Donate to Remove ads

Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators

Thanks to ErroneousBee,GSVsowhat,Shelford,Hypster,Wasron, for Donating to support the site

The Renewable Inrastructure Group (TRIG)

Closed-end funds and OEICs
Dod101
Lemon Half
Posts: 7283
Joined: October 10th, 2017, 11:33 am
Has thanked: 1731 times
Been thanked: 3021 times

Re: The Renewable Inrastructure Group (TRIG)

#344489

Postby Dod101 » October 2nd, 2020, 12:39 pm

mc2fool wrote:
88V8 wrote:I was surprised to see how TRIG dilutes its holders.

What does it matter? So you end up with 0.001% of a £2bn IT instead of 0.002% of a £1bn IT; the £ value of your holding is the same.

simoan wrote: And Private investors seem to be excluded from the equity raises.

Well that's certainly not true of all of them, I've had at least three offers in the time I've held them (since very soon after launch).


The matter of dilution is important. I see the effect with Primary Health Properties which regularly raises capital by share placings (and often/mostly excluding private investors). I agree that the reduction in economic value is usually insignificant for private investors but the effect is more obvious with dividend payments where the dividend has to be spread out over many more shares after a placing than before and it also holds back the share price at least in the short term. The effect of dilution has been particularly obvious with Phoenix Holdings which has issued lots of new shares to SLA and to Swissre for acquisitions and that has stalled the dividend per share for a couple of years at least despite the fact that the dividend payment has increased significantly in the Company's accounts.

Through an outfit like Primary Bid it is surely not difficult for companies to include their private investors. Obviously a rights issue gives every investor an equal opportunity to contribute but share placings have become very popular especially since Covid as they are cheaper and quicker to achieve.

Dod

mc2fool
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2368
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:24 am
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 734 times

Re: The Renewable Inrastructure Group (TRIG)

#344526

Postby mc2fool » October 2nd, 2020, 1:14 pm

Dod101 wrote:The matter of dilution is important. I see the effect with Primary Health Properties which regularly raises capital by share placings (and often/mostly excluding private investors). I agree that the reduction in economic value is usually insignificant for private investors but the effect is more obvious with dividend payments where the dividend has to be spread out over many more shares after a placing than before and it also holds back the share price at least in the short term.

Well then you should be asking why PHP et al is asking for new money and using it in a non-earnings/non-dividend enhancing way.

Surely the point of raising new funds is to expand the business and, in doing so, increase the amount of earnings/dividends. It doesn't matter if there's twice the number of shares to spread the dividend over if the amount of earnings that can be given out as dividends has also doubled (or more).

Of course, some boards may make less than optimal choices and/or forget that turnover is vanity profit is sanity, and one should look into what any company has historically done with new money, but it's surely not right to simply assume that equity raising = bad.

In the case of TRIG the dividend has grown year or year since inception, and if there is any negative effect from their having grown the business considerably over its life it's not glaringly obvious.

Dod101
Lemon Half
Posts: 7283
Joined: October 10th, 2017, 11:33 am
Has thanked: 1731 times
Been thanked: 3021 times

Re: The Renewable Inrastructure Group (TRIG)

#344565

Postby Dod101 » October 2nd, 2020, 2:42 pm

mc2fool wrote:
Dod101 wrote:The matter of dilution is important. I see the effect with Primary Health Properties which regularly raises capital by share placings (and often/mostly excluding private investors). I agree that the reduction in economic value is usually insignificant for private investors but the effect is more obvious with dividend payments where the dividend has to be spread out over many more shares after a placing than before and it also holds back the share price at least in the short term.

Well then you should be asking why PHP et al is asking for new money and using it in a non-earnings/non-dividend enhancing way.

Surely the point of raising new funds is to expand the business and, in doing so, increase the amount of earnings/dividends. It doesn't matter if there's twice the number of shares to spread the dividend over if the amount of earnings that can be given out as dividends has also doubled (or more).

Of course, some boards may make less than optimal choices and/or forget that turnover is vanity profit is sanity, and one should look into what any company has historically done with new money, but it's surely not right to simply assume that equity raising = bad.

In the case of TRIG the dividend has grown year or year since inception, and if there is any negative effect from their having grown the business considerably over its life it's not glaringly obvious.


