I notice BRM had the biggest rise in the NZX last week, plus 5 cents, plus 8.62%.
Any ideas?
Printable View
I notice BRM had the biggest rise in the NZX last week, plus 5 cents, plus 8.62%.
Any ideas?
Just recovering from a drop the week before.
Good dividend yield though if they can maintain the payout.
BRM (and stablemate KFL) pay 8.0% of NAV but its not a true dividend; the major portion of the dividend is capital return which requires the market value of their investments to increase by the same level just to break even. Historically, the shares trade at 15% discount to NAV which provides a useful benchmark when considering buying or selling their shares.
Disc: Hold both BRM and KFL
Yet another Carmel Fisher special.
To think that the stock was actually trading at a premium to NTA at one time - such was the PR and media hype.
One guesses that she is really crying into her champagne and choking on the caviar on this one - with laughter!
You obviously dont have Carmel on your Xmas card list...how much of your disatisfaction with the Fisher funds could realistically be blamed on her as opposed to a generally dropping market. Seems a bit unfair to single out one individual for a poster named "Balance" but maybe you have valid reasons. To suggest she is taking pleasure in your apparent illfortune is ridiculous. I have BRM and am quite satisfied...returns a nice steady healthy dividend. All companies and funds use marketing, "media hype" and PR as a given.
Birmanboy - I have just compared BRM to OZY on Google Finance. On all time periods YTD, 1y, 5y and 10y, OZY was a better investment. I dont think that factors in dividends but unless BRM pays huge divs, I still think the index fund will come out on top.
Not sure about liquidity of either.
Do you think BRM is a better investment?
I am making an observation for posterity and for the record.
"Buy high, sell low" Fisher had a great run with the buy stocks and ramp them higher strategy with KFL for a while, using the "great" returns to launch Barramundi and Marlin.
Talk to Craigs & Co about how they feel now about building KFL, BRM and MLN into their clients' portfolios. Or was it all about the easy sell and easy fees?
Not entirely sure what OZY is...if its something to do with AUSTralian group of shares then I stay away from shares based in AUSTRALIA. These plenty of NZ shares that are worth following. I have BRM because it seems to return a steady dividend stream. I know they are based on AUST shares buts its easier for me to let a specialist find the worthwhile listings. I dont have time (or inclination) to do research on backgrounds etc. etc. I have a diversified portfolio so try and spread the love around if you know what I mean. Some are better than others and if I spent a lot of time I might fine tune these things to take advantage of small differences. OZY could well be a better investment. I am getting about a 9.6% return on my investment with BRM so to be honest I havent looked elsewhere.
It is an index fund of Australian shares - top 20 - http://www.smartshares.nzx.com/products/ozzy/. It is also a pie and pays regular dividends. Why let someone do the picking for you when you can just pick the market. The answer is yu let someone pick when they are better than the market. I dont think this is the case for BRM, at least on a historical basis, based on my comparison with Google finance. having said that, past performance is not an indication of future performance.
Ok, thanks. Index funds based on top 20, middle 30 or whatever dont really strike me as being the way i like to do things. Its the "averaging" aspect that I dislike. Any high performers will be countered by the dudds so it would seem that you are left with an "average" performance. My goal is to look for above average returns that dont wander into the speculative category. BRM does the research, puts their collective necks and our funds on the line and cherry picks. As I mentioned BRM is returning 9.6% for me due to some canny(lucky) buying by me at low prices so when I do the math its a hard one to beat for my dividend oriented portfolio. Also of course the dividends are fully imputed. I have been looking to buy more but it hasnt approached my average cost for months. Seems to hit resistance at 61. Every now and then after a dividend it can make a dip. There is a large queue of buyers waiting as well. Something like 300,000 shares wanted made up of 20-30 buyers. BRM regularly buys as well which seems to keep the price up. Would be interesting? to see what happened to the share price if they stopped buying however. Re your Google research..has to be taken with a grain of salt because they dont factor in individuals cost prices. Someone who holds at .75 will be less content than someone who holds at .61 for example
I'm truly sorry that your investment is down 39% with BRM. If its any consolation I have some shares that are down to...namely GFF and SKA. But isnt that the nature of the share market? It would be unreasonable to expect that every decision we make is the correct one. We make our decisions based on the available information we have at the time in question. However its our decision...no-one forced us. This is why its so important to have a diversified portfolio. So you bought BRM at the wrong time...but others you purchased maybe at the right time. Time has a habit od blurring out the hard edges. I was looking at the opening post on TUA yesterday by Phaedrus..who most people seem to think is the resurrected Jesus. Baically he was saying its rubbish and downward death spiral etc.etc. And now is at 1.75 and has superb dividends. So go figure. As Kath and KIm would say....Look at moiii...one word for you....diversify. I'm sorry you blame Carmel however..thats not fair as I said before. I doubt very much whether she intended to cause harm but we all (including the experts) make mistakes.
