Haleon finals

[micrographia]

There will be quite a few of us still holding these since they were spun off from GSK. Results can be found here;

https://www.rns-pdf.londonstockexchange ... 4-2-28.pdf

Final divi of 4.2p announced, so we get our first sight of the level of full year divi we might expect from the company; 6p, or a 1.8% yield after todays 6% rise in SP. Moving forward, dividend to grow at least in line with adjusted earnings.

Profit up, revenue up, basic earnings down a tad, net debt down by a billion on last year. £500m in share buybacks announced for 2024 and the remaining GSK stake in the company is down to about 4% from the original 13%. Pfizer still hold about a third of the company, but they are selling it down slowly.

You wouldn't buy them for your HYP and you would get more income if you sold and bought a genuine HYP candidate instead, but given the size of the holding in the context of my portfolio I'm happy enough to hold on to them while we see how the divi grows from here. They are a big beast - £30bn market cap.

EEM

[micrographia]

Ex-divi 14th March, paid 16th May. 4.2p/share.

EEM

[Arborbridge]

There will be quite a few of us still holding these since they were spun off from GSK. Results can be found here;

https://www.rns-pdf.londonstockexchange ... 4-2-28.pdf

Final divi of 4.2p announced, so we get our first sight of the level of full year divi we might expect from the company; 6p, or a 1.8% yield after todays 6% rise in SP. Moving forward, dividend to grow at least in line with adjusted earnings.

Profit up, revenue up, basic earnings down a tad, net debt down by a billion on last year. £500m in share buybacks announced for 2024 and the remaining GSK stake in the company is down to about 4% from the original 13%. Pfizer still hold about a third of the company, but they are selling it down slowly.

You wouldn't buy them for your HYP and you would get more income if you sold and bought a genuine HYP candidate instead, but given the size of the holding in the context of my portfolio I'm happy enough to hold on to them while we see how the divi grows from here. They are a big beast - £30bn market cap.

EEM

Haleon is teasing me. I have an unwritten rule that if a HYP share is producing so little income that it's not worth getting out of bed to log the dividends, then I sell it. I know it's not official HYP policy - but I usually operate this "back 'em or sack 'em" idea. Unfortunately, at under 2% yield HLN is hardly ever likely to make the cut, yet I like the idea of a "big beast" that is in this sort of sector - I'm even reminded of its universality when I clean my teeth - the toothpaste tube has a little haleon logo on it.

To sell or not - well, let's be honest, it won't make any material difference either way. It would just be a matter of tidying up.

Arb.

[daveh]

There will be quite a few of us still holding these since they were spun off from GSK. Results can be found here;

https://www.rns-pdf.londonstockexchange ... 4-2-28.pdf

Final divi of 4.2p announced, so we get our first sight of the level of full year divi we might expect from the company; 6p, or a 1.8% yield after todays 6% rise in SP. Moving forward, dividend to grow at least in line with adjusted earnings.

Profit up, revenue up, basic earnings down a tad, net debt down by a billion on last year. £500m in share buybacks announced for 2024 and the remaining GSK stake in the company is down to about 4% from the original 13%. Pfizer still hold about a third of the company, but they are selling it down slowly.

You wouldn't buy them for your HYP and you would get more income if you sold and bought a genuine HYP candidate instead, but given the size of the holding in the context of my portfolio I'm happy enough to hold on to them while we see how the divi grows from here. They are a big beast - £30bn market cap.

EEM

Haleon is teasing me. I have an unwritten rule that if a HYP share is producing so little income that it's not worth getting out of bed to log the dividends, then I sell it. I know it's not official HYP policy - but I usually operate this "back 'em or sack 'em" idea. Unfortunately, at under 2% yield HLN is hardly ever likely to make the cut, yet I like the idea of a "big beast" that is in this sort of sector - I'm even reminded of its universality when I clean my teeth - the toothpaste tube has a little haleon logo on it.

To sell or not - well, let's be honest, it won't make any material difference either way. It would just be a matter of tidying up.

Arb.

I'm thinking of buying more. Next tax year I'm going to move the small holding that came from GSK held in my GIA into my ISA (GSK has already been moved). When I do I may buy more in the ISA than I'm selling in the GIA to move it closer to a full holding. My thinking is that they are ramping up the dividend (this years final was the same as last years whole year dividend), plus they are rapidly paying down the debt that was loaded onto them by GSK, so once debt is paid down to the level they are happy with there should be more scope to use the cash to increase the dividends.