Well there is an earnings drag and so a delay before dividends catch up. I noticed that TRIG has nevertheless increased its dividend per share each year and that is presumably because it is issuing new shares each year and so the increase in profits is not from the current year's fundraising but the previous year. Once you are on that bandwagon it should work out fine. As I said though, for a company to do a big issue of shares like Phoenix has done, you can see the effect quite clearly.

Dod

simoan
Lemon Slice
Posts: 849
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 9:37 am
Has thanked: 149 times
Been thanked: 458 times

Re: The Renewable Inrastructure Group (TRIG)

#344577

Postby simoan » October 2nd, 2020, 3:12 pm

mc2fool wrote:
Dod101 wrote:The matter of dilution is important. I see the effect with Primary Health Properties which regularly raises capital by share placings (and often/mostly excluding private investors). I agree that the reduction in economic value is usually insignificant for private investors but the effect is more obvious with dividend payments where the dividend has to be spread out over many more shares after a placing than before and it also holds back the share price at least in the short term.

Well then you should be asking why PHP et al is asking for new money and using it in a non-earnings/non-dividend enhancing way.

Surely the point of raising new funds is to expand the business and, in doing so, increase the amount of earnings/dividends. It doesn't matter if there's twice the number of shares to spread the dividend over if the amount of earnings that can be given out as dividends has also doubled (or more).

Of course, some boards may make less than optimal choices and/or forget that turnover is vanity profit is sanity, and one should look into what any company has historically done with new money, but it's surely not right to simply assume that equity raising = bad.

In the case of TRIG the dividend has grown year or year since inception, and if there is any negative effect from their having grown the business considerably over its life it's not glaringly obvious.

Yes, buying more and more assets is a good way to grow earnings, but only if you are not paying over the odds for them. The thing I didn't like about TRIG that gave me the collywobbles is that although the number of shares and net assets have grown roughly in line with one another, the free cashflow generated has not grown at all in the past six financial years i.e. FCF was less in FY19 than it was in FY14.

So for some reason the cash conversion has got progressively worse. Ultimately, if you have an investment vehicle designed to generate income it is a good idea for the dividend payment to be covered by free cashflow. This has not been the case once in the past six years for TRIG and it has paid out all free cashflow plus a bit extra to maintain the dividend. I am not sure what happens if we have a bad recession and electricity prices collapse. How would they maintain or grow the dividend in those circumstances?

All the best, Si
Last edited by simoan on October 2nd, 2020, 3:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

ReallyVeryFoolish
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1292
Joined: October 5th, 2019, 12:06 pm
Has thanked: 1034 times
Been thanked: 577 times

Re: The Renewable Inrastructure Group (TRIG)

#344583

Postby ReallyVeryFoolish » October 2nd, 2020, 3:25 pm

simoan wrote:
mc2fool wrote:
Dod101 wrote:The matter of dilution is important. I see the effect with Primary Health Properties which regularly raises capital by share placings (and often/mostly excluding private investors). I agree that the reduction in economic value is usually insignificant for private investors but the effect is more obvious with dividend payments where the dividend has to be spread out over many more shares after a placing than before and it also holds back the share price at least in the short term.

Well then you should be asking why PHP et al is asking for new money and using it in a non-earnings/non-dividend enhancing way.

Surely the point of raising new funds is to expand the business and, in doing so, increase the amount of earnings/dividends. It doesn't matter if there's twice the number of shares to spread the dividend over if the amount of earnings that can be given out as dividends has also doubled (or more).

Of course, some boards may make less than optimal choices and/or forget that turnover is vanity profit is sanity, and one should look into what any company has historically done with new money, but it's surely not right to simply assume that equity raising = bad.

In the case of TRIG the dividend has grown year or year since inception, and if there is any negative effect from their having grown the business considerably over its life it's not glaringly obvious.

Yes, buying more and more assets is a good way to grow earnings, but only if you are not paying over the odds for them. The thing I didn't like about TRIG that gave me the collywobbles is that although the number of shares and net assets have grown roughly in line with one another, the free cashflow generated has not grown at all in the past five years i.e. FCF was less in FY19 than it was in FY14.