Last NTA update - 76.83 cps on 13 Sep.
Sp was 62 cents = 19% discount.
Market is not dumb and is telling you something profound.
The decent thing to do is wind this fund up and return the full 76.83 cents back to unit holders but she will not do that and there is nothing to compel her to do that.
Just a lot of small time retail investors without clout to force her to perform or to return the funds.
What Carmel Fisher is doing is cleverly dragging the life-span of this miserable lousy performing fund out - so that she can maximized her fees year on year until she has bled the last cent out of it into her Gucci Italian silk-lined pockets as she tucks into the caviar and cries softly into her champagne, sitting on the balcony of the 6 star hotel overlooking the Eiffel Tower.
Throw a few crumbs to the pathetic peasants and they should consider themselves lucky they are even getting the crumbs.
https://www.nzx.com/companies/BRM/announcements/239120
Heads she wins, tails you lose.
Share price still 30% off issue price but she gets $659,043 plus GST performance fee for 'outstanding performance' in the last financial year!
I hold no BRM shares, and am not an apologist for Fisher Funds, but comparing BRM with MFG is to me meaningless, where is the similarity in what they are doing?
The fees charged may be high but it's the return that counts is it not?
Comparing with AFI and ARG, both respected ASX managers with rather lower fees I suspect, and companies I would prefer to invest with,
looking at share prices alone, leaving aside the NTA, which might be better to compare
AFI has risen by 3.11% and ARG by 3.68%, BRM has decreased by 6.76% since 1 April 2013
During this period the NZ/Aust crossrate has risen from 0.8040 to 0.8803, about 10% - add 10% to -6.76
and you get a return of 3.24%, it appears to me that the return of BRM has been affected by the currency change, and their
investment return has been very similar to AFI and ARG.
Holding and very happy with my 10.17% gross yield..thanks Carmel and the team.
Ha...yes buying them at less than NAV ....then if they sell the equivalent value of some of the holdings on market in in OZ at market price..they have an automatic ongoing profit margin of the difference. I'm not sure my somewhat feeble brain understands the whole picture but I'm along for the ride.
For the benefit of someone who is greener than spring growth but interested in learning;
BRM according to ASB stats;
EPS 16c versus share price of .70c seems great to someone green
Dividend 6.3cps giving seemingly healthy return of 9.14%. Seems good.
P.E ratio of 4.25 making it seem cheap to someone green.
And even with 9% dividend there's still 10 cents per share left to play with.
As stated earlier the management fees are hefty but if the return is there....
I haven't researched this company which is obviously something that would need to be done prior to any share purchase however provided these returns were reasonably consistent then seemingly with due diligence his would be a good buy.
Yet the sentiment here seems generally unfavourable (to word it nicely).
So is this because;
a) people are unhappy about the performance and share price given the stellar run of the market as of recent
b) the company is not favoured due to lack of growth potential and relative uncertainty of dividends as opposed to say a utility company therefore 'guaranteeing' neither growth or dividends.
c) Mr market does what he wants.
d) Some other reason
Cheers
NBT
Answer d) It is an "anti Carmel" thing.
