Can someone please explain to me how the Net Asset Value of a share can be R214 as stated in the financial results, but the share price trade at only R16, with a SBK 12m target of R17.16 What am I missing here ?
Reinet is a listed hedge fund. The published fund objective is long term capitl growth with minimum downside. The portfolio that is shaping looks like there is zero correlation between the new assets held. The standard charge is 2%. Borrowings of EU1.4BN indicate where this is going. So one is not paying for the BAT passive holding: it is for the accquisitions - backed by BAT - used as co- lateral as we have seen. If you look at the CGR of the share price over the last 3 or so years it is inline with what you would expect from a hedge fund. I haven't accessed negatvie month detail but I would expect that to be low single digit. If you want to hold BAT for income or as a defensive position that is another thing but it is simply oversimplfication to focus on the fees. Personally I think that BAT IS in decline. But that is almost a separate question now.
That may be so but, the point is that BAT is still over 84% of all assets and almost all their income. After all these years and given the huge management fees, you would have thought that diversification would have happened a bit quicker.
remember that because BTI was an inward listed co the initial plan was that they had a set period of time to off load the bti's .. that changed when inward was s*****ped as a concept .. me thinks board not always been very clear with shareholders
If I recall, they had an AGM a couple months back to change or do away with the set period i.e to change their MOI because of the good performance of BTI. However, poor performance by mngmt to meet their undertakings as per initial listing in the first place does not get mentioned.It surely would have been cheaper just to have unbundled the BTI shares in the first place.