So for some reason the cash conversion has got progressively worse. Ultimately, if you have an investment vehicle designed to generate income it is a good idea for the dividend payment to be covered by free cashflow. This has not been the case once in the past five years for TRIG and it has paid out all cashflow plus a bit extra to maintain the dividend. I am not sure what happens if we have a bad recession and electricity prices collapse. How would they maintain or grow the dividend in those circumstances?

All the best, Si

As I said earlier, reducing subsidy, more competition, falling prices for renewable energy on the grid?

RVF

simoan
Lemon Slice
Posts: 849
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 9:37 am
Has thanked: 149 times
Been thanked: 458 times

Re: The Renewable Inrastructure Group (TRIG)

#344584

Postby simoan » October 2nd, 2020, 3:27 pm

ReallyVeryFoolish wrote:
simoan wrote:
mc2fool wrote:Well then you should be asking why PHP et al is asking for new money and using it in a non-earnings/non-dividend enhancing way.

Surely the point of raising new funds is to expand the business and, in doing so, increase the amount of earnings/dividends. It doesn't matter if there's twice the number of shares to spread the dividend over if the amount of earnings that can be given out as dividends has also doubled (or more).

Of course, some boards may make less than optimal choices and/or forget that turnover is vanity profit is sanity, and one should look into what any company has historically done with new money, but it's surely not right to simply assume that equity raising = bad.

In the case of TRIG the dividend has grown year or year since inception, and if there is any negative effect from their having grown the business considerably over its life it's not glaringly obvious.

Yes, buying more and more assets is a good way to grow earnings, but only if you are not paying over the odds for them. The thing I didn't like about TRIG that gave me the collywobbles is that although the number of shares and net assets have grown roughly in line with one another, the free cashflow generated has not grown at all in the past five years i.e. FCF was less in FY19 than it was in FY14.

So for some reason the cash conversion has got progressively worse. Ultimately, if you have an investment vehicle designed to generate income it is a good idea for the dividend payment to be covered by free cashflow. This has not been the case once in the past five years for TRIG and it has paid out all cashflow plus a bit extra to maintain the dividend. I am not sure what happens if we have a bad recession and electricity prices collapse. How would they maintain or grow the dividend in those circumstances?

All the best, Si

As I said earlier, reducing subsidy, more competition, falling prices for renewable energy on the grid?

RVF

As I was trying to make clear, they seem to be running very hard to stand still! :)

All the best, Si

Dod101
Lemon Half
Posts: 7283
Joined: October 10th, 2017, 11:33 am
Has thanked: 1731 times
Been thanked: 3021 times

Re: The Renewable Inrastructure Group (TRIG)

#344585

Postby Dod101 » October 2nd, 2020, 3:30 pm

Buying assets by issuing new shares is not usually particularly beneficial to existing shareholders because these new shares have go to be serviced as well. OTOH if you are buying (profitable) assets using retained earnings well that is altogether another matter, and the additional profits will accrue to the existing shareholders. I often think that the main beneficiary is the manager, as in the case of PHP and TRIG, as well as the manager of ITs which occasionally buy another IT (such as Murray Income where the main beneficiary is the manager)

Being diluted as a minority shareholder is not usually good news. As for TRIG I am glad that I started this thread as I have learned a lot thanks to all those who contributed.

Dod

UncleEbenezer
Lemon Half
Posts: 5884
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 8:17 pm
Has thanked: 787 times
Been thanked: 1287 times

Re: The Renewable Inrastructure Group (TRIG)

#344591

Postby UncleEbenezer » October 2nd, 2020, 3:44 pm

Don't most ITs issue more shares when at a premium? Some of them issue an RNS about it about five times a week!

All of these Renewable Infrastructure fundraises are at prices significantly above NAV, now that the sector as a whole commands premia.

Dod101
Lemon Half
Posts: 7283
Joined: October 10th, 2017, 11:33 am
Has thanked: 1731 times
Been thanked: 3021 times

Re: The Renewable Inrastructure Group (TRIG)

#344622

Postby Dod101 » October 2nd, 2020, 5:20 pm

So many angles on this! Certainly ITs often issue new shares (many often buy in their sharers as well) but that is usually to control the discount, not for the purpose of acquiring a new business, and very often in relatively modest amounts.

