Donate to Remove ads

Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators

Thanks to Blatter,orangepekoe,longview,ouzo,Fluke, for Donating to support the site

UK Wind (UKW)

For discussion of the practicalities of setting up and operating income-portfolios which follow the HYP Group Guidelines. READ Guidelines before posting
Forum rules
Tight HYP discussions only please - OT please discuss in strategies
funduffer
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1467
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:11 pm
Has thanked: 146 times
Been thanked: 945 times

Re: UK Wind (UKW)

#709387

Postby funduffer » February 3rd, 2025, 9:59 am

ClarkeP wrote:
I think the most important thing to remember about all these alternative energy companies is that they are not viable businesses without the largesse of the exchequer. How a company can pay a 10p dividend to shareholders and not a single penny of tax to HMRC may not be something that lasts forever… it’s the political wind you should be more concerned about.


The exchequer subs in £4b pa but the renewables are cross subsidized by the rest of the power generation industry by more than ten times that amount through industry levies.

Whether you consider it a subsidy or not is a moot point. Much of the renewables generating sector is covered by Contracts for Difference (CFDs), which is a mechanism for achieving price stability not a subsidy as such. When electricity prices are high (higher than the contract price), renewable companies give revenues to the government. When low, the opposite.

Not sure if your £4b figure is net or not?

FD

ClarkeP
Posts: 11
Joined: January 16th, 2025, 1:13 pm
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 11 times

Re: UK Wind (UKW)

#709390

Postby ClarkeP » February 3rd, 2025, 10:14 am

I don’t think it is moot. No wind turbines would have been installed without these payments. Gas and Coal and Oil managed without such interventions not just here but around the world.

If an industry needs large net payments from a third party mandated by government legislation then it is disingenuous to pretend it’s not subsidised.

That the government also pays £4b NET is further evidence.

It may be that this is the right policy and wise and necessary. That is moot or at least arguable. To pretend it never happened is not.

ClarkeP
Posts: 11
Joined: January 16th, 2025, 1:13 pm
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 11 times

Re: UK Wind (UKW)

#709411

Postby ClarkeP » February 3rd, 2025, 11:32 am

It’s not that the CfD is inherently a subsidy. It’s the strike price that makes it so.

Gerry557
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3047
Joined: September 2nd, 2019, 10:23 am
Has thanked: 234 times
Been thanked: 941 times

Re: UK Wind (UKW)

#709413

Postby Gerry557 » February 3rd, 2025, 11:42 am

moorfield wrote:
Itsallaguess wrote:
Are you sure it's a rise on last year?

Dividend Data is showing a 10p annual dividend for this year and also last year -

Image

[Source - https://www.dividenddata.co.uk/dividend-history.py?epic=UKW]

Cheers,

Itsallaguess



Quite so. And as a result (something I mentioned yesterday), UKW has now been relegated from the AICs list of Dividend Heroes.
https://www.theaic.co.uk/income-finder/dividend-heroes


They shudda put it up by 0.01p :lol:

You both are correct so it will be Amber Green Green Green unless they make any changes. Anyway I have added a few more this morning so whilst not showing any dark green :cry: The actual £ figure will be a bit higher. ;)

Now I need to sort out January and income has fallen that month 2 years in a row not helped by NG. cutting its divi and having sold a holding. Maybe I need to get onto that heros list and see who pays out when :lol:

Itsallaguess
Lemon Half
Posts: 9288
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:16 pm
Has thanked: 4285 times
Been thanked: 10542 times

Re: UK Wind (UKW)

#709423

Postby Itsallaguess » February 3rd, 2025, 12:05 pm

Gerry557 wrote:
You both are correct so it will be Amber Green Green Green unless they make any changes. Anyway I have added a few more this morning so whilst not showing any dark green :cry: The actual £ figure will be a bit higher. ;)

Now I need to sort out January and income has fallen that month 2 years in a row not helped by NG. cutting its divi and having sold a holding. Maybe I need to get onto that heros list and see who pays out when :lol:


Self-limiting income-investment options because of a particular dividend payment month has always felt to me like a very bad method of choosing what to buy, and stepping away from a 'hand-to-mouth' dividend process that drives the desire for such a monthly drum-beat of payments is in my view likely to deliver better long-term performance than using that type of 'payment-month' filter from the outset.

