Obbligazioni perpetue e subordinate Tutto quello che avreste sempre voluto sapere sulle obbligazioni perpetue... - Cap. 2 (5 lettori)

Stato
Chiusa ad ulteriori risposte.
Wallygo

Wallygo

Forumer storico
dopo vani tentativi nei gg. scorsi sono riuscito a prendere un cippino di 5000$ (2900 eur) di NIBC 074 7,625% fixed a 74,25
titolo CUM e NO LOSS per il cassetto non mi dispiace

provato a prendere NORTHERN ROCK 9,375% LT2 _89 esposto ma non operativo :(
" " " GFW CAPITAL 6% fixed _64,5 esposto ma non operativo :(
 
Ultima modifica:
angy2008

angy2008

Forumer storico
Joe Silver ha scritto:
Che fossero ben pagati non mi risulta. Mi sembra di ricordare che l'interesse fosse comunque inferiore all'inflazione ed in ogni caso sempre di prestito forzoso si tratta : il primo di una lunga serie di atti di arbitrio :down::down:
Clicca per allargare...
erano abbastanza ben pagati, ne avevo acquistati anche da colleghi, era vietato ma erano titoli al portatore. Io volevo solo sottolineare che il tetto messo ora alle detrazioni fiscali è una cosa ben più grave del btpizzare la contingenza. Tra l'altro la contingenza ai pensionati adesso fanno che non dargliela e finisce a pagare le pensioni etc. alla casta.
Scusate OT
 
gionmorg

gionmorg

low cost high value
Membro dello Staff
Wallygo ha scritto:
dopo vani tentativi nei gg. scorsi sono riuscito a prendere un cippino di 5000$ (2900 eur) di NIBC 074 7,625% fixed a 74,25
titolo CUM e NO LOSS per il cassetto non mi dispiace

provato a prendere NORTHERN ROCK 9,375% LT2 no carta :(
" " " GFW CAPITAL 6% fixed no carta :(
Clicca per allargare...
isin della NORTHERN ROCK 9,375%?
 
angy2008

angy2008

Forumer storico
Zorba ha scritto:
FondiariaSai: Is the market misunderstanding savings A shares’ dividend? (Svg A shares: Buy reiterated, target price raised to EUR 100)

Some individual investors, who own 2.5% of the savings A, have again rejected the terms of the recent rights issue and submitted to the board the request of conversion into the ordinary shares after a split in the region of 100 x 1 – press recently reported. The investors are said to have called a meeting of the holders of the savings A, while the company board is said to answer them after the reshuffle will take place at the shareholder meeting scheduled for end-October.
The investors’ above move revives previous complains and confirms some market criticism. In our view, the complains may be founded only if the reading of the company’s bylaws, recently modified, were to lead to a cap to the dividend the savings A can pay in the future.
- The company bylaws says that: 1) the saving A shares pay a minimum dividend of EUR 6.5/sh and an addition of EUR 5.2/sh to the dividend the ordinary shares pay; 2) the saving B shares, those issued during the recent rights issue on the ratio of 252 new shares x 1 saving share A, pay a minimum dividend of 6.5% of the share capital value and an addition of 5.2% of the share capital value to the dividend the ordinary shares pay; 3) the savings A are senior to the B category.
- The share capital value of the savings A was raised to EUR 100/sh as a result of the reverse split which took place before the summer, while that of the ordinary ones and that of the savings B was set at around EUR 1/sh and EUR 0.565/sh respectively, equal to the subscription price of the recent rights issue. Moreover, the dividends on the savings A were set in absolute terms, instead of relative terms to the share capital, only after the bylaws was modified before this summer when the terms of the rights issue were approved by the ordinary shareholders.
- Since the ordinary shares will not pay a dividend in the region of EUR 1.3/sh ever, because of the huge dilution due to the rights issue, the literal reading of the company’s bylaws raises the doubt that the savings A shares could never pay a EUR 6.5-higher dividend and are therefore capped to the minimum of EUR 6.5/sh. By contrast, the savings B shares could always pay an addition of EUR 0.03/sh on the ordinary shares’, ie 5.2% of their share capital of EUR 0.565/sh.
- The above reading, however, should be considered “unfair” since it would lead to a proportionally higher dividend in favour to the holders of both the savings B and the ordinary shares. Indeed, while the dividend yield on the savings A would be capped to 6.5% of their EUR 100 share capital, the yield on the savings B, in our estimates, may easily reach 40% of their share capital at run rate.
- The advisors, the representative of the savings A shareholders relied on in the meeting held before the summer to demonstrate the rights issue was not hurting the rights of the category, said the savings share categories should pay a dividend higher than the ordinary ones by the amount set by the bylaws when measured on the respective yields on their share capital values. As a result, if the ordinary shares were to pay EUR 0.20/sh at run rate, ie 20% of their share capital, the savings shares should pay 25.2% or EUR 25.2/sh to the savings A shares and EUR 0.14/sh to the savings B shares, thus resulting into a mkt yield of around 40% for the first ones (!) and cumulative dividends to both the saving share categories in the region of EUR 75m, clearly affordable by a company which is targeting
EUR 821m profit for 2015 after the merger with Unipol Assicurazioni.
We reiterate our convinced buy on the savings A shares and we raise our target price on this share category to EUR 100/sh.
Clicca per allargare...
grazie Zorba. Io non le ho perchè sono lento di comprendonio e ho ancora il contenzioso per la mancata Opa Fonsai in piedi. Vorrei però capire il prezzo di mercato a cosa è dovuto e mi viene il dubbio che ci siano dei dubbi sulla solidità del gruppo e quindi sulla possibilità che i dividendi seppur ricchi vengano pagati, anche le LT2 Unipol hanno prezzi/rendimenti convenienti ed il motivo è che il mercato ha dei timori.
 
Stato
Chiusa ad ulteriori risposte.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 6 (members: 0, guests: 6)
Alto