I suppose if TRIG and others like them are issuing shares at a premium that ought to be beneficial to the existing holders, but only I suppose if the price is actually above the quoted market price. Otherwise I cannot see any real benefit for existing shareholders.

Dod

Urbandreamer
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1058
Joined: December 7th, 2016, 9:09 pm
Has thanked: 76 times
Been thanked: 291 times

Re: The Renewable Inrastructure Group (TRIG)

#344702

Postby Urbandreamer » October 2nd, 2020, 9:25 pm

I confess that I view TRIG as more like a traditional company than an investment trust. Their assets are windfarm's, from which they make a return.
Finding money to buy more assets, either from retained earnings, placings, or, as I have subscribed to, an open offer. Is what any company would do.

OK! I accept that this makes it VERY different from many IT's. However there is a form of IT, known as a REIT, Would you expect them to be like other investment trusts? Why expect this type of IT to be like FCIT et-al?

TRIG is not for everyone. As I have said, I'm happy with my investment.

Dod101
Lemon Half
Posts: 7283
Joined: October 10th, 2017, 11:33 am
Has thanked: 1731 times
Been thanked: 3021 times

Re: The Renewable Inrastructure Group (TRIG)

#344722

Postby Dod101 » October 2nd, 2020, 11:49 pm

I cannot see anywhere in its Annual Report that TRIG claims to be an investment trust and if that is the case then Urbandreamer should view it as a traditional company (whatever that may be :) )

Neither is it a REIT as far as I can see, but the fact that it needs to raise additional capital on a regular basis suggests that it pays out most if not all of its earnings as dividends. That has already been mentioned earlier in this thread. Most companies that do that are indeed REITs because they are obliged to pay out not less than 90% of their income profits as dividends (called PIDs in their case) so that there is almost no opportunity to build up capital for future investment.

ITs are entirely different because they have no need to raise capital for expansion; they simply invest the subscribed capital and sometimes borrow for expansion.

Dod

ReallyVeryFoolish
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1292
Joined: October 5th, 2019, 12:06 pm
Has thanked: 1034 times
Been thanked: 577 times

Re: The Renewable Inrastructure Group (TRIG)

#344761

Postby ReallyVeryFoolish » October 3rd, 2020, 9:54 am

A little pedantic here, TRIG is listed at The AIC, so is an investment trust? Not that it really matters.

https://www.theaic.co.uk/companydata/0P0000Z760

Investment companies (often known as investment trusts) are a type of fund.


RVF

Urbandreamer
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1058
Joined: December 7th, 2016, 9:09 pm
Has thanked: 76 times
Been thanked: 291 times

Re: The Renewable Inrastructure Group (TRIG)

#344787

Postby Urbandreamer » October 3rd, 2020, 10:33 am

I'm sorry if my post was unclear.

Yes TRIG is an investment trust. REIT's are a special type of investment trust. IBT is also a investment trust, as is FCIT.

However each is VERY different, even ignoring what they invest in.

Nobody thinks it strange that REIT's pay out 90% of what they bring in. Sure they are required by law to do so, but that doesn't require anyone to buy them. Those who do are happy with that structure.
FCIT reserves income and uses that to make fresh investments.
IBT has little to no income, yet pays a dividend from capital. Quite the reverse of what FCIT is doing.
TRIG pays out it's income, but raises money to invest when it sees an investment opportunity.

What I was trying to say was that it's not helpful to regard all IT's as being very similar other than what they invest in. Instead we need to recognise their differences and decide if we wish to invest given how they operate as well as what they invest in.

I think the act of placings, open offers and rights issues to take advantage of investment opportunities as something that most associate with companies rather than investment trusts. I don't see it as a problem that TRIG acts the same way.

Dod101
Lemon Half
Posts: 7283
Joined: October 10th, 2017, 11:33 am
Has thanked: 1731 times
Been thanked: 3021 times

Re: The Renewable Inrastructure Group (TRIG)

#344812

Postby Dod101 » October 3rd, 2020, 11:12 am

Actually TRIG is not an investment trust as we all know them as in F & C, Alliance and so on. It is an investment company and a self managed Alternative Investment Fund per the EU regulations and is incorporated in Guernsey. They tell us in the Annual Report that this structure gives the same tax advantages to shareholders as a UK REIT which is that the company does not pay tax on capital gains.