I'd perhaps consider allowing a moderate capital-buffer to build up, where you'd then continue to spin-off your usual income-requirements, but where a level of 'dividend backfill' can then be constantly topping up that capital-buffer, thus removing the need for a particular January payment to have to be delivered as dividends in the same month as you want to use them.

Even if an income-investment is bought specifically to take advantage of a particular dividend-payment month, there is nothing to stop the company or investment manager changing those arrangements any time they wish to, which would instantly negate any perceived benefit in the first place.

Whilst there is an element of opportunity-cost involved with building such an income-delivery buffer, I strongly suspect that small cost to be lower over the long term than using a 'dividend-payment-month' filter at the start of any income-investment optioneering process, where broader, better quality options are likely to have been filtered out for a spurious reason that can be removed with a small tweak to your current income-delivery process.

There are much more important considerations that should be made in terms of investment-quality when we're looking to invest for income, and the use of a dividend-buffer can allow you to concentrate on those, rather than a particular payment-month in the calendar that you've got no real control over once you've committed your funds anyway...

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

moorfield
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3857
Joined: November 7th, 2016, 1:56 pm
Has thanked: 1822 times
Been thanked: 1574 times

Re: UK Wind (UKW)

#709461

Postby moorfield » February 3rd, 2025, 1:16 pm

Gerry557 wrote:They shudda put it up by 0.01p :lol:


They should have done. UKW was the first and only Renewables IT listed as a Dividend Hero. Can you imagine that the question was not asked in the relevant board discussions? The additional 0.01p cost shouldn't be difficult to calculate, but perhaps that tells us they are struggling to even hold the dividend?

daveh
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2515
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:06 am
Has thanked: 501 times
Been thanked: 924 times

Re: UK Wind (UKW)

#709469

Postby daveh » February 3rd, 2025, 1:33 pm

moorfield wrote:
Gerry557 wrote:They shudda put it up by 0.01p :lol:


They should have done. UKW was the first and only Renewables IT listed as a Dividend Hero. Can you imagine that the question was not asked in the relevant board discussions? The additional 0.01p cost shouldn't be difficult to calculate, but perhaps that tells us they are struggling to even hold the dividend?


Or it says they don't care for dividend hero status and are happy to allow their investment qualities to speak for them. I'm not particularly worried by dividend hero status particularly when a number of trusts game it by doing exactly what you suggest and increasing the dividend by a meaningless amount just to maintain dividend hero status.

Anyway they have already said they plan to increase the dividend this year so can't be too worried about being able to pay the dividend. Look at it another way in the previous year they increased the dividend by ~30%, this year they left it unchanged but directed money into buybacks of their own shares that are sitting at a large discount, which is (probably) a better use of the cash than upping the dividend.

Itsallaguess
Lemon Half
Posts: 9288
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:16 pm
Has thanked: 4285 times
Been thanked: 10542 times

Re: UK Wind (UKW)

#709561

Postby Itsallaguess » February 3rd, 2025, 6:56 pm

Gerry557 wrote:
Itsallaguess wrote:
Self-limiting income-investment options because of a particular dividend payment month has always felt to me like a very bad method of choosing what to buy, and stepping away from a 'hand-to-mouth' dividend process that drives the desire for such a monthly drum-beat of payments is in my view likely to deliver better long-term performance than using that type of 'payment-month' filter from the outset.


Yes you are correct but ................. as I measure [the monthly dividend income] I "want" it to increase.

The annual amounts have and its nice to see every month increase year on year.

If it was really that important to me then I would have bought something else instead of adding these.


Well as someone who has measured monthly and annual dividend-income for many years myself, I certainly agree that they're useful metrics, but my monthly dividend-income figures are really only captured for cross-checking purposes and for feeding into both my annual and rolling-12-month income figures, which are the two important figures for me, and so I certainly don't place any emphasis at all on measuring those monthly figures against amounts from previous years, or altering my investment behavior to influence a particular payment month.