It is always possible that Balance is one of her cousins. :eek2:
Either way, we are all sick of provoking him into his usual tirade by posting anything remotely positive.
All of the above plus Fisher's track record of buying them high, and swelling them low - but cranking in the fees - the fees - the fees.
Unit price goes down (say 90 cents to 70 cents), she collects management fees and cries softly into her champagne from the balconey overlooking Takapuna Beach.
Unit price goes up from the bad performance price (say from 70 cents to 85 cents), she collects management fees and performance fees - and cries quietly into her champagne and caviar from the balcony overlooking the Eiffel Tower.
You like?
:D
Correct me if I'm wrong, but from my reading, there is a "high watermark" applied to the NAV before performance fees can be paid, so she can actually only keep 15% of the return above previous high watermark and does not make any performance fee if overall value does not exceed previous highs. This watermark is adjusted for dividends, so it is possible for the NAV to fall (as it has, being currently below issue price) and still receive a performance fee, provided the dividends plus NAV still amount to an increase in value since last performance fee paid (and the benchmark rate is exceeded in that year).
Tackling the question as to whether fees are excessive is unlikely to be as clear cut as it appears. However, from what I can see, BRM incurs a 1.25% management fee (reduced for poor performance) and 15% of gains above the benchmark index (subject to high watermark), of which 50% is effectively paid by the issue of new BRM shares.
The high watermark effectively means the last "high" NAV at which a performance fee was paid. The reason there is still a fee at current levels when the shares were originally issued at $1, is that the value is adjusted for dividends issued.
For comparison (and since MFG was mentioned), Magellan Flagship fund also appears to have base fees of 1.25%, but requires performance to exceed 10%pa before paying performance fees and will no longer pay performance fees after 2016. The Magellan Global Fund (unlisted) has base fees of 1.35% and pays 10% of excess return above benchmark subject to also high watermark and also exceeding fixed interest rates (in the form of the 10 yr govt bond rate).
The Milford Asset Management Trans-Tasman fund might be more comparable to BRM, if unlisted, and has a 1.05% base rate and performance fee of 15% above benchmark - the benchmark being NZX50 portfolio index at time of trust deed (net of fees and gross of tax). I could not find evidence of a high watermark, but it is possible there is one.
Pie Funds seems to have a 1.5% base management fee ($150,000 per fund minimum) and a performance fee of 15% of return above previous high watermark.
I have witnessed Fisher executives (principally Carmel) marketing the hell out of the 'buy high and keep buying to show performance' King Fisher Fund to entice investors into Barramundi and Marlin. The financial advisors get their upfront fees (very nice) and Fisher gets management and performance fees for life.
The investors get?
Don't believe me? Have a chat with the AFAs (eg. Craigs' advisors) and banks like ASB who marketed the hell out of the Fisher funds - they certainly are keeping very quiet about their involvement!
The fees may appear high but to give it some perspective re Kingfish and Barramundi - I am happy with my investment.
KFL - investment $5000, profit to date $5,136.44
I invested a modest $2,500 (my first shares bought) when KFL launched 31/3/2004 and then purchased a further 2500 shares $2,500 31/3/08. By 9/1/13 from dividend reinvesting I had accumulated 7801 shares and sold off 2801( the dividend shares) to realise $3191.25. The current value my original 5000 shares plus this years dividend shares 211 is $6,774.30 - so in total real/paper profit $4,965. 85 (plus sold warrants issued 2010 $170.89)
BRM - 29/4/08 purchased 2000 shares for $1,400 - current paper profit $615.29 or after tax 8.72% (nb return based on days held but not compounded)
So maybe the fees do appear high, but to me the returns are acceptable.
I've certainly had a lot worse investments than KFL. Sold my last few last week at 1.31. Bought at low-mid 90s. As mentioned above, no one likes paying (high) fees, but the return has been better than a lot of my self-managed shares, so I'm not complaining.
