As you say prediction the future is always fraught and we all know it will also be wrong to varying degrees.
But we all are looking for clues on this forum, from each other, trying to shape an opinion to do just that.
I always like to have hard figures, as a long term value investor, I see it as the only way to measure and improve on for the next time.
With regards to prediction OCAs uNPAT, yes there are many unknowns but with effort, all of them now have a 5 year pattern to observe. I dont see it is being brave , I do see now semie consistent inputs that are quite reliable now that , through evolving methodology, push numbers out the other end . The quality of inputs and processing is very good now.
During its listing OCA has experienced relentless issues;
increasing care underfunding, Covid costs, covid lockdowns, boarder closures , staff crises, ultra low borrowing costs , explosive inflation/ wages, cost/ delays of building crises, floods, war, wild swings in housing prices and sentiment....et al.
These can all be isolated and studied using both the extremes of now known high and low event positions. This has now given quite solid clues as to how each even affects OCAs operations. It has been frustrating that's its been one thing after another but on the plus side , it has given good info as to the effects on OCA now having been experience to their extremes of before / after , and highs/lows of these individual events. They are now semi measurable.
For example, Craigs new graph of min wage vs dhb rates that I've been raving on about can now crudely offer a measuring tool to the resultant effect of govt underfunding to care profit. Of course this will need to be tweaked with more info ahead , but its a blunt start for now.
More recently we know though reports Auckland , Waikato and Tauranga house sales have picked up 10% from their troughs. All care operators have NOT had to reduce pricing through the housing downturn. Demand is robust country wide. Staffing is improving. Care funding as relatively improved from its trough. I reckon these can be isolated out and now known quantifiable effects can be applied.
Then we get the updates from ARV and more ongoing clues from others , SUM next Wednesday. I think this does make OCAs earnings ( not share price ) reasonably predictable.
Hence me thinking quite confidently OCA`s EPS will be in the range of 10.5-$11c FY24 ( being weighting to HY2 as that captures more Govt funding increasing and higher sales.)
My expectation of course is only until the next drama that you absolutely rightly say is coming.
PS. I`m heading away like you have BP for a long while, so nothing to read into my future silence here. Au-revoir
Mav ‘prediction’ above - me thinking quite confidently OCA`s EPS will be in the range of $10.5-$11 FY24 ( being weighting to HY2 as that captures more Govt funding increasing and higher sales.)
Assume you mean 10.5/11.0 cents
Jeez that’s more bullish than my ‘prediction’
Be great if you are right …..30% plus increase in Underlying Earnings pretty solid eh
Enjoy your trip …bon voyage
Sailor man said
"everyone is focused on either growth (engine 1) or multiple (engine 2) but forget about capital returns (engine 3)"
The question is, whats your focus, as you talk about what everyone else is doing wrongly so therefore I pointed out that your focus is probably capital losses
Try and focus !