Hey Mav …. RBNZ has the number of house sales data which they source from Core Logic …but it always seem to be a quarter behind.
In a spreadsheet as well
https://www.rbnz.govt.nz/statistics/...cators/housing
Printable View
Hey Mav …. RBNZ has the number of house sales data which they source from Core Logic …but it always seem to be a quarter behind.
In a spreadsheet as well
https://www.rbnz.govt.nz/statistics/...cators/housing
Thanks winner.
Yes , having it miss out Q1-24 isn't too helpful here especially as that is the key to how sales might have dropped for OCA HY2 and MIGHT offer some justification for low OCA new sales numbers . From your link , I think the jump in Q4 -23 up from Q2 and Q3 -23 is fairly benign so it looks like the 8% yoy sales is about right (after all why wouldn't it be) .
You might be interested in this ...I've continue to focus on how these PAC and new cares suite sales corelate with each other .
My motive is that should new cares suite sales be low then new apartment sales just arn`t as bad one would assume. Given we were told a total of these sold were 69.( what are the chances of that winner69 :scared:)
The undeniable rise in PAC fees over the years clearly says PAC has become a growing way of life for OCA as opposed to a pure ORA care suite model. The numbers are saying for years , about 20-25% of all care suite resales and new sales are now PAC.
This completely puts to bed any fear that large numbers of unsold cares suites are sitting around empty. A PAC and DMF generate the same daily return (10% p/a) just PAC doesn't come with the ORA capital to sit in OCAs bank account/debt.
I`m trying to work out what this 2HY cares suites new sales might be of that 69.....This is my observations and math ....
a. 20-25% ratio of available new care stock is going to PAC rather than be a new sale.( based on last 3 years of data) .
b. They only had 126 empty ones to sell at beginning of 2HY24,
c. Therefore , these remaining 100 c/s left for ORA sale, they should be selling down over 2.5 years ( being needs based so has always taken that long).
That leaves potential new sales from opening stock for 2hy24 of only 20.
Then add new deliveries for 2hy24 stock which will also be selling on top of these 20...
A. Blenheim care suites (55) got delivered very late so sales might be 5 or so ( big guess here)
b. Newly delivered c/s at Helier (32) will never be "sold" as such , just weekly fees .
It is quite possible total new care suite sales could as low as 25-30 and that would still be healthy.
that leaves scope to have new apartment sales of c. 40-45.
If this actually works out then apartment HY2 new sales will be same or slightly greater than HY1.
The result could be far better and have far better future connotations than the disaster this total 69 apartment / cares suite figure first initially looked like in a pro-rata way.
I'm not stating this will all be true and certainly waiting to see it first ...but the numbers worked from years of PAC growth data is suggests this is actually happening.
OCA seem to be now accepting PAC as part of their repertoire rather than a short term , diminishing , gap filler. There seems a clear consistency in their data of PAC growth.
There's really no reason to have put all this effort in when I can just go fishing for a few weeks for us to be told the result but should these things play out as I'm now think I'm seeing then it should change the way we all see care suits in ORA and PAC ( therefore empty units) in OCAs portfolio.
Just maybe OCA can start reporting how many PACs are in play from here on. There's so much confusion and mystery over this area.
There are many (too many) things in life I don't understand. One if these is the poor communication from companies to the owners of the business. Poor communication creates uncertainty and allows rumours and misinformation to flourish. Maybe something for the new CEO to consider.
Of late, I have carefully reconsidered my thesis on Oceanias ‘float’ and concede I have been very wrong about it. Apologies to those who followed and believed in my analysis around this. A good reminder that everyone needs to do their own work.
I will try and explain where I, and I believe others went wrong and credit to those who called it out all along, as well as ‘the market’ which is clearly seeing it for what it really is. It now also makes sense why the analysts never talk about it and it never features in Jenny Ruth's write ups.
Assuming that OCA is not conducting major and deliberate fraud, we can look at the balance sheet and assume that the numbers are correct, at least in the record of capital that has gone into the business, and what has come out.
The balance sheet shows the assets that are owned by the company and how they are funded.
If we look at total assets, we can see 2.7 billion dollars worth, now some may argue that the true value is lower but one thing is for sure and that is the value of the liabilities are 100% real and those stand at 1.7 billion dollars. This is real capital that has been put into the company to build or acquire the assets along with some real capital from shareholders over the years.
So we know that 1.7 billion at least has gone in, plus the capital from shareholders - the original capital, retained earnings and subsequent capital raises.