I bought into KFL about April/May last year at 94, mainly as a default position to be in the market, but over a portfolio of shares. 55% return with divvies into the DRP.
Sure, understand what Balance is saying, with divvies supported from capital, and the management fees, and performance particularly in regard to Barramundi & Marlin.
Not a long term hold, but at this stage I just wish I'd bought more of them.......but now looking to exit when I see something more enticing.
Absolutely CJ. Not a long term hold, but a bid of recompense for not buying Ryman at about $2.70......bugger
Anyone picked this disaster up?
"On a larger scale, but still way short of blue chip, Australian salary packaging company McMillan Shakespeare produced a stomach-churning drop of 50 per cent for shareholders last month after the Government proposed tax changes that could poleaxe its core business.
The drop was particularly bad news for listed New Zealand investment fund Barramundi, managed by Fisher Funds, which had McMillan Shakespeare as one of its top-five portfolio holdings."
Classic Fisher style investment - buy high, sell low?
This company pays a 10% dividend, their March 14 update looks pretty positive... and yet their share price is plummeting, am i missing something here?
The Aussie mining boom is supposedly over, but that would only affect a small part of BRM's portfolio I would have thought. Is it just negative sentiment about the Australian economy in general causing the shareprice drop?
Snapiti or anyone else, do you have any solid analysis on BRM that you'd care to share?
Last time I asked the question similar to Bryndlefly someone suggested BRM was using capital to pay dividends and therefore the value of the company was slowly decreasing. Whether this is true or not I don't know. I looked in to it but found a better option (PEB @ .50 :t_up: )
Cheers
NBT
from the Morningstar report on the brm website the chart showing shareprice discount to nav suggestd that the current gap is the closest it has been for a few years
looks like tracking 6%-9% discount to NAV
thou at 61 cents the discount to last weeks nav has widened a bit ...maybe nav has declined
Good point winner. Top 5 stocks making up re 39%. Credit Corp is drifting down but the rest look pretty good. If NAV is still the same ,discount now re 16%.
Maybe the type of investors who were holding Barramundi were doing so because bank interest rates were so terrible. Now that bank interest rates are picking up (or forecast to) and Australia is apparently underperforming, they are selling out and happily plonking their money in the bank?
Looks to be in a fairly well established downtrend. Depth doesn't look very good either, if it's accurate.
Disc; not holding ATM.
Perhaps one contributing factor to the recent decline is the Fisher Funds Australian portfolio manager, Frank Jasper is stepping down for a different role at Fisher Funds. The current International funds analyst Manuel Greenland is taking over.
This could be a good thing for BRM though. While Frank seems like a nice guy, BRM hasn't performed well at all in recent years and failed to fire like KFL. Manuel might do a better job.
Too big a discount(if I'm right) imo to not take some up @ 61c.
Latest NAV out NAV 69c. I make that a 13% discount @ 61c still higher than norm. Now where to from here for the mkt?
Interestingly at 61 the 12% discount to NAV is just about the average it has been over the past 15 months or so (see chart)
Analysts often use a z-score (no not the Altman one) to assess whether a fund like this is a screaming buy or a sell. The magnitude of the z-score shows whether the difference between the current discount and the average is statistically significant, ie is the difference due to more than just random chance?
BRM short term z-score is 0.1 - as you would think seeing todays discount is pretty close to the average anyway. Would be better to take a longer time frame but a cursory look at a chart in one of their reports would suggest the long term average is higher than what it is now anyway. So on these numbers pretty ho hum and not a screaming buy. Guru analysts would like to see a 16%/17% discount before saying a screaming buy
BRM is a bit unusual with giving punters investments back as a dividend so such an analytical tool maybe not that appropriate. Whatever one should not forget that invariably the discount to NAV of most investment funds in the NPV of future management fees which in this case (as Balance would remind us) are quite high. Sometimes I feel that future dividends are somehow incorporated into the discount as well.
