Marlin

[777]

Paying dividends from capital described as good dividend yield play?

Distributing capital gain along with dividend income. The same as all unit trusts and in Australia a requirement to so.

You are just scaremongering.

[smtrader]

Distributing capital gain along with dividend income. The same as all unit trusts and in Australia a requirement to so.

You are just scaremongering.

That sounds better!


Capital gains and plunged in capital are quiet different.


777, what about your thoughts on the effect of fx on them? I haven't looked at unit trust in depth and don't know if they hedge their dividend income streams or even if they can? My only thought is that as the nzd is low, naturally these securities value denominated in NZD would be high and vice versa?

[777]

That sounds better!


Capital gains and plunged in capital are quiet different.


777, what about your thoughts on the effect of fx on them? I haven't looked at unit trust in depth and don't know if they hedge their dividend income streams or even if they can? My only thought is that as the nzd is low, naturally these securities value denominated in NZD would be high and vice versa?

Not sure whether they hedge or not. With the number I hold I should probably know.

Have a look back through this thread and you will see a consistent "anti Carmel" in all of Balances posts.

[tim23]

Well they are a good yield play as it turns out. I collect their dividends quarterly so I guess I might know.

Paying dividends from capital described as good dividend yield play?

[Balance]

Distributing capital gain along with dividend income. The same as all unit trusts and in Australia a requirement to so.

You are just scaremongering.

So Brian Gaynor was also scaremongering?

https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=ma...FKfu8wegtrD4BA

Excerpt : "Marlin paid a 7.43c per share dividend in its June 2012 year even though it reported a loss of $12 million. These dividends were paid out of capital and the company now has an accumulated earnings deficit of $11 million. These dividends are counter-intuitive because one of the advantages of a closed-end fund is its ability to retain financial resources in a market downturn so that it can fully participate in a market recovery. Marlin's dividend payments negate one of the clear advantages of a closed-end fund."

The sp is well below $1.00 issued price so how can there be capital gain (losses obviously exceeds gains) to distribute from? Logic alone tells you that Marlin is creating dividends by giving back the punters their capital back!

777 sounds like a plant by Fisher Funds to keep the good times going by posting what are blatantly misleading comments - just as Fisher Funds create the illusion of profitability by distributing 'dividends'.

Actually, it's about management fees for eternity? Heads they win, tails you lose.

[winner69]

So Brian Gaynor was also scaremongering?

https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=ma...FKfu8wegtrD4BA

Excerpt : "Marlin paid a 7.43c per share dividend in its June 2012 year even though it reported a loss of $12 million. These dividends were paid out of capital and the company now has an accumulated earnings deficit of $11 million. These dividends are counter-intuitive because one of the advantages of a closed-end fund is its ability to retain financial resources in a market downturn so that it can fully participate in a market recovery. Marlin's dividend payments negate one of the clear advantages of a closed-end fund."

The sp is well below $1.00 issued price so how can there be capital gain (losses obviously exceeds gains) to distribute from? Logic alone tells you that Marlin is creating dividends by giving back the punters their capital back!

777 sounds like a plant by Fisher Funds to keep the good times going by posting what are blatantly misleading comments - just as Fisher Funds create the illusion of profitability by distributing 'dividends'.

Actually, it's about management fees for eternity? Heads they win, tails you lose.

....and the discount to NTA is essentially the present value of future management and performance fees

[777]

Believe what you like Balance. Your negativity on most threads is boring. You can return to my ignore list. Bye

And no, I am not as plant by anyone. Just a happy shareholder who has done well out of these funds by buying at the right time and selling occasionally when they close in ion their NTA. The warrants have also been a successful play.

[Balance]

Believe what you like Balance. Your negativity on most threads is boring. You can return to my ignore list. Bye

Haha - facts are facts. Not nice being caught out?

And the fact is that Fisher Funds create the illusion of dividends by paying unit holders back their capital - meanwhile earning management fees every year, come sunshine or as in the case of Marlin and Barammundi, come hail as that has been the case with NTA still below IPO price.

[smtrader]

So Brian Gaynor was also scaremongering?

https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=ma...FKfu8wegtrD4BA

Excerpt : "Marlin paid a 7.43c per share dividend in its June 2012 year even though it reported a loss of $12 million. These dividends were paid out of capital and the company now has an accumulated earnings deficit of $11 million. These dividends are counter-intuitive because one of the advantages of a closed-end fund is its ability to retain financial resources in a market downturn so that it can fully participate in a market recovery. Marlin's dividend payments negate one of the clear advantages of a closed-end fund."

The sp is well below $1.00 issued price so how can there be capital gain (losses obviously exceeds gains) to distribute from? Logic alone tells you that Marlin is creating dividends by giving back the punters their capital back!

777 sounds like a plant by Fisher Funds to keep the good times going - management fees for eternity. Heads they win, tails you lose.

Enjoy!

Well there is a bias when you are anti something all together. You have to give a full picture.

I cant be bothered in going into detail as to why for some (in my opinion everyone should have a percentage of their portfolio) should be in managed funds.. specially closed ones as well, but il just give a quick view as to why.

First - If you try to time the market (like in another post somewhere i saw someone mentioning Martin Hawes is selling down his portfolio), in my opinion that's stupidity, because timing the markets are for gamblers and speculators.. no one can claim that they have and won.. yeah you might get lucky, but luck isn't an investment strategy.

Second - I completely believe in being able to pickup on technical and fundamental analysis to have good trades and to change holding levels and composition, but if you think that alone is enough then also its a stupid move.. after all again and again it has shown FOR MOST (and im talking about atleast 95% of all sophisticated investors) that you can not beat the market, so don't rely on your awesome picking skills.

Not going to go into TONS of other reasons, but the point i want to make is this, you have to allocate a percentage of your overall holding to be dedicated to managed funds.. and if MLN isn't the greatest in your opinion, then should diversify that percentage of holdings into many funds, because during major events you would be almost certain the managers aren't going to sell down the shares at cheap price (the holders of the shares in the fund might) but you if you don't, unrealised losses won't occur..

So its not about beating the market, you have to think of it as an insurance policy. The key is to figure out the number of funds to hold in, the % of your portfolio in funds, the markets you are gaining exposure to and the levels of dividends paid as a % of your portfolio you wish to acheive..


finally though to get back to your main point.. MLN has been paying on average 7cents per share per year over the past 10 years.. so 70 cents Plus as off this week around 80 cents is the price per share.. that's 1.5 dollars per share total since inception.. if you look at any hedge fund manager, the number one rule is guard your capital first by tweaking this "ALL WEATHER PORTFOLIO" and then go ahead with perhaps 20% of your portfolio on "GAMBLING" or taking bets - A.K.A to pick certain stocks, do trades, or use your magic ball to forecast the next crash like Martin Hawes

[Balance]

Well they are a good yield play as it turns out. I collect their dividends quarterly so I guess I might know.

You are a fund manager's dream investor!

Give them $1.00 and they pay you back part of it every year as a 'dividend' while charging you management fees on what remains of the $1.00 - what a wonderful scheme!