Simply because a company is a member of the AIC does not make it an investment trust, but it does make it an investment company.

I am not sure that any of this matters too much, and I do not think that Simoan's concern about dividends not being covered by free cash flow is actually correct, at least not if you study and believe the remarks from the Chairman.

I have not invested at the moment but I do think it is worth a bit of study of this now longish thread to get a good understanding of it.

Dod

Dod101
Lemon Half
Posts: 7283
Joined: October 10th, 2017, 11:33 am
Has thanked: 1731 times
Been thanked: 3021 times

Re: The Renewable Inrastructure Group (TRIG)

#344837

Postby Dod101 » October 3rd, 2020, 12:09 pm

The Annual Report makes an interesting read. Carrying on about IT status, they do say at one point that 'the Company conducts and intends to continue to conduct its affairs such that it would qualify as an investment trust if it were resident in the UK'

mc2fool might be interested to know that although earnings increased in 2019 to £162 million before tax from £123 million in 2018, EPS actually reduced from 11.7p in 2018 to 11.4p in 2019, presumably as a result of the dilution by two fundraisings in 2019, resulting in a big increase in the number of shares in issue.

Dod

simoan
Lemon Slice
Posts: 849
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 9:37 am
Has thanked: 149 times
Been thanked: 458 times

Re: The Renewable Inrastructure Group (TRIG)

#344840

Postby simoan » October 3rd, 2020, 12:12 pm

Dod101 wrote:I do not think that Simoan's concern about dividends not being covered by free cash flow is actually correct, at least not if you study and believe the remarks from the Chairman.
Dod

How dare you suggest the Chairman knows better than me!! And in the process insinuate that I don't check my facts! Perhaps some of the money to pay the dividend comes out of his piggy bank then? Here are the last 6 years per share Free cashflow and Dividend payments:

Value         | FY14 | FY15 | FY16 | FY17 | FY18 | FY19 | Total (ps)
FCF (ps) | 6.57 | 4.64 | 5.37 | 6.05 | 4.94 | 6.12 | 33.69
Dividend (ps) | 6.03 | 6.15 | 6.23 | 6.38 | 6.48 | 6.64 | 37.91

The data is from a reliable source, Refinitiv. So they have paid out 4.22p more than they have made in free cashlow. Basically, they keep asking shareholders for money and then give some of it back to them. What's the point of that?

All the best, Si

ReallyVeryFoolish
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1292
Joined: October 5th, 2019, 12:06 pm
Has thanked: 1034 times
Been thanked: 577 times

Re: The Renewable Inrastructure Group (TRIG)

#344843

Postby ReallyVeryFoolish » October 3rd, 2020, 12:19 pm

simoan wrote:
Dod101 wrote:I do not think that Simoan's concern about dividends not being covered by free cash flow is actually correct, at least not if you study and believe the remarks from the Chairman.
Dod

How dare you suggest the Chairman knows better than me!! And in the process insinuate that I don't check my facts! Perhaps some of the money to pay the dividend comes out of his piggy bank then? Here are the last 6 years per share Free cashflow and Dividend payments:

Value         | FY14 | FY15 | FY16 | FY17 | FY18 | FY19 | Total (ps)
FCF (ps) | 6.57 | 4.64 | 5.37 | 6.05 | 4.94 | 6.12 | 33.69
Dividend (ps) | 6.03 | 6.15 | 6.23 | 6.38 | 6.48 | 6.64 | 37.91

The data is from a reliable source, Refinitiv. So they have paid out 4.22p more than they have made in free cashlow. Basically, they keep asking shareholders for money and then give some of it back to them. What's the point of that?

All the best, Si

That would be a great question to ask if the company holds an AGM?

RVF

richfool
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2703
Joined: November 19th, 2016, 2:02 pm
Has thanked: 623 times
Been thanked: 602 times

Re: The Renewable Inrastructure Group (TRIG)

#344855

Postby richfool » October 3rd, 2020, 1:13 pm

I'm slightly puzzled why some investors seem less enthusiastic about TRIG.

I tend to work on the premise that Mr Market knows better than I do. Thus if it's prospects were that poor, I ponder, why would it be trading at a premium of +22.7%, even now that its dividend yield has been driven down to 4.84% by its good capital performance. (E.g. Capital performance: 1 year: +9%. 2 Years: +22%. 3 years: +26%. 5 years: +34%.). It's dividend was increased earlier this year.

