Stephen Bland - New HYP Portfolio @ Stockopedia

[DrBunsenHoneydew]

New series for 2019 How I build an HYP

https://www.stockopedia.com/content/how-i-build-an-hyp-459388/

Moderator Message:
Minor mis-spelling in subject line corrected. -- MDW1954

[Raptor]

Registration required to view complete article. 14 Days free trial available.

Raptor.

[PinkDalek]

For those who are registered they'll find that https://www.stockopedia.com/contributors/stephen-bland/ includes I didn't invent high yield share investing, it is a very old idea., so there's no need for posters here to keep repeating that he claims anything else.

Up to now, there are 3 shares selected for the (new) High Yield Portfolio.

As Gromley says over there:

It's just like deja vu all over again!

[mattman74]

Which three shares has his Royal PYADness chosen?

Are you allowed to say?

Matt

[Raptor]

SLA Standard Life Aberdeen
VOD Vodafone
IMB Imperial Brands

The first 2 I would avoid at the moment but do have in my portfolio. I have recently brought into IMB, so far 3 out of 3 for me. I still am unsure of VODs continued Yield and I do like SLA but feel that they are still "morphing" and wonder how they will look in the end.

Raptor

[moorfield]

Thanks DrBunsenHoneydew, your post is a timely one - I was nitpicked recently over slightly misquoting Stephen, so I'll take the liberty of requoting his latest advice from that linked article (coincidentally written on the same day):

The main characteristics of my HYP strategy are to choose high yielding UK big caps, widely diversified with equal investment in each industry and totalling 15-20 sectors.

The three selections so far are not unpredictable. Two elephants in the room are CNA and SSE - I'll be interested to see if Stephen selects those next.

[kempiejon]

SLA Standard Life Aberdeen
VOD Vodafone
IMB Imperial Brands

The first 2 I would avoid at the moment but do have in my portfolio. I have recently brought into IMB, so far 3 out of 3 for me. I still am unsure of VODs continued Yield and I do like SLA but feel that they are still "morphing" and wonder how they will look in the end.

Raptor

I hold all three but like Raptor would rule out VOD as I like more cover and SLA as it's not really the company I bought and I'd suggest historical data is not a true record of the current entity.

[Arborbridge]

SLA does surprise me - I wouldn't say that was "not unpredictable". Have I really just used a triple negative!

SLA does not have a five year record in this form- so he is taking Gengulphus's definition of continuity.

Is VOD an endorsement that he has investigated VOD and found it passes for safety? This suggests to me that he is using the initial safety factors as final and definitive rather than a starting point for further investigation, as I rather thought his original position was.


Arb.

[moorfield]

I'm guessing many here are not actually using HYP as PYAD championed to produce their pensions. Here's a handy reminder, again from that linked article.

Then just do nothing and enjoy the income

(edited 23/3. As per mod box. Raptor.)

[Gengulphus]

SLA does not have a five year record in this form- so he is taking Gengulphus's definition of continuity.

Sorry, I don't remember defining continuity (*) - so if I have done so, please remind me, and if I haven't, please tell me what you're talking about!

(*) At least, not in a HYP or investment sense - and I certainly don't claim responsibility for any of the mathematical definitions! ;-)

Gengulphus

[johnstevens77]

I'm guessing many here are not actually using HYP as PYAD championed to produce their pensions. Here's a handy reminder, again from that linked article.

Then just do nothing and enjoy the income

I am with Arboridge on this one. I discovered the HYP on the Motley Fool back in 2003 and athough not a strict non tinkerer, it is providing me with a comfortable retirement.

john

(edited 23/3. As per mod box. Raptor.)

[Arborbridge]

I'm guessing many here are not actually using HYP as PYAD championed to produce their pensions. Here's a handy reminder, again from that linked article.

Then just do nothing and enjoy the income

What you say is certainly true, but that does not undermine my comment.
As the originator of HYP he encouraged many or us to look in that direction and although we may all have modified his concept to suit ourselves, Irrespective of the fact that I use a modified version of HYP myself, I discovered HYP at just the right time to plan my pension investments, and it's worked: so I feel some respect is due.

Arb.

(edited 23/3. As per mod box. Raptor.)

[TheMotorcycleBoy]

New series for 2019 How I build an HYP

https://www.stockopedia.com/content/how-i-build-an-hyp-459388/

Moderator Message:
Minor mis-spelling in subject line corrected. -- MDW1954

According to Raptor's post one of the Stocks picks was IMB.

Now whilst I don't have a strict HYP, I do own several popular HYP shares one of which is IMB, so I'd be very interested in you sharing Stephen Bland's rationale for this stock.

For me, I like the dividend, my impression of the CEOs competence, and the fact that in addition to diversification from tobacco to Vapes, IMB are also making investments into medicinal cannabis in the form of Oxford Cannabinoid.

However the downside for me of IMB is it's high EBITDA leverage, it's reduction of retained earnings down into negative terrority.

So if you could share any of what was written regards this company I'd be very grateful.

thanks Matt

[Raptor]

New series for 2019 How I build an HYP

https://www.stockopedia.com/content/how-i-build-an-hyp-459388/

Moderator Message:
Minor mis-spelling in subject line corrected. -- MDW1954

According to Raptor's post one of the Stocks picks was IMB.

Now whilst I don't have a strict HYP, I do own several popular HYP shares one of which is IMB, so I'd be very interested in you sharing Stephen Bland's rationale for this stock.

For me, I like the dividend, my impression of the CEOs competence, and the fact that in addition to diversification from tobacco to Vapes, IMB are also making investments into medicinal cannabis in the form of Oxford Cannabinoid.

However the downside for me of IMB is it's high EBITDA leverage, it's reduction of retained earnings down into negative terrority.

So if you could share any of what was written regards this company I'd be very grateful.

thanks Matt

Follow the link and have a free registration. Just picking out his rationale for IMB from the rest of his thread would not give the whole picture. The idea of links is for people to follow them and read, if they are interested.

Raptor.

[Dod101]

As for pyad's choices, I would not touch two out of the three shares so far chosen. Anyway that is up to him, but I doubt that he ever claimed to be a stockpicker although he does advocate Strategic Ignorance. He appears to practice it too.

Dod

(edited 23/3. As per mod box. Raptor.)

[Arborbridge]

SLA does not have a five year record in this form- so he is taking Gengulphus's definition of continuity.

Sorry, I don't remember defining continuity (*) - so if I have done so, please remind me, and if I haven't, please tell me what you're talking about!

(*) At least, not in a HYP or investment sense - and I certainly don't claim responsibility for any of the mathematical definitions! ;-)

Gengulphus

Sorry Gengulphus if I have taken you out of context, or misquoted.
Actually, on a quick look back at various threads, I cannot even find the conversation! However, what I thought you wrote was in a discussion about whether SLA could be regarded as a continuity of either Standard Life or Aberdeen. You mentioned deciding this by using the company's registered number. Leading on from this, I posited that perhaps PYAD was treating SLA's history not as a new entity (which would therefore have too short a dividend record) but as a continuation of one of its previous company names - in which case the dividend record could be said to be greater than five years.

That's all I intended.

Arb.

[jackdaww]

i hold all three , but reducing vodafone , whose prospects are very debatable now.

is this just chasing high yield with no thought ?

[kempiejon]

SLA does not have a five year record in this form- so he is taking Gengulphus's definition of continuity.

Sorry, I don't remember defining continuity (*) - so if I have done so, please remind me, and if I haven't, please tell me what you're talking about!

(*) At least, not in a HYP or investment sense - and I certainly don't claim responsibility for any of the mathematical definitions! ;-)

Gengulphus

Sorry Gengulphus if I have taken you out of context, or misquoted.
Actually, on a quick look back at various threads, I cannot even find the conversation! However, what I thought you wrote was in a discussion about whether SLA could be regarded as a continuity of either Standard Life or Aberdeen. You mentioned deciding this by using the company's registered number. Leading on from this, I posited that perhaps PYAD was treating SLA's history not as a new entity (which would therefore have too short a dividend record) but as a continuation of one of its previous company names - in which case the dividend record could be said to be greater than five years.

That's all I intended.

Arb.

I remember that viewtopic.php?f=15&t=16727&p=207426&hilit=compaines+House+SLA#p207426

The only objective way of deciding the matter that I'm aware of is a technicality: Standard Life Aberdeen is the same company (number SC286832) as Standard Life, having only changed its name, and not the same company as Aberdeen Asset Management (number SC082015) - the links are to the Companies House records for the companies. But the only practical purpose I know of for which that's still relevant is that if you had a certificated holding in one of the original companies, your old share certificate would have become invalid and you would have received a new certificate during the merger if it was Aberdeen Asset Management, but if it was Standard Life, your old share certificate will probably have remained valid. In essence, the company number on a share certificate is what identifies the company, while the name on the certificate only describes the company as it was when the certificate was issued.

[Arborbridge]

I remember that viewtopic.php?f=15&t=16727&p=207426&hilit=compaines+House+SLA#p207426

The only objective way of deciding the matter that I'm aware of is a technicality: Standard Life Aberdeen is the same company (number SC286832) as Standard Life, having only changed its name, and not the same company as Aberdeen Asset Management (number SC082015) - the links are to the Companies House records for the companies. But the only practical purpose I know of for which that's still relevant is that if you had a certificated holding in one of the original companies, your old share certificate would have become invalid and you would have received a new certificate during the merger if it was Aberdeen Asset Management, but if it was Standard Life, your old share certificate will probably have remained valid. In essence, the company number on a share certificate is what identifies the company, while the name on the certificate only describes the company as it was when the certificate was issued.

Thanks for that, yes that was it.


Arb.

[Dod101]

As I think I said at the time, technically G is of course correct, but businesswise, the now SLA is nothing like the merged Standard Life and Aberdeen. It is now purely a fund manager, and not a very successful one at that, it would seem. Anyway, in its new guise it needs a couple of years to settle down, and then we might be able to see how it is actually doing in terms of investment results, new business acquisition (or how it is stemming its losses) and the management structure. Despite this week's court case win, it will most likely lose the £100 billion from Lloyds, come 2022 if not now.

Currently there is a lot of instability.

Dod