He is banned for three months, why don't you just get in contact with him directly so you don't need to wait that long. I can check if that's okay with him if you actually are wanting to go through with the bet.
Printable View
yep tried to lay a bet on me too , new was just bravado. anyway never took the bait would have bankrupted him as he's still waiting for the float to make him rich
In the heart of the storm, where waves clash and roar,Stood Sailor Rob, a gambler to the core.With a glint in his eye and a swaggering stride,He'd bet on the wind, on the tide.
His voice boomed loud as the ship cut through spray,"Come one, come all, let's play the game today!I'll wager my gold on the roll of the dice,Or the turn of a card, whatever entices."
With a laugh and a grin, he'd take on the odds,Challenging fate with his bold, daring nods.For Rob knew no fear, not of loss or of debt,He'd risk it all, with no hint of regret.
Through tempests and tempts, he sailed undeterred,Each wager a tale, each outcome was heard.His bravery matched only by his daring bet,A legend at sea, no gambler could forget.
For in the heart of a sailor, there beats a thrill,A longing for risk, a desire to fulfill.And Sailor Rob, with his bravado so grand,Embraced every gamble, with cards in his hand.
So here's to the sailor who never shies away,Who faces the odds, come what may.In the dance of chance, he'll always be found,Sailor Rob, with bravado unbound.
If people were prepared to put the same amount of time into analysis of OCA rather than putting time into drafting and then trying to make money off each other via these 'bets', I am sure OCA investors on the forum would be better off. Let's work together people, rather than trying to out-bluff each other with these bets.
I am offering up no prize for anyone who can answer this question, bar the basking in the knowledge that you have helped a lot of people better understand their OCA investment. I set the scene of my question like this.
1/ OCA take a deferred management fee (DMF) into the accounts when they sell a villa. This fee is 30% of the capital the resident pays over when they take up their licence to occupy.
2/ The DMF is recurring for each new ORA signed on as the villa licence to occupy changes hands. Thus the incoming resident refills the DMF coffers, when moving in, which means, barring a management disaster, the DMF never has to be paid back by OCA.
3/ The 30% DMF becomes a kind of 'extra defacto equity' for OCA, which allows OCA to be able to build 30% more villas in their growth plan than they would have, had the DMF not existed.
4/ The villas are built with 'real cash', retained earnings from OCA added to the float, that must be handed over to the builders on completion of each new construction contract.
5/ /Mr Market' values any retained earnings, and the float at 50c in the dollar, as that is the only way that a villa equity return of 3% can be increased to 6%, which is a satisfactory borderline acceptable return from a share investor perspective.
6/ The only way an OCA share investor can get their capital out of OCA is to sell their shares on market, at a price determined by Mr Market (a rate of 50c per dollar of the assets on the balance sheet).
Let the equity of an ordinary property development company, without a float, be 'E' (not the case with OCA because their 'E' is enhanced by the float).
The equation for an investor in 'cents in the dollar' to recover their share of the company's retained equity, by selling OCA shares -enhanced by the float- comes down to: 0.5 x 1.3 x E = 0.65E
So for every dollar generated within OCA, our shareholder investor can get back 65c of that by selling their OCA shares on market. Alternatively, our investor might want the money generated within the company paid out as an unimputed dividend (OCA do not have imputation credits to pay out) . Assuming our shareholder were on a 33% marginal tax rate they would receive 67c in the dollar, which is 2c in the dollar more than if the company retained their money! So (drum roll, here is the question) "How is OCA developing a retirement village along these funding lines a good deal for OCA shareholders?" Who can answer that one? I genuinely want to know the answer!
SNOOPY
discl: do not hold OCA
Addendum: I have just realised I have made a mistake in that final calculation. It is not $1 supporting 30c of float value. It is 70c supporting 30c of float value. 30/70 = 0.4286
The equation for an investor in 'cents in the dollar' to recover their share of the company's retained equity, by selling OCA shares -enhanced by the float- comes down to: 0.5 x 1.4286 x E = 0.7143E
So for every dollar generated within OCA, our shareholder investor can get back 71.4c of that by selling their OCA shares on market. And that is a few cents better than paying an unimputed dividend.
Great thought provoking post Snoopy.
I had rightly or wrongly assumed that shareholders don't really make any money until OCA cut back on the second part of point 4, as there will be costs aplenty exceeding that of just the blokes swinging the hammers, and buying jib board and nails, then potentially there is a dividend worth discussing, as the company throttles back on growth?
What I don't know if this happens before or after the share price becomes $3.22 :)
Hey Snoopy, Your analysis is more than welcoming as is all other contributors, however the personal dribble is not.
Anyway have you ever looked at Arvida (ARV) the same way you have been getting your snout into OCA.
For mine ARV is way more likely to require a CR than OCA.
I am a holder in OCA, ARV and SUM.
Dude, your argument is "Mr Market is discounting OCA shares, therefore this is bad for shareholders as if they sell their shares they only recieve x% back."
But dude, that's exactly why I am a shareholder, I only bought in because of the discount to intrinsic value...
The answer to your question is because it generates float, "free money" and a sh1t ton of it. OCA could make zero EPS for a decade and continue their float growth at 15-20% and shareholders will still do very well out of it by earning say 5% ROA from that point on.