William, another way to look at it is that FIG is like the general partner to all of its portfolio companies (NCT, NRZ, NewMedia and the senior housing spin-off to come) not to mention all of the fund vehicles. If you like any of their portfolio companies, you have to like the general partner.
Saw a posting on Fortress on the i.v. board. They are the same group that brought you NCT, NRZ etc. FIG runs hedge and alternative asset funds. The stock is in the $7's and they paid a divy of 26 cents made up of a regular 8 cent divy and a special (kind of like how NRZ paid a regular and special). They said they will pay out most of what they call "distributable income" and they said they have $1 billion in undistributed DE. Basic shares are 200mm. My math may be off or I may be misreading as I quickly try to read through their press release and filings, but it looks like they have close to $5 to distribute over the next 2 quarters. This may be another case of the market not understanding how this company generates its funds and not applying the correct yield to it. Even if they pay 26 cents quarterly, the yield is near 14%. I don't know the tax treatment of the distributions. There might be someone in our group who owns this and can speak more intelligently about it.
Stagg, correct me if I am wrong, but I think you got that backwards. it was 44 cents for March and 24 for June. It does not seem to matter to the market. But the stock is overbought on an RSI level. I see a nice upward sloping channel that has developed, bounded below by the 50 dma at $18.55.
bob, Wunderlich put a $88 trading price target on it. It was also mentioned in a NYT article on acquisition candidates for KMI.
The MLP sector is rebounding nicely. APL got a new $40 target price. HCLP got an $80 target. Even EVEP is starting to move. The Marcellus/Utica continues to lead.
I guess I could be called a bear on these trusts. I think they are value traps as the supposed high "yield" which is part return of capital, appeals to yield chasers and keeps the stock price elevated despite continued poor production below original estimates. The charts speak for themselves in whether they represent good long-term investments. Notwithstanding the short-term movements, the fundamentals are clear and the best support for the bearish argument is that CHK values their investment in this at $7.
No one has argued that the stock does not bounce after it undergoes one of these post ex-date declines. So by all means feel free to play the upswing into the next distribution announcement, but don't confuse a bounce with a change in the longer term fundamental outlook.
grgsvll, I am also perplexed by the recent action in CHKR and also the snapback rallies in SDT, SDR and PER (I doubled my money on a SDR option play but glad I pulled the trigger when I did to close out the position). All of these trusts reached oversold levels in their latest drops. I don't think the rebounds have anything to do with commodity prices as nat gas has been drifting down and oil sold off. There's been stories about the oversupply of oil out of the Permian basin and stories about the predictions for this winter being as cold as last year. On CHKR specifically, it appears to have held the $10 support so maybe that embolden traders to get a jump on the run-up into the next distribution announcement. Maybe because the drilling schedule has been drawn out causing the subordination period to last longer, traders are focusing on the current yield and discounting the possibility of lower cashflows or CHK dumping units any time soon.
As I said last year, there was no telling when the pattern of large post ex-date declines would change. I don't think it has changed because of an improvement in the fundamentals. Even stocks with broken fundamentals can still see short-term bounces as traders play oversold levels (as an example look at that iron ore trust, GNI).
So one can make a case that the stock can move up, maybe even taking out past resistance. But the stock still declines after the distribution and the process in November can also be exacerbated by tax-loss selling.
I'm going to sit out the put play in CHKR this time unless the stock runs up too much into the next distribution. A runup over $12 might make it a good put candidate, depending on how the puts spreads are. I still would rather risk 40 or 50 cents in puts to double or triple my money on a almost certain post ex-date decline, rather than risking $11 to pick up a $1 in potential capital gain.
Vin, I don't think much of the dividend increase -- was it 1/1000th of a penny? Someone once said that if the CFO can't find 1 penny per share, then they should be fired. On the positive, their report has some of the best disclosure of what they are doing in all of the different investments and financing strategies. As for adding shares if one already owns some, while these occasional panics can be a good buying opportunity to amass a large position, you have to ask yourself whether it is prudent to have that much exposure to any one stock, especially if the stock price is not growing. PSEC has bounced back from at least 2 prior selloffs, but it has not cracked the $11 range from earlier in the year. I know you are more disciplined in this regard than others.
The Fed saved the banks and their banker friends. It certainly wasn't any of the political parties.
Fixed it for you.
SC4, NRZ is an mREIT, but the price over book doesn't seem to matter as much because they have to wait for MSRs to be offered for sale before they can buy, and they don't use as much leverage.
Jack, I think you give the Fed too much credit. Past history has shown that they don't always know what they are doing. When they released the Fed minutes from 2007, it showed that many members didn't know the extent of the subprime mortgage problem. Their forecasts have been notoriously bad. The reasons for not raising rates are just canards. That doesn't mean that they won't keep rates low, but it shows their reasons are just smoke screens.
First, back in 2007, the debt was already huge (over 10T) and that didn't stop the Fed from raising rates to 5 1/4%. Consumer debt levels were at historic highs back then too and we were running $400b deficits because of the wars. Second, most of the debt is in the mid-range maturity of 5-10 years. Only 1.8T is in bills. While raising rates would increase debt service, the greater risk is if inflationary expectations were to resurface and cause longer rates to rise. In fact, as long as the Fed keeps rates ultra low, the politicians don't have to make any tough choices on spending or taxes and they know it.. Long rates don't seem to be increasing anywhere in the world even though deficits are exploding, so there is a disconnect at this point between debt levels and interest rates, and that's because of deflationary pressures. Finally, as you said, the Fed can't do anything to solve the demographic and structural problems. Their remedy -- low rates -- only causes higher asset prices and more malinvestment and more debt. They complain about high leverage, but they never raise margin rates, something that is in their control.
Kee, looks like the target stocks (EPB, KMP and KMR) will trade in line with the movements in KMI with a little arbitrage spread. There's a possibility that they might pay one more distribution (which are at rates higher than KMI's rate) before the deal is complete, but I'm thinking the Alerian index will have to sell shares of KMP and EPB before the exchange which could keep the spread in tact. One could always sell some covered calls to gain a little more premium. I had to cover my Sept calls (which I had sold a few months ago before the deal was announced and moved out to March calls for extra premium).
SC4, let me add a couple of points to Bob's review. Reverse splits have a bad connotation because they are usually employed when a stock declines below exchange listing standards and so are viewed as a desperation move. Plus, after the split, shorts are attracted to keep shorting the shares. This is not the case here with NRZ. The fundamental reason to own NRZ was because the capital rules for banks for holding mortgage servicing were change and the big banks were dumping these assets and only a few entities were in a position to do this line of business. I think many of us are surprised that NRZ has not priced at a 8-9% yield instead of the 11% yield. Maybe it's because rates have not risen yet and investors are staying with mREITs that invest in mortgages instead of servicing.
Gambler, the market is anticipating the news out of Jackson Hole in which Yellen is expected to be doveish. There is a little gamesmanship going on with all of the Fed talk. Some members kept talking about raising rates and then Yellen follows with talk about slack in employment, etc. It's the old "do as I do, not what I say" argument..
The market likes round numbers so S&P 2000 is the path of least resistance. But we have rallied 100 points in a relatively short time, and the upper bound of the channel is around 2010. As we get into September, there are two forces in play: those funds who want to nail down their profits and book their bonuses for their year -end in October versus those funds that are lagging and need to catch up by buying those stocks with the most beta (i.e. Apple, etc.).
Marv, I appreciate your posts. From what I can tell, many have not yet pulled the trigger on selling EPB or KMP, so maybe those dollars have not yet been reinvested. The Alerian will have to rebalance and EPB/KMP make up over 10%. The smaller components might get a bigger lift out of the rebalancing.
Williams raised their dividend again and again gave guidance as to further increases. Wells mentioned in one of their reports on MLPs that there is an anomaly in the market that WMB is still priced at a 3% yield when other GPs with comparable dividend growth are priced at much lower yields. This should be over $100 in a couple of years. I should stop writing about it and just buy it.
I think the play in gold is a much longer term play based on history. I think if you look at the long term chart plus consider the long term history, there is a place for it, but maybe not at this time. The main reason for gold is a hedge against currency debasement. History is on the side of currency debasement. It has always occurred whoever has had the reserve currency.
We will see if QE is really winding down. You may be forgetting that it was supposed to wind down after QE1, then QE2, then Twist and now QE3. As for "relative" stability in the global economy, I guess it depends on your definition of relative. Much of Europe is headed back into recession and the trade sanctions against Russia are not helping. China is a bubble ready to blow, unless of course, they keep printing. Japan never stopped printing. Meanwhile China and Russia keep buying gold and have expressed a desire to move away from the dollar. Obviously, they have to do this over time as they dribble out their US Treasury sales and invest in gold without trying to move the price of either.
There are analogies to consider. While there are many factors that effected the price of oil over the years, for many years, oil was contained in a trading range and then the 70's came and the price level moved up. Notwithstanding the occassional declines (including to $10 at one point) it has stayed high. The point is that something very foreseeable changed (the countries with oil decided they could get a higher price for it, possibly in response to the fact that the dollar was no longer convertible into gold). Currency is not being destroyed but continues to be printed because that seems to be the answer to keep financial assets up.
For the record, there are some compelling arguments that the first move will be a stronger dollar and a lower gold price, before the big move in gold occurs
If someone ever finds a platform that doesn't have as many problems as this one, please let us all know and we can make the jump together. Between the frequent breakdowns, error messages, bad yield calculations and #$%$ feeds from useless providers like Zacks, cramer, wall st cheat sheet etc., it's a wonder that we stay with this.