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

csearle
Lemon Half
Posts: 5129
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 2:24 pm
Has thanked: 5303 times
Been thanked: 2281 times

Re: UK Wind (UKW)

#709580

Postby csearle » February 3rd, 2025, 9:02 pm

Itsallaguess wrote:Well as someone who has measured monthly and annual dividend-income for many years myself, I certainly agree that they're useful metrics, but my monthly dividend-income figures are really only captured for cross-checking purposes and for feeding into both my annual and rolling-12-month income figures, which are the two important figures for me, and so I certainly don't place any emphasis at all on measuring those monthly figures against amounts from previous years, or altering my investment behavior to influence a particular payment month.
I like the clarity of your posts. So glad you are amongst us again. C.

Gerry557
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3047
Joined: September 2nd, 2019, 10:23 am
Has thanked: 234 times
Been thanked: 941 times

Re: UK Wind (UKW)

#709691

Postby Gerry557 » February 4th, 2025, 12:34 pm

Itsallaguess wrote:
Gerry557 wrote:


Yes you are correct but ................. as I measure [the monthly dividend income] I "want" it to increase.

The annual amounts have and its nice to see every month increase year on year.

If it was really that important to me then I would have bought something else instead of adding these.


Well as someone who has measured monthly and annual dividend-income for many years myself, I certainly agree that they're useful metrics, but my monthly dividend-income figures are really only captured for cross-checking purposes and for feeding into both my annual and rolling-12-month income figures, which are the two important figures for me, and so I certainly don't place any emphasis at all on measuring those monthly figures against amounts from previous years, or altering my investment behavior to influence a particular payment month.

Cheers,

Itsallaguess


I find it useful to see the reasons behind any changes, so a reminder that I sold a holding or it was sold from under me and NG rebased it's dividend. I prefer to see that it's gone up either due a an increase in divi or because I've increased the holding ideally both.

My quoted comment seems to have disappeared unless my finger edited away after you quoted it.

I saw the boss of GB energy talking jobs and reduction in bills or distinct lack of whilst extolling the virtues of this sector. I've added to my solar holdings this morning but they don't pay out in Jan either. Hopefully the BoE rate cuts will turn the tide.

Gerry557
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3047
Joined: September 2nd, 2019, 10:23 am
Has thanked: 234 times
Been thanked: 941 times

Re: UK Wind (UKW)

#709692

Postby Gerry557 » February 4th, 2025, 12:38 pm


Gerry557
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3047
Joined: September 2nd, 2019, 10:23 am
Has thanked: 234 times
Been thanked: 941 times

Re: UK Wind (UKW)

#710036

Postby Gerry557 » February 6th, 2025, 7:54 am

moorfield wrote:
Gerry557 wrote:They shudda put it up by 0.01p :lol:


They should have done. UKW was the first and only Renewables IT listed as a Dividend Hero. Can you imagine that the question was not asked in the relevant board discussions? The additional 0.01p cost shouldn't be difficult to calculate, but perhaps that tells us they are struggling to even hold the dividend?


I missed this ........ Target dividend10.35p for 2025

This is on the Dec 24 facts heat.

So might be a bit better than first thought and I will have to update my spreadsheet.

Gerry557
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3047
Joined: September 2nd, 2019, 10:23 am
Has thanked: 234 times
Been thanked: 941 times

Re: UK Wind (UKW)

#710038

Postby Gerry557 » February 6th, 2025, 8:05 am

2024 dividend cover of 1.3x is also mentioned in the fact sheet. This appears to contradictory to "Since IPO, the Company has delivered 1.8x dividend cover and, with its revised generating budget, remains on course to generate (on average) dividend cover of 1.9x over the next 5 years"

The buyback have averaged at 129p so whilst done at below NAV it's above actual 118p currently. I know this is a longer term argument but they are not great at being investors at the moment.


Return to “HYP Practical (See Group Guidelines)”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests