Legal & General Results.

[idpickering]

With my newfound skills at tables (thanks to IAAG) I might even post my holdings at some point (on another Board!)

Dod

That’s a shame Dod. I would certainly like to see your HYP on this board. I’m sure I’m not alone in that.

Ian

I'm with Ian: it will then be viewed by the dedicated HYP community. I rarely look at other boards unless something prompts me to.

Can you contribute a table which just isolates the HYP shares and post that here? I know we had a post of your shares a long while back, but it would be nice for us if your could update us with changes regularly.

Arb.

Spot on Arb, thanks. I rarely, if ever, go to any other boards. In fact if this board wasn't here, neither would I be. I'm a HYPer, and am only interested in this method of investing, but I respect other investor's opinions, and whichever method of investing they prefer.

Ian.

[Arborbridge]

Hi Arb

Nothing very special with my shares I fear, but I can certainly post a table in due course.

Dod

Maybe not, but you have managed to avoid some potholes which others fell into, so I think your opinion has value. In any case: please publish and let people judge for themselves.


Arb.

[moorfield]

Can you contribute a table which just isolates the HYP shares and post that here?

I'd certainly like to see Dod's whole portfolio here if possible, or if not on Portfolio Management & Review with a cross-post. A precedent has been set for posting slightly impure HYPs here, I believe up to ~5% capital and/or income from non-HYP shares is tolerated. The next logical step would be to test and unambiguously codify that boundary through debate, which I did attempt, but was laughed off the park.

[IanTHughes]

Can you contribute a table which just isolates the HYP shares and post that here?

I'd certainly like to see Dod's whole portfolio here if possible, or if not on Portfolio Management & Review with a cross-post. A precedent has been set for posting slightly impure HYPs here, I believe up to ~5% capital and/or income from non-HYP shares is tolerated.

That makes no sense to me. Such a portfolio - 5% non-HYP - would not be an HYP. It would therefore be pointless, indeed useless, on a discussion board that is set up to discuss the practicalities of running an HYP.


Ian

[idpickering]

Can you contribute a table which just isolates the HYP shares and post that here?

I'd certainly like to see Dod's whole portfolio here if possible, or if not on Portfolio Management & Review with a cross-post. A precedent has been set for posting slightly impure HYPs here, I believe up to ~5% capital and/or income from non-HYP shares is tolerated. The next logical step would be to test and unambiguously codify that boundary through debate, which I did attempt, but was laughed off the park.

Agreed moorfield. Let's hope common sense prevails and it's permitted. The author could just mention that he also invests in another manner as a footnote to his/her main comments re their HYP.

Ian.

[Arborbridge]

Can you contribute a table which just isolates the HYP shares and post that here?

I'd certainly like to see Dod's whole portfolio here if possible, or if not on Portfolio Management & Review with a cross-post. A precedent has been set for posting slightly impure HYPs here, I believe up to ~5% capital and/or income from non-HYP shares is tolerated. The next logical step would be to test and unambiguously codify that boundary through debate, which I did attempt, but was laughed off the park.

? I'm not surprised Best left "uncodified" - beware of what you wish for.

[Arborbridge]

Can you contribute a table which just isolates the HYP shares and post that here?

I'd certainly like to see Dod's whole portfolio here if possible, or if not on Portfolio Management & Review with a cross-post. A precedent has been set for posting slightly impure HYPs here, I believe up to ~5% capital and/or income from non-HYP shares is tolerated.

That makes no sense to me. Such a portfolio - 5% non-HYP - would not be an HYP. It would therefore be pointless, indeed useless, on a discussion board that is set up to discuss the practicalities of running an HYP.


Ian

Agreed. Makes no sense, and who would encourage a can of worms? My previous post was to the effect that I believe we have always tolerated the occasional low key mention of OT matters in passing. But to start "codifying" this tolerance would lead to an unhelpful debate - even if it were allowable! A HYP which contains instruments which are clearly non-HYP, simply isn't a HYP, so as Ian says, it would be nonsense to even discuss it.

[MDW1954]

Can you contribute a table which just isolates the HYP shares and post that here?

I'd certainly like to see Dod's whole portfolio here if possible, or if not on Portfolio Management & Review with a cross-post. A precedent has been set for posting slightly impure HYPs here, I believe up to ~5% capital and/or income from non-HYP shares is tolerated.

Dod has referred to his portfolio of HYP-ish holdings. Writing as a moderator, I see no reason why it could not be posted here, at least initially. If it were more appropriate to move it elsewhere, that could be done.

Another option is for Dod to PM me or any other mod, with the list, and seek a prior opinion.

Obviously, this depends on how HYP-ish his definition of HYP-ish turns out to be. But as I have posted before, there are plenty of shares that meet HYP criteria that never seem to get mentioned on this board, REITs especially, but also companies like MCRO. There is no board ruling that says a HYP has to be "the usual suspects".

MDW1954

[IanTHughes]

I'd certainly like to see Dod's whole portfolio here if possible, or if not on Portfolio Management & Review with a cross-post. A precedent has been set for posting slightly impure HYPs here, I believe up to ~5% capital and/or income from non-HYP shares is tolerated.

Dod has referred to his portfolio of HYP-ish holdings. Writing as a moderator, I see no reason why it could not be posted here, at least initially. If it were more appropriate to move it elsewhere, that could be done.

In that case he should post it on an HYP-ish Practical Board, which should allow discussion of income-generating investments without the restriction of the portfolio only containing individual company shares, a restriction that is part and parcel of the HYP Strategy. If only there was such a board ------ wait a minute, there is one. It is called "High Yield Shares & Strategies - general".

Seriously, if it is an income portfolio but not HYP, what is wrong with the "High Yield Shares & Strategies - general"?


Anyway, this is way off-topic for here. I will respond no further except on the Biscuit Bar


Ian

[Raptor]

Moderator Message:
The last batch of posts are way off topic for this forum. Any further discussion on the "biscuit bar" please. Any further posts on here will be deleted. Raptor.

[Gengulphus]

Not sure if I'll have time to do the honours tomorrow, as the dentist beckons. We'll see.

Early morning appointment Ian ? I normally have mine at 2.30

You're neglecting the first rule of HYP tooth care: the time to see the dentist is now. And waiting until 2:30 is a recipe for disaster...

Gengulphus

[richfool]

Wouldn't it have been easier and less contentious and allowed for a much wider discussion, to have posted the contents of this thread, here:

viewtopic.php?f=94&t=16604

[moorfield]

You're neglecting the first rule of HYP tooth care: the time to see the dentist is now. And waiting until 2:30 is a recipe for disaster...

Oh dear. That joke fell flat then.

I found my coat by the way.

[Arborbridge]

Wouldn't it have been easier and less contentious and allowed for a much wider discussion, to have posted the contents of this thread, here:

viewtopic.php?f=94&t=16604

No. The thread was news about a HYP share, so it's perfectly reasonable to put it here. As regards the following discussion,: no one knows in which direction a discussion will go beforehand.

I would resist news and discussion about HYP shares being dumped in a backwater where no one would notice them. Might as well just give up. This board must remain a compendium of all HYP information and for all HYP participants. To create a diaspora, would not be convenient to me or anyone else.

Arb.

Moderator Message:
Guys, I am in communication with Dod, and should he wish to post details of his HYP-ish portfolio at some point, the option of posting it here will be carefully examined. A lot depends on what it contains, and what HYP-ish means. But if it can be done, it will be done. -- MDW1954

[micrographia]

Even reading about others considering going overweight in financials gives me the heebie jeebies . Never again

[SlickMongoose]

Even reading about others considering going overweight in financials gives me the heebie jeebies . Never again

Well each downturn is different from the last. It's difficult to say which sector will over or under perform next time.

LGEN's record over the last decade is very impressive. In the HYP world they stand out as one of the best. Their return on equity of 22% is great compared to most HYP stocks.

[Dod101]

Even reading about others considering going overweight in financials gives me the heebie jeebies . Never again

So what do you hold instead?

Dod

[micrographia]

Don't get me wrong, I'm happy to hold LGEN. It is one of the very few financials I've added to my HYP in the decade since the crash, alongside HSBA. I won't go overweight in ANY sector in my HYP now though, it's not a financials-specific lesson. But it was financials where I learned my lesson, hence the heebie-jeebies .

Regards, EEM.

[moorfield]

Don't get me wrong, I'm happy to hold LGEN. It is one of the very few financials I've added to my HYP in the decade since the crash, alongside HSBA. I won't go overweight in ANY sector in my HYP now though, it's not a financials-specific lesson. But it was financials where I learned my lesson, hence the heebie-jeebies .

Me too. In fact, LGEN is currently my largest holding both by capital (9.2%) and income (9.6%) weights. Am I overweight? - well that depends on your pov. Certainly compared to sector average (both 1.6x) it is, but it remains within my self-imposed limits (10%) so I have room to add some more.

If you leave your portfolio to its own devices, some of your sectors will inevitably go overweight in due course, perhaps grossly so - see pyad's HYP1. That raises the question of how and when to rebalance - if you are a builder (reinvestor of dividends) for the future I'd suggest the simplest way to address that is to continue topping up elsewhere on a regular basis.

[Gengulphus]

If you leave your portfolio to its own devices, some of your sectors will inevitably go overweight in due course, perhaps grossly so - see pyad's HYP1.

HYP1 is not an example of leaving a portfolio to its own devices - pyad has made various reinvestment decisions about returned capital, especially during its 2006-2008 spate of cash takeovers. Leaving it to its own devices would have resulted in it being hugely overweight in the cash 'sector'!

It's basically necessary for a HYP strategy to have a reinvestment policy for capital returned as cash, at least for the large quantities sometimes returned by takeovers. And if that policy puts much larger proportions of the portfolio value into single holdings than the initial investment did, as HYP1's reinvestment policy did (over 10% compared with 6.7% in the cases of Associated British Ports' replacement by BT and Gallaher's replacement by BATS), the resulting overweight holdings need to be at least partially blamed on the reinvestment policy rather than on leaving the portfolio to its own devices.

Gengulphus