Barramundi ( BRM )

[winner69]

See Total Shareholder returns (that is after they reinvest the money they give you back) is quite extraordinary since 2009 (the blue line)

Share price (the green line) not so hot

But if they hadn't returned capital as dividends wouldn't the NAV be higher ... and the shareprice higher

From Barramundi website

[nextbigthing]

NBT, BRM has lost 38% in capital value in 7.5 years - issued at $1.00 and it's now trading 62 cents.

Meanwhile, guess how much the manager has been paid in fees for this 'outstanding' performance?

Doesn't shareprice alone mean nothing, Xero is $40 and ATM is 90 cents? Agreed it's a real drop if someone has bought $1.00x and sold at $0.62x but there's obviously more to it than just shareprice. Eg NTA per share etc - do you have figures something for this which shows they have in fact lost value in real terms?

Just trying to learn and keep the debate accurate.

Cheers,

NBT

[Balance]

Doesn't shareprice alone mean nothing, Xero is $40 and ATM is 90 cents? Agreed it's a real drop if someone has bought $1.00x and sold at $0.62x but there's obviously more to it than just shareprice. Eg NTA per share etc - do you have figures something for this which shows they have in fact lost value in real terms?

Just trying to learn and keep the debate accurate.

Cheers,

NBT

NTA means nothing in the real world unless you can cash out at that NTA.

You can do that with unlisted unit trusts as a general rule but not with listed trusts like BRM - that is the whole idea with listed trusts that the manager has you by the short and curly for life. You want out, you do so at the sp.

So if you want out of BRM now, 62 cents is your exit price.

Meanwhile, the manager continues to clip the ticket and weeps gently into the caviar and champagne.

[Joshuatree]

Great entry imo exit later , know when to hold them know when to fold them, know who's holding the 2 headed coin.

[Xerof]

I think Balance's bone of contention is the amount of fees these people have taken despite substandard funds performance, and what's worse, this was 'disguised' in the early days by using capital to pay dividends. It really was disgusting behaviour, but thats what you get when you put lipstick on a pig.

FWIW, I agree with Balance on Fisher - I retain my barge pole.

[Joshuatree]

and maybe the $kiwi is weakening atm, that would ne a bonus

[winner69]

When Barramundi newsletter says Total Shareholder Return since inception (Oct 2006) is 11.2% accumulated I assume the 11.2% is not a pa figure but that for every buck you put in you have $1.11 after 7 1/2 years

Seeing they reinvest the money they give you back to come up with that $1.11 doesn't seem much of an investment over that time frame.

I assume I am correct about that accumulated intepretation

[Joshuatree]

If folks read lizards FACTUAL post a few threads back re fee structure comparisons fees look inline with most other funds and you can find many that have under performed over various timeframes.If one bought BRM on listing they may not have performed well .Each person has to make their own decisions re if and when to buy each based on their own unique position. The timing is good for me personally right now as i need more income.

[nextbigthing]

NTA means nothing in the real world unless you can cash out at that NTA.

You can do that with unlisted unit trusts as a general rule but not with listed trusts like BRM - that is the whole idea with listed trusts that the manager has you by the short and curly for life. You want out, you do so at the sp.

So if you want out of BRM now, 62 cents is your exit price.

Meanwhile, the manager continues to clip the ticket and weeps gently into the caviar and champagne.

Thanks Balance.

I guess the point I was trying to make is that shareprice only matters if it is irrational. Ie if it deserves to be at $2 (eg $2 per share of assets) but is only 62c then who cares, it has done well. However Winner showed us that the shareprice is rational at the moment - trading at the usual average discount to NAV. Therefore is guess you're right Balance, in real terms it has gone from $1 to $.62 meaning capital has simply paid the dividends and fees with a miserable 11% left over after all those years. That is a terrible result!

Can anybody correct this or is it correct already?

Joshua tree I appreciate your need to change to income stocks but surely if they're just paying you your own capital as dividends wouldn't it be better to go somewhere else?! What are your thoughts?

NBT

[JayRiggs]

I was at the BRM shareholder meeting a couple of years ago. At the time, BRM was around 62-63c.
During the QA session, a shareholder expressed concern about how low the share price was compared to the $1 IPO and asked when we're getting back to $1.
Frank Jaspers response was something along the lines of...
"If you include dividends over the years, then we are breakeven at $1 thereabouts".

So that's Fisher Fund's justification. Include dividends into the return and everything is sweet!