All of the assets are owned by the shareholders of the company and most of them are real physical assets that you can see and touch. The way those assets were created or acquired involved spending money, as discussed this is recorded on the balance sheet.
So we have 2.7 billion in assets, mostly physical, that are owned by shareholders, some of this value came from gains in value over and above money that was put in by the different providers of capital (retained earnings - development value creation and property market value increases), but mostly these assets came from the capital provided by shareholders and debt.
The money from the shareholders, ‘equity’ comes to around 1 billion and the money from debt is around 600 million.
Instead of talking numbers, if we for the sake of this exercise assume the 2.7 billion dollars in assets is actually 27 retirement villages, then 10 of them are paid for by equity from the shareholders, 6 of them are paid for by the bondholders and the banks.
This leaves 11 villages or 1.1 billion dollars unaccounted for.
As the money hasnt come from shareholders or debt from the bank or bondholders, but clearly exists as we can see the assets that it created or acquired and those assets are currently in use for the benefit of shareholders, I have come up with some potential sources of this billion dollars of funding currently in use. As a group we can discuss the merits of each and decide which is correct.
- Kim Dotcom
- Kim Jong Ung II
- Kim Kardashian
- Oceanias Customers.
Please don’t ask for my methods, they are proprietary and my sources (or sauces) are confidential.
Next I consider the costs of the ‘missing funds’ that are clearly backed by real physical assets working for the benefit of shareholders right now, not only becoming available in future when development stops as some have suggested).
- One hundred billion % per annum. (This figure came from Dr Evil may not be correct)
- 10% pa
- Negative cost
- Very slightly positive if care runs at a loss permanently
Next I consider the way in which the missing funds that don't exist can be requested back from the mystery providers
- When Kim is extradited to the US
- When Kim lands on the Moon
- When Kim’s latest TV show flops
- Never
Next I consider the way in which we should think about the mystery funding
- Like a loan from the mob
- Like a loan from a pawn shop
- Like a loan from the government
- Not like a loan at all but economically superior to equity
Next I consider what the value of this mysterious 1.1 billion dollars is, now that interest rates are 6% vs the decade where they were close to zero.
- About the same
- Lower
- Higher
- FAR FAR higher
Penultimately, the regulations governing the use of the mystery capital, how it must be invested and how it must be kept safe.
- More regulated than a Labor Green dream team
- Like insurance float
- Like a contract with the mob
- Nothing at all, totally unregulated
Finally, the rate in which the free capital is shoved down the companies throat for the pure benefit of shareholders.
- Getting removed rapidly
- Remaining constant
- Growing slowly
- Compounding at a rate that would make Buffett blush bigly.
Imagine for a moment, being offered a 2.7 Million dollar house, and getting a permanent interest free loan of 1.1 million dollars from the government with no conditions and mortgage from the bank of 600k at half the going interest rate and only having to pay 400k down of your own money.
Then imagine the loan from the government was able to be used to create more situations as above, and the loan grew each year at an incredible rate.
Would be pretty good I’d say.
Imagine for a moment being able to buy $100 notes from many of Sharetraders best for $45 each, imagine believing that OCA has taken $1.30 in cash from Maverick and turned it into 57c in 24 Months. That’s a solid effort if they have.
Imagine believing that the billion dollars of float was superior to equity and thus the discount to NTA was in fact 80%...
Imagine having a situation like this and being able to transact with other market participants that no matter how patient you are or how many times you explain it, just cannot understand it. Imagine them confusing float with debt just because the accounts say so, not able to think in economic terms and calculating NTA with the float as debt!
Then imagine the market participants who understand this better than anyone and understand the company, but instead of focusing on the company they fret about what other market participants think over a 2 year period out of 30 or 40 years, and state that they have to 'Endure' a situation for a 'few more weeks' where they can get, by their own calculations, forward returns of 20 plus % CAGR for years to come. Imagine having to Endure that and PRAYING for that situation to end after 30 years of investing experience. Hard to imagine such a scenario.
Float, what float? It either doesn’t exist, or will ONLY become available in some future hypothetical scenario.
SailorRob is back from jail with a ripper
Welcome back SailorBoy.
https://youtu.be/YkgkThdzX-8?si=dCf72U9EVxH4qfp1
Keep buying sailor moon! Maybe U can buy all the shares and delisted this 🐶....at $1.50
Existing shareholders will be grateful!!! 🥲
Welcome back SailorRob!