Thanks for raising such a subject - had a look at some numbers which was interesting but not really tempted
Winner that is an excellent reply. Thanks for the great post. So the answer to Bryn's original question is probably that it has been overpriced as of recent and that the current price is just correcting to normal where it now lies.
The last six months of the shareprice follows a parabolic arc up and down, funnily enough as does Winners graph...
Yes very good little chart there. Not being picky but i make it 13% discount , 8 divided by 69. My situ and current rebalancing requires more income from my portfolio; BRM fits nicely at decent discount and hopefully Genesis is a good fit too. Caveat with BRM is a possible decent correction coming so haven't gone ballistic with my first shoal of shares.
And the free calculator app on the iPad says its 11.55574887632304%
Amazing what you get with free stuff eh
The price chart probably looks like that because since Feb 2013 the NAV has declined by 19% (rounded). NAV was 85 cents back then
That's in NZD so some forex impact and the dividend impact but heck 19% is a lot eh
But alls OK because adjusted NAV is over a dollar. Maybe Balance can explain that
Thanks for the informative answers everyone. The current share price makes more sense to me now. cheers
Heads they win, tails you lose.
Imagine using capital to pay 'dividends' to give the illusion of performance while they rip fees out year after year.
Might as well invest in Sanford if you like fish.
i bought into them last September when they were uptrending, i was actually looking at their sliding shareprice wondering if i should sell. They're now worth almost 10% less than what i paid for them, but they do pay a decent dividend, so hadn't made up my mind. i've held onto falling stocks before though, so wondered if i should try this whole stoploss limit thingy. As you can probably tell I'm fairly self-taught with share trading and am working it out by trial and error (mostly error... although i've had the occasional good investment too).
I also have been watching them...
Have had the trigger finger at the ready.
I do not see them moving enough until the
ozzy economy starts to pick up. And that could be
some time off
BB
if you look at the 5 year chart you will notice that the vast majority of the time has been spent at a higher price than 61....If it did get as low as this it has had the tendency to recover. if you ignore the highs and lows the average price looks to be about 68. Also it has produced strong dividend returns so IMHO its a buy (and hold). Other strident posters have been ongoing and relentless in their criticism...so be it. Results and money in the bank is all I care about...until they prove me wrong they are good to go. As always make up your own mind.
Of course ;he is one eyed with a 2 headed coin in his pocket and an allergy to curls and pearls:)
Could be share dilution as well when they issue DRP shares.
For the last dividend, 1,159,479 new shares were issued.
Whereas only 15,000 were issued from treasury stock.
1,174,479 total shares issued for DRP representing 0.97% of all shares.
Something else I noticed, they only recently started their stock buyback after no buybacks for about 3 months. So next dividend they will probably issue more shares from treasury stocks.
I think 61c is a good entry anyway and picked some up.
From late 2007 until now the share price is down 36.36%.
In the last 5 years the share price is down 15.5%.
In the past year the share price is down 12.5%.
No misinformation, Snapiti.
Good on you if you bought low in BRM, just as good on all those who bought up large after the GFC in various stocks - eg. THL has provided 200%+ return.
However, BRM has been a dog of a fund for investors and the only real winner every step of the way is the manager with the 'heads we win, tails you lose' fee structure.
You are of course welcome to crow their praises for them.
Dogs do bark at crows, you know?
You are talking about YOU and your perfectly timed investment into BRM, Snapiti.
The critical point here is about BRM being a lousy investment for its shareholders in general but great for its manager, irrespective of how badly BRM has performed - and will perform.
Anyone can brag about their great investments - eg. someone who bought TRS at 0.02c and sold at 1c, and made 500% in a week. Does that make TRS a great investment?
No, it doesn't.
But when you have BRM delivering negative returns - measured over 3 years, 5 years and from inception - it is a losuy investment especially when the manager gets paid irrespective of how badly they manage the fund.
Please don't try the old trick by changing the goal posts to deflect from how badly BRM (and for that matter, its equally smelly fishy counterpart) has performed for its investors - compared to the manager who reaped millions of dollars for fees for failing to perform.
Snapiti
I have had a look at Stocknessmonster and FT charts.They are very different from Yahoo chart.So I find myself apologising for Yahoo charts.!!! Sorry to waste your time.!
My view. Fisher funds is a way to cheaply buy a moderatly well diversified group of shares.
Some of the investment decision making in regard to Barramundi has been really bizarre and I believe the fund manager has done very well, whereas on the other hand the average investor has been served very poorly. Of course some will claim they have incredible timing, (a paid employee of Fisher Funds might suggest that for example), but any way you slice and dice this debate a fund manager deserves to be measured against its peers and I'd back Milford Asset Management any day of the week over Fisher funds. Milford's reputation has been well earned and they are well respected whereas on the other hand...
See Total Shareholder returns (that is after they reinvest the money they give you back) is quite extraordinary since 2009 (the blue line)
Share price (the green line) not so hot
But if they hadn't returned capital as dividends wouldn't the NAV be higher ... and the shareprice higher
From Barramundi website
Doesn't shareprice alone mean nothing, Xero is $40 and ATM is 90 cents? Agreed it's a real drop if someone has bought $1.00x and sold at $0.62x but there's obviously more to it than just shareprice. Eg NTA per share etc - do you have figures something for this which shows they have in fact lost value in real terms?
Just trying to learn and keep the debate accurate.
Cheers,
NBT
NTA means nothing in the real world unless you can cash out at that NTA.
You can do that with unlisted unit trusts as a general rule but not with listed trusts like BRM - that is the whole idea with listed trusts that the manager has you by the short and curly for life. You want out, you do so at the sp.
So if you want out of BRM now, 62 cents is your exit price.
Meanwhile, the manager continues to clip the ticket and weeps gently into the caviar and champagne. :D
Great entry imo :t_up: exit later , know when to hold them know when to fold them, know who's holding the 2 headed coin.
I think Balance's bone of contention is the amount of fees these people have taken despite substandard funds performance, and what's worse, this was 'disguised' in the early days by using capital to pay dividends. It really was disgusting behaviour, but thats what you get when you put lipstick on a pig.
FWIW, I agree with Balance on Fisher - I retain my barge pole.
and maybe the $kiwi is weakening atm, that would ne a bonus:D
When Barramundi newsletter says Total Shareholder Return since inception (Oct 2006) is 11.2% accumulated I assume the 11.2% is not a pa figure but that for every buck you put in you have $1.11 after 7 1/2 years
Seeing they reinvest the money they give you back to come up with that $1.11 doesn't seem much of an investment over that time frame.
I assume I am correct about that accumulated intepretation
If folks read lizards FACTUAL post a few threads back re fee structure comparisons fees look inline with most other funds and you can find many that have under performed over various timeframes.If one bought BRM on listing they may not have performed well .Each person has to make their own decisions re if and when to buy each based on their own unique position. The timing is good for me personally right now as i need more income.
Thanks Balance.
I guess the point I was trying to make is that shareprice only matters if it is irrational. Ie if it deserves to be at $2 (eg $2 per share of assets) but is only 62c then who cares, it has done well. However Winner showed us that the shareprice is rational at the moment - trading at the usual average discount to NAV. Therefore is guess you're right Balance, in real terms it has gone from $1 to $.62 meaning capital has simply paid the dividends and fees with a miserable 11% left over after all those years. That is a terrible result!
Can anybody correct this or is it correct already?
Joshua tree I appreciate your need to change to income stocks but surely if they're just paying you your own capital as dividends wouldn't it be better to go somewhere else?! What are your thoughts?
NBT
I was at the BRM shareholder meeting a couple of years ago. At the time, BRM was around 62-63c.
During the QA session, a shareholder expressed concern about how low the share price was compared to the $1 IPO and asked when we're getting back to $1.
Frank Jaspers response was something along the lines of...
"If you include dividends over the years, then we are breakeven at $1 thereabouts".
