Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Canadian REITS, Trusts & Dividend Stocks -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bat Man who wrote (3058)	3/26/2002 2:21:36 PM
From: David Alon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 11633

In trusts we trust Tuesday, March 26, 2002 Glenn MacNeill TORONTO (GlobeinvestorGOLD) -- An increasing number of established businesses are adopting the income fund model. The timing has been right for their public offerings: with equity markets still vacillating and fixed-income yields still low by historical standards, yield-hungry investors have eagerly bought these offerings. The trust structure is best suited to businesses in mature industries that do not consume large amounts of capital in maintaining their property or means of production. These also tend to be steady, low-growth industries that generate ample free cash flow, where this cash flow is best returned to shareholders, as opposed to being reinvested in the business. Here are two recent examples, outside the traditional income trust industries such as energy and real estate. BFI Canada Income Fund generates income from solid waste management services. BFI has almost 40,000 commercial, industrial and residential customers in Canada, of which more than 80 per cent are under contracts that typically run three to five years. The waste management business isn’t a high growth business – estimates are it grew by 4.5 per cent annually from 1995 to 2000 in the United States – but it’s an essential business. Regardless of economic conditions, people and institutions will produce garbage. Sun Gro Horticulture Income Fund produces income from Sun Gro, the largest distributor of peat moss and related products in North America. This is certainly a mature and defensible business: the company has been in business since 1929 and there is no substitute for peat moss. The popularity of gardening among baby boomers is also a plus for this business. There will likely be more companies converting to income trusts in the months to come. Some will be of better quality than others. Investors should not look at these investments strictly in terms of yield. These are not fixed-income securities paying predetermined distributions. These are operating businesses that have to be evaluated in terms of financial strength, barriers to entry to their line of business, the ability to defend their margins from suppliers and customers. In other words, these trusts have to be evaluated just like equity in “traditional” companies. Glenn MacNeill is Vice President of Investments for Sentry Select Capital Corp

To: Bat Man who wrote (3058)	3/26/2002 3:09:12 PM
From: Peter W. Panchyshyn	Respond to of 11633

Wow! Someone who stuck to the subject that is supposed to be discussed , not whether Peter did this or that. -------------- Its pretty much clear as you say these guys don't want to talk about the trusts. NOT ONE BIT. The majority of posts form Mark and Lorne are just pure personal attacks and insult. Even Tommy here doesn't want to discuss them. As I told him I was providing counters to his arguments. I asked him if he could provide some evidence of his assertion/opinion that moves in interest rates would necessarily mean that unit prices would fall as a results of rates moving higher. I put forward because of his statement that rates perked up in 98 and 99 that in those years looking at data from my source FP Annual Dividend and 10 year price range that the one years low to the next years highs for both periods 97 - 98 and 98 - 99 showed moves in unit prices to the upside. As I documented in my one post. In direct contrast to his assertion/opinion. Notice how instead of himself countering with some data for his case. He turned the discussion instead to a focus of my saying I had been in trusts near 20 years or near 2 decades which he says is more like 16. Hence because of that so called "fact". He says the source I quote, its data , and what it shows for trust holders is not more important to them as when my investing in these is 16 years or 20 years. Shows where his priorities lay as far as discussion goes. If he can't provide a counter that people can use then try and launch a credibility attack. I just wish that him and they would attack with data about and for the trusts. But they refuse to do that. Lorne himself has been so stead fast in his assertion that selling PWI at that loss and buying PVE was the best course of action. Yet when I counter using his own numbers to show that not to be the case. Even counter his simplistic example he puts forward . His only recourse is to launch his personal attacks and insults. Now Lornes behavior in the matter is in direct contrast to KASTELCO. Who also sold out of PWI at a loss. KASTELCO response was yes he did suffer the loss but had he stayed the course and not paniced or even bought at the lower levels everything would have been fine. Two different people with the same happening yet one admits and accepts what has happened. The other denies it. And goes on a personal attack. Instead of sticking to the issues or the facts for the benefit of all. Again showing where his priorities lay. ---------------------------- I think you're right PVE goes up from here, I do own some of them.