[Arborbridge]

I'm thinking of buying more. Next tax year I'm going to move the small holding that came from GSK held in my GIA into my ISA (GSK has already been moved). When I do I may buy more in the ISA than I'm selling in the GIA to move it closer to a full holding. My thinking is that they are ramping up the dividend (this years final was the same as last years whole year dividend), plus they are rapidly paying down the debt that was loaded onto them by GSK, so once debt is paid down to the level they are happy with there should be more scope to use the cash to increase the dividends.

Makes sense, but I think Dod had a different view.

Arb.

[Grumpsimus]

I must admit to being puzzled as to why people hang on to Haleon, it was never a HYP share, nor is likely to be in the forseeable future. When it demerged from GSK it was loaded with debt and had a large number of shares still held by Pfizer and GSK over hanging the market.

The demerger happened because Haleon as mature consumer Healthcare business, was considered to have only linited growth prospects, basically in line with the market. If freed GSK to be a pure pharmaceutical company with better growth prospects.

I have seen no HYP rule that you have to hold on to shares you get as a result of a coporate action. I sold my HLN straight away and invested the money elsewhere.

[kempiejon]

I have seen no HYP rule that you have to hold on to shares you get as a result of a coporate action. I sold my HLN straight away and invested the money elsewhere.

I can't point you to a rule on holding on but the HYP sold to me is a never sell strategy. HYP rules are to sort the highest sustainable yields from the largest capitalised on the London stock exchange and buy 15 shares in different sectors, spend the dividends. There's a lot of online gum bumping for something so simple.
I stopped being too concerned about how other people want to run their HYPs with their own variations and let them get on with it. There as many HYPs as investors, many who chat about their version on here do more than the outline I gave above. Then again GSK hasn't been a HYP pick since about 2018.

[tjh290633]

I must admit to being puzzled as to why people hang on to Haleon, it was never a HYP share, nor is likely to be in the forseeable future. When it demerged from GSK it was loaded with debt and had a large number of shares still held by Pfizer and GSK over hanging the market.

The demerger happened because Haleon as mature consumer Healthcare business, was considered to have only linited growth prospects, basically in line with the market. If freed GSK to be a pure pharmaceutical company with better growth prospects.

I have seen no HYP rule that you have to hold on to shares you get as a result of a coporate action. I sold my HLN straight away and invested the money elsewhere.

There is no rule because originally the HYP concept never envisaged corporate actions or takeovers. When takeovers happened, the whole of the proceeds went into a single share, leading to the imbalance that we see today in HYP1.

If a share splits, you have to decide what you want to do. I decided to hold on to Haleon for a while to see how things developed. I did much the same when Indivior was spun out of its parent. In that case it paid a few dividends then stopped. Consequently I dumped it. In both cases I have built up the holding to about my median holding value. Going back to the Hanson split up, two USA domiciled subsidiaries were separated, neither having a UK quote, so they could not be held in a PEP and were sold. In my view, if you hold on to the shares, you should bring them up to about median value. Whether to retain depends on how the share performs. If its share price takes off, the yield may fall so low that you consider disposal. Then the dividend may grow so much that the yield is restored. It never pays to be too hasty to sell. There is always the thought that dividends may grow so much that the return on initial cost is acceptable, but if you put the money into higher yielding shares, say 6% instead of the original 2%, even with rapid growth it can be 10 years or so before the low yield share catches up, if it ever does.

You make your own rules, which are made to be broken.

TJH

[Arborbridge]

I must admit to being puzzled as to why people hang on to Haleon, it was never a HYP share, nor is likely to be in the forseeable future. When it demerged from GSK it was loaded with debt and had a large number of shares still held by Pfizer and GSK over hanging the market.

The demerger happened because Haleon as mature consumer Healthcare business, was considered to have only linited growth prospects, basically in line with the market. If freed GSK to be a pure pharmaceutical company with better growth prospects.

I have seen no HYP rule that you have to hold on to shares you get as a result of a coporate action. I sold my HLN straight away and invested the money elsewhere.

I do not believe you are correct. The original HYP concept was clearly to permit only "market trading" as PYAD called it - and market trading includes corporate actions. It was a hold forever strategy, so in a classic HYP one would leave HLN well alone, until eventually the market would offer its own solution. The only exception which was allowed, I believe, was if and when a share stopped paying a dividend with no possibility of it being restored.

So, there you have it. A classic HYPer would certainly not be selling HLN: whether not it was loaded with debt or wouldn't be a HYP choice at the moment, is quite irrelevant.

