Sorry I made a mistake. It traded around 55 cents(NZD) in 2000.
Printable View
WB has been heard to say buy low risk infrastructure then leverage returns
The IFTWB where good value way back here
https://www.sharetrader.co.nz/showth...Infratil/page4
Digger had a good few
"07-01-2005, 10:50 AM#30
digger digger is offline
Advanced Member
Join Date
Apr 2001
Posts
1,973
Default
IFT is my best investment ever,GEN is my worst. Strange how suddenly in the last two months the warrants are now seen at 80 odd cents as great value. I bought 180000 at 54 cents shortly after listing and at the time we had top advise saying they should be only worth 35 cents.
This co needlessly drifted back after the Whenuapai fiasco.Personally i think they would be better off putting their effort into existing airports rather than the 200 year permits needed to start up another. IFT has a lot without worring about Whenuapai.
To conclude at the moment i think the warrants and the heads are about in fair comparative relative value.
I hold this stock and it is also in my 5 picks for 2005."
Then sold all of them?
His shareholding of 50,000 shares + 180,000 IFTWB would be worth around $2.3 m now if he coughed up the $180k ? to convert them
SL brought then sold??? Then brought back in. Then sold them?
And directors "See the other week a director sold heads and bought warrants,as per notice."
And Shasta, Steve, Toddy,Colin
https://www.sharetrader.co.nz/showth...ighlight=IFTWB
IFTWB excise price around $1.80? as per SL post
https://www.sharetrader.co.nz/showth...light=infratil
Those who still holds all there IFT after converting IFTWB have seen a sizeable return.
Probably not Balance?
https://www.sharetrader.co.nz/showth...nfratil/page82
Not complaining at all, but interesting to debate where we would be if Infratil management was in house, instead of paying Morrison & co that huge incentive fee annually. I mean their performance has been spectacular, but they certainly take an arm and a leg.
I haven’t done the math, but aren’t they somewhere in the ballpark of having extracted over half a billion dollars from Infratil over the last few years?
In house management may have its advantages in lower fees but then wouldn't the key personal leave & set up their own company or be seduced away by a competitor?
Higher staff retention rates of key personal is key over the long term.
The advantages of the statis quo in my view is all stakeholders are aligned to performance & the structure assists in blocking takeovers. The fee still leaves shareholders with 90% of the gains
IFT share performance is double the return from Berkshire Hathaway from 1995 when they listed to the present
IFT outperformance by quite a stretch +++ IFT pays dividends on top of these long term gains
https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/BRK-...JjaGFydCJ9fX19
XD 12.5c today
Held up well
Expecting significant tail winds for CDC & Longroad. These two could easily triple size over next 5 years.
Very interesting on their first road show in Napier. CDC only about 100 customers and they pick and choose who they want. On top most have 20 year contracts from the date they first signed and also claimed there was still lots of demand despite others in the same field.
Longroad will produce enough energy supplies eventually to produce more than all providers in nz and with most states offering incentives towards clean energy they have lots of growth adding approximately 1.5 GW per year irrespective who is running the country. All electricity suppliers want similar incentives from the nz government for more renewable energy.
They want more growth eventually in Europe.
In August a report will come out how they will try to see how they can reduce their carbon footprint in all industries. It’s the in thing what institutions are wanting apparently.
All in all a happy investor. I was surprised how many people who had invested with Infratil for over 20 years never knew Morrison and co oversaw the company.
They are still aiming for a 11-15% after tax increase in value for annum based over a 10 year period. Last 10 years was just under 19%
They could as well crash and burn or just fizzle out.
Renewables are currently in their beginnings. Its a bit like the times early last century when every coachbuilder changed their business model to build coaches with ICE (cars with combustion engine). Hundreds of manufactures emerged. Just go into the next vintage car museum and ask yourself, how many of these companies survived. Sure - some of them succeeded and got really profitable (e.g. Ford, Daimler, GM, ...) but most of them just disappeared.
I realise that this is the thread to cheerlead and groupthink, but investors maybe should wonder as well what IFT might have what others don't - and its not a cunning external fund manager you need to make renewables successful.
Here are just a handful of the big fish in the tank:
https://energydigital.com/top10/top-...ergy-companies
Brookfield Renewable Corp. ...
Algonquin Power & Utilities Corp. ...
Siemens Gamesa Renewable Energy SA. ...
Vestas Wind Systems A/S (VWDRY) Market cap: $29.58bn. ...
Orsted A/S. Market cap: $36.19bn. ...
Iberdrola SA. Market cap: $72.67. ...
NextEra Energy, Inc. Market cap: $147.57bn.
There is an awful lot of really big and resourceful companies and funds around the world focussing on renewables, and clearly - this sector is currently not a deep value game but more in the inevitable bubble. I suspect - like in any other business maybe 5% will thrive ... 20% might survive (Pareto) and the reminder will go down the gurgler.
IFT is on an international scale a very small fish and not even a renewable specialist. Renewables might turn well into one of their loss leaders ... lots of companies around who lost money with renewables before.
Ah yes - our very own NWF is a good example that it is very easy to loose a lot of money with renewables ...
Anyway - just bring back the cheerleaders ...
It's pretty easy to be a chairleader when the p.e ratio is currently only 11.