So that's Fisher Fund's justification. Include dividends into the return and everything is sweet!
People are o bsessed re the $1 issue way back. Im only int in now for me..Timimg is everything who knows if I'm right or wrong but I'm happy @61c for my first shoal.Who knows when i sell again I'm hoping to get good income andc make abit on these/p for reasons I've already expressed with the caveat are the mkts going to correct big time soon. Gensis looks more defensive plus a big div I've applied for heaps. Had laser on eye today so not sorry re grammar.
So you are even more one-eyed than usual JT?:) I'll increase the font size so you can see it better...everybody else reverse the procedure please. You're right JT...some people seem to have made the naïve assumption that BRM SP should have gone up from issue price......because well...you know...that's what shares are supposed to do right??? C'mon, we all have purchased shares that have gone down below what we paid for them. The list of such evil doers is long and at some points even the best of companies or shares have plumbed the nether regions. Why should BRM be any different? Buy it at the right time after some study and tracking its performance and you increase your chances of it being a winner for you. Timing is everything...trouble is no-one can time these things to perfection. Simply put those who buy at the right time are happy and those that don't whinge. Everybody colours things by their own experience. Reality is that very few investors are interested or GAF about how someone else views things. We read but do not comprehend. JT You have a lot of people joining you today who think as you do. Looks good to me too. To all those living in the past you have a choice....if you are still holding (yeh right) you could choose to lower your average cost by buying more at a lower price or move on to a more productive use of your time. May the force be with you.
Don't have BRM, but I did buy into MLN about 18 months ago, and it's working out really well so far. One thing that Snapiti has not mentioned was the food at the AGM. Of all the meetings I have attended, this was the best feed by far. In fact it was so good, I may take a doggy bag next year. I'm assuming that BRM shareholders got the same treatment. Like they say, the quickest way to an investors heart….??? Well probably through his wallet, but good food works for me.
Hey zigzag take balance along ' s/he will be your doggy bag and bubble guzzler and who knows his/her dreams may come true; Carmel may stick her tongue in his/her ear:t_up:(worst nightmare more prob)
HeeHEe i like that BB. Best wishes with the painterly wife and your allergy I'm convinced another masterpiece will be forthcoming . Gazooks should be in the lounge, drinks on me and a yard glass for guess who.:blink:
LOL you're giving up?? After 10 minutes? It takes me longer than that to put my socks on.....However I appreciate your suggestion and I will certainly give it the consideration it deserves. PS ..luck has very little /next to nothing to do with long term investing so hope your research/learning continues the way you want it to.
Thanks BB. It's going ok. I'm enjoying it and doing well. Cheers.
Here's some factual things I think are worth considering.
BRM started paying a regular dividend in Sep 2009 (http://www.barramundi.co.nz/barramundi-performance/)
The NAV of BRM has gone from approx 85c in Sept 2009 to 71c in Feb 2014, as per the NAV History link on that same page. A decrease of 14c.
During that period they have paid approx 30c in dividends (same initial link).
So 30c dividends minus 14c in capital value loss leaves a 16c overall gain for the period (of approx 4.5 years).
16c / 4.5 years = 3.5c effective return P.A. per share.
So if you had purchased the shares at this time (2009), the historical price was around 75c.
3.5c / 75c = 4.7% return.
Hardly spectacular IMHO. I have no doubt you could do better yourself BB!
Taking the situation a few years back to the initial price of $1 only makes it worse as you add many more years but only one extra 2c dividend payout.
As you say, timing is everything. Snapiti has done very well getting in at 37c. He is one of few though (well done Snapiti).
I'm happy to be proven wrong - given this very average historical performance and no obvious change on the horizon, sticking to facts not opinion, what makes you say this is a buy right now?
Cheers,
NBT
PS I appreciated you've previously said that 62c is below the average price and therefore it's cheap. Winners post earlier showed it is trading at its usual discount to NAV and therefore it's technically not cheap, it's exactly the effective price it always is on average (relative to current NAV).