That's the HYP method, but in reality, most of us cannot help thinking too much. Or as Luni used to say, we feel the need to do something. That, is quite unecessary, for one's HYP will soldier on as it always does, without you doing very much at all.

Of course, I am only human so I am also thinking too much.....about selling HLN for one thing.

Arb.

[Grumpsimus]

Love to know what a 'Classic HYP' is. HPY1 was a demo portfolio of 15 shares written for a series of articles on Motley Fool and I am sure that even PYAD would not regard it as holy writ.

It was of course it was further expanded in later articles. PYAD suggested that the original 15 shares be expanded to 15-20 shares. A lot of people on this board have expanded it a lot further than this. It is a long term buy and hold concept. but not a never sell plan. Selling could occur if a company stopped paying dividends or reduced its dividend. Corporate actions were discussed, often rights issues, these inevitably happen when you own a number of shares. I can't recall any demergers during PYADs time.

To me the GSK/HLN demerger seems exactly the same as a dividend cut and therefore a signal to consider selling the shares. I can see little point on hanging on Haleon shares to see what might happen. How many years do wait, earning very little? The prospects for Haleon were widely discussed at the time of the demerger and I remember some comments that GSK had pulled a bit of fast one. Emma Walmsley the CEO of GSK, made sure she stayed with them.

[Arborbridge]

Love to know what a 'Classic HYP' is. HPY1 was a demo portfolio of 15 shares written for a series of articles on Motley Fool and I am sure that even PYAD would not regard it as holy writ.

It was of course it was further expanded in later articles. PYAD suggested that the original 15 shares be expanded to 15-20 shares. A lot of people on this board have expanded it a lot further than this. It is a long term buy and hold concept. but not a never sell plan. Selling could occur if a company stopped paying dividends or reduced its dividend. Corporate actions were discussed, often rights issues, these inevitably happen when you own a number of shares. I can't recall any demergers during PYADs time.

To me the GSK/HLN demerger seems exactly the same as a dividend cut and therefore a signal to consider selling the shares. I can see little point on hanging on Haleon shares to see what might happen. How many years do wait, earning very little? The prospects for Haleon were widely discussed at the time of the demerger and I remember some comments that GSK had pulled a bit of fast one. Emma Walmsley the CEO of GSK, made sure she stayed with them.

In my view, you are being quite dogmatic but maybe without the long association with HYP some have - otherwise you wouldn't ask what a "classic HYP is".

Pyad's idea arose from the belief that selling and choosing something else usually resulted in the amateur investor being worse off: better to let the market trade for you. Simply choose your shares carefully and do nothing. That what modified to some extent by pressure from various discussions, be even so he has hardly wavered from his belief and to show it works he has continued with HYP1 experiment, as you say. A dividend cut would not be a reason to sell - only a case where the dividend had been stopped completely - and I believe he only agree to that "reluctantly" if I remember correctly. Most of us would run a looser system and would consider trading up in yield in a case like HLN - but then, that wouldn't be classic HYP behaviour.

The bells and whistles were added later by people on TMF and here, who believed they could improve the results, or who couldn't stand the idea of doing nothing - not by Pyad. I am one of those who makes occasional changes, but a couple of people do run as near to a classic HYP as one can get.

Arb.

[micrographia]

I must admit to being puzzled as to why people hang on to Haleon...

Honestly? If I sold it now and switched the cash into a HYP share in a similar sector (or CTY or the like) it would improve the income from my HYP by a fraction of one percent, minus dealing costs in year 1. So as Arb has already noted, it is materially insignificant in the context of my portfolio and disposing of it would basically just be tidying up. I don't mind having a sprawling HYP , which you tend to get anyway if you are using HYP principles to build an income stream over time rather than in one shot.

I'm maybe 5 or 6 years from retirement so I'm happy enough to leave HLN to run until then unless something goes badly wrong with it. Or enormously well . There is likely to be a bit of portfolio fettling at that point, so I could reassess how it's doing then. Wouldn't be at all surprised if it turned into another ULVR or RKT with a safely covered, generally progressive dividend.

EEM

[Arborbridge]

I'm maybe 5 or 6 years from retirement so I'm happy enough to leave HLN to run until then unless something goes badly wrong with it. Or enormously well . There is likely to be a bit of portfolio fettling at that point, so I could reassess how it's doing then. Wouldn't be at all surprised if it turned into another ULVR or RKT with a safely covered, generally progressive dividend.

EEM

Ooh! a new expression. Now we can have pickering over our fettling.

[kempiejon]

Ooh! a new expression. Now we can have pickering over our fettling.