The company's factsheet, accessible through the HL link below, indicates it is managed by leading infrastructure managers InfraRed, has ESG objectives, and invests in a diversified portfolio across a range of renewable infrastructure assets (including wind, solar and storage) in diversified geographies.

https://www.hl.co.uk/shares/shares-sear ... up-ord-npv

Surely, as the world seeks to eliminate the use of fossil fuels there will be a continuing and growing demand for renewable energy.

I hold JLEN and TRIG and would rather hold them than BP or Shell.

Dod101
Lemon Half
Posts: 7283
Joined: October 10th, 2017, 11:33 am
Has thanked: 1731 times
Been thanked: 3021 times

Re: The Renewable Inrastructure Group (TRIG)

#344863

Postby Dod101 » October 3rd, 2020, 1:29 pm

simoan wrote:
Dod101 wrote:I do not think that Simoan's concern about dividends not being covered by free cash flow is actually correct, at least not if you study and believe the remarks from the Chairman.
Dod

How dare you suggest the Chairman knows better than me!! And in the process insinuate that I don't check my facts! Perhaps some of the money to pay the dividend comes out of his piggy bank then? Here are the last 6 years per share Free cashflow and Dividend payments:

Value         | FY14 | FY15 | FY16 | FY17 | FY18 | FY19 | Total (ps)
FCF (ps) | 6.57 | 4.64 | 5.37 | 6.05 | 4.94 | 6.12 | 33.69
Dividend (ps) | 6.03 | 6.15 | 6.23 | 6.38 | 6.48 | 6.64 | 37.91

The data is from a reliable source, Refinitiv. So they have paid out 4.22p more than they have made in free cashlow. Basically, they keep asking shareholders for money and then give some of it back to them. What's the point of that?

All the best, Si


I assume that your comments do not need to be taken too seriously but certainly your numbers are not very encouraging. I am not familiar with such companies so find it difficult to find my way around. I guess they would say that whilst acknowledging these numbers,the free cash flow is at least to an extent in their control because it includes not just dividends paid up to them from operations, interest and repayment of loans etc as well as expenses such as capex and running costs. You could well be correct though in your summary that some of the funds raised are used to pay dividends and so you could say that the money is just circulating, and of course diluting those who do not participate, a pointless exercise as you say.

Dod

Dod101
Lemon Half
Posts: 7283
Joined: October 10th, 2017, 11:33 am
Has thanked: 1731 times
Been thanked: 3021 times

Re: The Renewable Inrastructure Group (TRIG)

#344866

Postby Dod101 » October 3rd, 2020, 1:40 pm

richfool wrote:I'm slightly puzzled why some investors seem less enthusiastic about TRIG.

I tend to work on the premise that Mr Market knows better than I do. Thus if it's prospects were that poor, I ponder, why would it be trading at a premium of +22.7%, even now that its dividend yield has been driven down to 4.84% by its good capital performance. (E.g. Capital performance: 1 year: +9%. 2 Years: +22%. 3 years: +26%. 5 years: +34%.). It's dividend was increased earlier this year.

The company's factsheet, accessible through the HL link below, indicates it is managed by leading infrastructure managers InfraRed, has ESG objectives, and invests in a diversified portfolio across a range of renewable infrastructure assets (including wind, solar and storage) in diversified geographies.

https://www.hl.co.uk/shares/shares-sear ... up-ord-npv

Surely, as the world seeks to eliminate the use of fossil fuels there will be a continuing and growing demand for renewable energy.

I hold JLEN and TRIG and would rather hold them than BP or Shell.


Your comments and thoughts are exactly why I put up my comments in the first place. As far as the dividend is concerned, it is not declared once they have a trading result but is set as a target at the beginning of a trading period and so just becomes an expense to be paid for either from capital gains or revenue and I think that is the key to simoan's point. I do not know about other infrastructure companies, but 3i Infrastructure does the same. In fact, the investment trust RIT does so as well and makes most of the payment from capital. I think that is the point. They do not mind whether the dividend is paid from revenue or capital.

Dod


Return to “Investment Trusts and Unit Trusts”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests