SC4, I haven't gone back to study the history of FIG. I can surmise that the crash in 2008 could have effected the values of their different funds (assets under management) which is the denominator of the payout ratio. The fund values have since rebounded, perhaps substantially during this bull market, as well as an increase in additional funds under management.
Your comment does make me think about the timing of investing in private equity managers when the bull market is 5 years old. As I remember, Fortress made a splash when it sold an interest to Nomura at the height of the last bull market, and fellow pe firm Blackstone top-ticked the last bull market when it went public.
As long as the bull is still alive, I think the case can be made that they are selling below the value of their competitors and that they have substantial distributions to make.
To clarify, that was from the i.v. MLP board. There is also a similar recap on the yahoo message board for FIG where someone spells out the different components of the dividend. The play is if the market starts pricing this at a 6% yield like they do for some of the competitors like Carlyle and Blackstone on the regular and special divy combination of 26 cents per q/ 1.04 per yr. That should get it into the low teens at least.
One bad point, they issue a K-1. Will have to do more due diligence to see if there's UBTI before thinking about putting it into a retirement fund.
I'm not chasing it yet as the next distribution announcement is probably not until end of Oct.
jk, I agree with the gold rush analogy. Frac sand and water. The Antero Midstream has a big water component. The S-1 discloses that they get revenues of $650-700k per well from Antero. Antero will be adding hundreds of wells each year for several more years. Now if the IRS will only get them their private letter ruling so that they can do the IPO.
But it wasn't just lending to subprime borrowers but the toxic mortgage products like pay Option ARMS that were developed by the lenders, over which the regulators, including the Fed, had jurisdiction and refused to constrain. If there were no pay option ARMS, there would have been far fewer subprime borrowers.
HCLP appears to have digested the recent offering by its sponsor and has posted a new presentation. The amount of sand to be delivered next year is going from 3.7 mm tons to 5.6mm tons. I believe there are some price increases to go along with the increased volume. The stock of its competitor, EMES, has started to explode again and I think HCLP will follow.
One post on the i.v. board mentions that some of the e&p firms are having success re-fracking wells. I have spent some time looking at various presentations from Antero and CNX about their drilling plans in the Marcellus and Utica. It's really just getting started.
I pulled a "Jersey Vin" and sold some of my higher cost basis PSEC in order to harvest a much-needed tax loss to offset a large and unexpected ordinary gain-to-be on EPB. I'll sit out one dividend and reasses in 31 days. By that time, it will be near October and may be a time to be raising cash anyway.
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.