Not new, I've always liked the term. It's more refined than tinkering.
viewtopic.php?p=638437#p638437
search.php?keywords=fettling

[Grumpsimus]

In my view, you are being quite dogmatic but maybe without the long association with HYP some have - otherwise you wouldn't ask what a "classic HYP is".

Pyad's idea arose from the belief that selling and choosing something else usually resulted in the amateur investor being worse off: better to let the market trade for you. Simply choose your shares carefully and do nothing. That what modified to some extent by pressure from various discussions, be even so he has hardly wavered from his belief and to show it works he has continued with HYP1 experiment, as you say. A dividend cut would not be a reason to sell - only a case where the dividend had been stopped completely - and I believe he only agree to that "reluctantly" if I remember correctly. Most of us would run a looser system and would consider trading up in yield in a case like HLN - but then, that wouldn't be classic HYP behaviour.

The bells and whistles were added later by people on TMF and here, who believed they could improve the results, or who couldn't stand the idea of doing nothing - not by Pyad. I am one of those who makes occasional changes, but a couple of people do run as near to a classic HYP as one can get.

Arb.

Your assumption that I don't have a long association with HYP is incorrect, maybe because I don't post here very much. In fact, I have run two HYPs since the time of the original HYP1 articles on motley fool. Anyway this doesn't really matter.

I am now clearer where we differ, you regard HYP1 as a 'classic HYP'. However, I regard HYP1 as a starting point and that any HYP is always a work in progress, rather than a fixed set of rules. Obviously, our recollections differ, but I recall discussions around latter HYPs on motley fool of what to do when a company cuts its dividend. It was never a single simple answer, but depended on the circumstances at the time, if it was a temporary cut for some reason you might keep the share, if likely to be a long term cut - sell the share.

The trouble with Haleon was that it was the equivalent of dividend cut in the long term. Which was why I sold. Why have a small rump of low yielding shares cluttering up your HYP.

Incidentally, I do not sell shares very often, Haleon was the last one in July 2022.

[csearle]

In my view, you are being quite dogmatic but maybe without the long association with HYP some have - otherwise you wouldn't ask what a "classic HYP is".

Pyad's idea arose from the belief that selling and choosing something else usually resulted in the amateur investor being worse off: better to let the market trade for you. Simply choose your shares carefully and do nothing. That what modified to some extent by pressure from various discussions, be even so he has hardly wavered from his belief and to show it works he has continued with HYP1 experiment, as you say. A dividend cut would not be a reason to sell - only a case where the dividend had been stopped completely - and I believe he only agree to that "reluctantly" if I remember correctly. Most of us would run a looser system and would consider trading up in yield in a case like HLN - but then, that wouldn't be classic HYP behaviour.

The bells and whistles were added later by people on TMF and here, who believed they could improve the results, or who couldn't stand the idea of doing nothing - not by Pyad. I am one of those who makes occasional changes, but a couple of people do run as near to a classic HYP as one can get.

Arb.

Your assumption that I don't have a long association with HYP is incorrect, maybe because I don't post here very much. In fact, I have run two HYPs since the time of the original HYP1 articles on motley fool. Anyway this doesn't really matter.

I am now clearer where we differ, you regard HYP1 as a 'classic HYP'. However, I regard HYP1 as a starting point and that any HYP is always a work in progress, rather than a fixed set of rules. Obviously, our recollections differ, but I recall discussions around latter HYPs on motley fool of what to do when a company cuts its dividend. It was never a single simple answer, but depended on the circumstances at the time, if it was a temporary cut for some reason you might keep the share, if likely to be a long term cut - sell the share.

The trouble with Haleon was that it was the equivalent of dividend cut in the long term. Which was why I sold. Why have a small rump of low yielding shares cluttering up your HYP.

Incidentally, I do not sell shares very often, Haleon was the last one in July 2022.

Yes HYP, as used here is a little wishy-washy so we shouldn't get too hung up about it. There are vague guideines to give us all a steer. Adopting a term like classic HYP is bound to spawn a debate.

Every now and again our pyad pops up to keep us honest.

Chris

[Arborbridge]

Yes HYP, as used here is a little wishy-washy so we shouldn't get too hung up about it. There are vague guideines to give us all a steer. Adopting a term like classic HYP is bound to spawn a debate.

Every now and again our pyad pops up to keep us honest.

Chris

I'm a little surprised that you believe "classic HYP" is a term that will spawn debate. It has been used here and on TMF for decades and it has always been accepted without debate. Then this happens! A chance tangential remark Well, I suppose it's good to have one's assumptions questioned, but this felt more like airbrushing history.

