The Lemon Fool

In case I am not the only HYPer to own this one, the 4th quarterly dividend details can be found here ……

https://www.investegate.co.uk/newriver- ... lc%20Alert

NewRiver is pleased to announce that it has declared a fourth quarterly dividend of 5.4 pence per share in respect of the year ended 31 March 2019, which is a 3% increase on the fourth quarterly dividend from the prior year (5.25 pence).
This dividend will be paid as a Property Income Distribution (PID). The dividend payment date will be 24 May 2019 and the dividend will be paid to shareholders on the register at close of business on 23 April 2019. The ex-dividend date will be 18 April 2019.

Dividend rise is not entirely surprising, being simply the same as the three previous quarters it was somewhat expected, but it is good to receive confirmation.


Ian

I was very pleased to do a big top up at 219p about 5 months ago.

I looked very carefully at it and came to the conclusion the sell off in retail property had been misjudged in this case.
These guys have poundland/b&m/aldi/lidl/coop convenience in their retail parks. No department stores. No mid range fashion. They are also a pubco (some relationships with Marstons if I remember) who are quite happy to redevelop as necessary if the pubs are not doing well. The Lockhearts (sp?) are a father & son team who run the outfit have plenty of skin in the game.
They seem like smart operators.

They were paying out a just about covered divi of 10% at the time - now about 9% due to SP

One real worry was Woodford really liked them....

So far so good.

As always do your own research. They are interesting and somewhat off the usual HYP beaten track.

Matt

mattman74 wrote:I looked very carefully at it and came to the conclusion the sell off in retail property had been misjudged in this case.
These guys have poundland/b&m/aldi/lidl/coop convenience in their retail parks. No department stores. No mid range fashion. They are also a pubco (some relationships with Marstons if I remember) who are quite happy to redevelop as necessary if the pubs are not doing well. The Lockhearts (sp?) are a father & son team who run the outfit have plenty of skin in the game.
They seem like smart operators.
As always do your own research. They are interesting and somewhat off the usual HYP beaten track.
Matt

Thanks for sharing that. I don't hold, but had been thinking to look into them.

torata

mattman74 wrote:I was very pleased to do a big top up at 219p about 5 months ago.

I looked very carefully at it and came to the conclusion the sell off in retail property had been misjudged in this case.
These guys have poundland/b&m/aldi/lidl/coop convenience in their retail parks. No department stores. No mid range fashion. They are also a pubco (some relationships with Marstons if I remember) who are quite happy to redevelop as necessary if the pubs are not doing well. The Lockhearts (sp?) are a father & son team who run the outfit have plenty of skin in the game.
They seem like smart operators.

They also go for clients that are into entertainment - cinemas, discos, pizzerias - looking for the evening/weekend fun footfall, not simply shops.

I bought a little earlier than you - June 2018 at 288.40p - but I am happy with the increased dividend and very happy to hold


Ian

I bought these in 2014.
They may have come up on TMF.
Currently in OH's ISA.
Woodford, yes iirc was a major shareholder.
Quarterly payer, which is nice.

Maybe they are a hidden HYP treasure.
The divi is and has been in the DZ, but they keep plugging on. The overly high yield has deterred me from topping up, perhaps I should.

V8

88V8 wrote:The divi is and has been in the DZ, but they keep plugging on.

What may I ask is the "DZ"


Ian

IanTHughes wrote:

88V8 wrote:The divi is and has been in the DZ, but they keep plugging on.

What may I ask is the "DZ"


Ian

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAJpEisJOIM



EEM

Hehheh, yes the Danger Zone as defined by Luni, that is to say more than 160% of the FTSE yield.

V8

"DZ"

Danger Zone.

Once upon a time in HYPland there was a mythical creature called a "Luni".

Luni was there to protect us from the tracker elves and the OEIC orcs. However Luni also knew that too much yield in HYPland was bad. He called the share treasure which gave out too much money as a percentage every year as being possibly bad - the danger zone.

So 4% was ok. 8% was in the danger zone and the share treasure would turn to poison and stop giving out money & "be cut"

He would warn us but we did not listen to him and he went away when had to move from one Foolish land to another.

Some people think that he will come back and weave his mystical baskets of treasure again in a different place here in the citrus groves of the lemon fool. Some think we have strayed too far from the path for this to happen.

The magic moderators no doubt wish I would stick on topic so I am off to pray for Luni's return and his wisdom

Matt

88V8 wrote:Hehheh, yes the Danger Zone as defined by Luni, that is to say more than 160% of the FTSE yield.