I daresay there is some wiggleroom as to what each of us means, but there is no doubt in my mind that when people use the word "classic" or possibly "Pyadic" they mean the original concept as written up by pyad himself.
I you might accept some debate around how many shares, and whether bought over a period or in one block - but essentially "classic" would mean holding without tinkering and allowing market trading to do the work.

Anything else came later and HYP was "watered down" to make it more palatable for us "normal" investors who like meddling.


Arb.

[Grumpsimus]

Yes HYP, as used here is a little wishy-washy so we shouldn't get too hung up about it. There are vague guideines to give us all a steer. Adopting a term like classic HYP is bound to spawn a debate.

Every now and again our pyad pops up to keep us honest.

Chris

I'm a little surprised that you believe "classic HYP" is a term that will spawn debate. It has been used here and on TMF for decades and it has always been accepted without debate. Then this happens! A chance tangential remark Well, I suppose it's good to have one's assumptions questioned, but this felt more like airbrushing history.

I daresay there is some wiggleroom as to what each of us means, but there is no doubt in my mind that when people use the word "classic" or possibly "Pyadic" they mean the original concept as written up by pyad himself.
I you might accept some debate around how many shares, and whether bought over a period or in one block - but essentially "classic" would mean holding without tinkering and allowing market trading to do the work.

Anything else came later and HYP was "watered down" to make it more palatable for us "normal" investors who like meddling.


Arb.

The term "classic HYP" didn't mean much to me. We all know that people can run a HYP in whatever way you want. Even pyad refined the concept over time.

I do think that if the "classic HYP" results in holding low yielding shares like Haleon for years, it might cause some to question the wisdom of rigidily following it. One share on its own is unlikely to make that much difference to a portfolio. However, if keeps being repeated you are likely to end up with a medium or low yield portfolio. This appears to defeat the main objective of having a HYP, which is having a growing level of income from the portfolio. This can either be reinvested or used as income.

[kempiejon]

I think the classic HYP is one that follows the guidelines as offered back in yore by pyad on The Motley Fool. Y'know, rank the big FTSE shares by yield and pick the ones with sustainable looking dividends in different sectors. There is some flex in how you pick those shares, how high is high yield, is it at portfolio or individual level, how many you can find, doubling up in sectors at half weight, all in or gradually collected, going foreign, etc. Ideal holding time forever, don't sell, well hardly ever. As I said the TMF articles being first port of call for me but TLF guidelines as referenced do cover selling, something I'm not inclined to bother with. I have ended up with some shares I didn't buy as a result of corporate actions. I have some shares that today do not look like HYP shares but were when I bought them. The portfolio has developed imbalances and varied yields, it does offer me an income.
I've been through this a few times before as have others so let's not get into discussion of HYP rules.
Others can of course run their HYPs as they see fit.

I do think that if the "classic HYP" results in holding low yielding shares like Haleon for years, it might cause some to question the wisdom of rigidily following it. One share on its own is unlikely to make that much difference to a portfolio. However, if keeps being repeated you are likely to end up with a medium or low yield portfolio. This appears to defeat the main objective of having a HYP, which is having a growing level of income from the portfolio. This can either be reinvested or used as income.

I had a little think about this. A lowering yield isn't a lowering income. As my HYP is a buying strategy if my portfolio of shares showed good growth of income each year, ahead and growing further ahead of inflation over time but better growth of capital such that a decade or so down the line was now of average or even below average yield I don't think I'd be inclined to sell up. But it's an interesting premise to ponder on further. It'd free up a few years of income from capital, would obviously increase the income and if I was lucky (clever?) enough to have selected such good shares previously I might be just as lucky running it again. Except I like the do nothing but spend dividends bit of HYPing.

[Arborbridge]

The term "classic HYP" didn't mean much to me. We all know that people can run a HYP in whatever way you want. Even pyad refined the concept over time.

I do think that if the "classic HYP" results in holding low yielding shares like Haleon for years, it might cause some to question the wisdom of rigidily following it. One share on its own is unlikely to make that much difference to a portfolio. However, if keeps being repeated you are likely to end up with a medium or low yield portfolio. This appears to defeat the main objective of having a HYP, which is having a growing level of income from the portfolio. This can either be reinvested or used as income.

Maybe so, but that's the way it is with a classic, or Pyadic, HYP - both of which terms have been written enough times on Lemon Fool to have been noticed over the years. However, most of us confess to not running a HYP that way, as you will have realised!

Arb.