Oh not that unsubstantiated nonsense!

That was a looney idea then and it still is in my view.


Ian

mattman74 wrote:The magic moderators no doubt wish I would stick on topic so I am off to pray for Luni's return ...

When you say return search.php?author_id=144&sr=posts?

IanTHughes wrote:

88V8 wrote:Hehheh, yes the Danger Zone as defined by Luni, that is to say more than 160% of the FTSE yield.

Oh not that unsubstantiated nonsense!

That was a looney idea then and it still is in my view.

I think you use the word 'nonsense' at your peril when you are taking on the market. I subscribe very much to Luni's theory and indeed practice it myself for most of the time. The theory, at least my theory, is that if a particular share is yielding much more than say 50% over the FTSE100 average, that is a sign that you should look carefully at the reason why because if the share is yielding that much over the average, most rational investors would be buying and bringing the yield down to nearer the market average.

I know nothing of NewRiver but if its yield is 8.7% as it is quoted in my newspaper, that is certainly a good reason to take a closer look to figure out why. Maybe it is too small for some, its finances are over stretched or investors do not understand it and it is the bargain of the year.

Dod

Dod101 wrote:

IanTHughes wrote:

88V8 wrote:Hehheh, yes the Danger Zone as defined by Luni, that is to say more than 160% of the FTSE yield.

Oh not that unsubstantiated nonsense!

That was a looney idea then and it still is in my view.

I think you use the word 'nonsense' at your peril when you are taking on the market. I subscribe very much to Luni's theory and indeed practice it myself for most of the time. The theory, at least my theory, is that if a particular share is yielding much more than say 50% over the FTSE100 average, that is a sign that you should look carefully at the reason why because if the share is yielding that much over the average, most rational investors would be buying and bringing the yield down to nearer the market average.

Well that is where we differ. My theory is that all prospective purchases should be looked at carefully, irrespective of the yield.

I also do not blindly follow anyone else's unsubstantiated theories


Ian

ITH

Maybe you are being deliberately obtuse but I have never said that one should blindly follow anyone else's unsubstantiated or otherwise theories and of course all prospective purchases should be looked at carefully.

What I have said is that very high yields should be looked at very carefully because it has been proved to my satisfaction that the market is telling us something when very high yields are on offer. There may be a perfectly good reason but chasing high yields is often a very hazardous path.

Dod

Dod101 wrote:Maybe you are being deliberately obtuse

I am never obtuse, deliberately or otherwise, I thought you knew

Dod101 wrote:I have never said that one should blindly follow anyone else's unsubstantiated or otherwise theories and of course all prospective purchases should be looked at carefully.

My apologies, when you said:

Dod101 wrote:I subscribe very much to Luni's theory and indeed practice it myself for most of the time.

I assumed that you were serious.

Dod101 wrote:What I have said is that very high yields should be looked at very carefully because it has been proved to my satisfaction that the market is telling us something when very high yields are on offer.

Are you able to show this board your proof or is it to remain your "little secret"?

Until you do I can only re-iterate that unlike you:

IanTHughes wrote:I do not blindly follow anyone else's unsubstantiated theories

Anyway, no need to quarrel, you go your way and I shall go mine. Each to their own I say.


Ian

IanTHughes wrote:

Dod101 wrote:Maybe you are being deliberately obtuse

I am never obtuse, deliberately or otherwise, I thought you knew

Dod101 wrote:I have never said that one should blindly follow anyone else's unsubstantiated or otherwise theories and of course all prospective purchases should be looked at carefully.

My apologies, when you said:

Dod101 wrote:I subscribe very much to Luni's theory and indeed practice it myself for most of the time.

I assumed that you were serious.

Dod101 wrote:What I have said is that very high yields should be looked at very carefully because it has been proved to my satisfaction that the market is telling us something when very high yields are on offer.

Are you able to show this board your proof or is it to remain your "little secret"?

Until you do I can only re-iterate that unlike you:

IanTHughes wrote:I do not blindly follow anyone else's unsubstantiated theories

Anyway, no need to quarrel, you go your way and I shall go mine. Each to their own I say.


Ian

High yield is generally an indicator that the market does not like a share. I think we can all agree that not investigating why that high yield exists would be remiss.

How one chooses to do that/ using arbitrary triggers or sniff tests/detailed technical and fundamental analysis I think is open to discussion.

I think we can all agree that blindly investing in high yields which clearly no one here is doing is not clever.