Smith (DS) - smoke and mirrors

[Wizard]

Oh and you have still not pointed out, with reference to the wording of the HYP-P guidelines, why my interpretation that I cannot post on that board is flawed. Just saying it a lot does not make you right. If you can point out whrre I am wrong then there would be no restriction on me posting on HYP-P if I wanted to.

It is really a question of your state of mind. If you had an open mind about HYP, despite having decided that you did not wish to follow that path, then your ability to post on that board is not in question. As it is, you have a mindset that says that HYP is a a strategy with which you fundamentally disagree. If you were merely sceptical about it because of your own failed experiment, and wished to post about your experiences, then there is no problem. Others might be able to learn from your mistakes. From what I recall, you only tried it for a short period of time.

It might be a cathartic experience for you to tell the story.

TJH

This is just going in circles, you state my ability to post on HYP-P "is not in question". So again I ask, please point out what in the guidelines leads you to conclude this?

As for open mindedness I have freely admitted in the past that others have done well with their version of HYP, including yourself. I question the risks of not rebalancing the portfolio in the original concept, but the TLF version allows for such rebalancing. I also question the restriction to only UK shares as I think this is unnecessarily limiting opportunity for increased diversification, both geographic and sectoral, the TLF version retains that restriction. I question the fact that at times the approach can cause diworsification / chasing yield. I tried running an HYP for about 3 years, like others (Monabri as an example IIRC) I have concluded it is not for me, in my case put simply the capital losses were horrific and I am therefore not prepared to commit more assets to the approach.

What frustrates me about HYP-P is that it seems in many cases it is not about what is said, but who says it. It is IMHO a bit of a clique, if you are inside the group pretty much anything said is permissable and if necessary defended, but if you are on the outside then you can be made to feel pretty unwelcome at times. Others will have different views, but that is how I have found it.

[moorfield]

I agree with RVF though that the classic HYP is now all but dead. In the final analysis, it has failed the stress test.

The final analysis will come in November, with pyad's HYP1 is 20 report. I expect that despite a ~50% income drop (finger in the air) he will no doubt claim that this is the rough and tumble of HYP that one has to suck up. It depends how you define "failure" - as you know my "stress test" is CTY, and by that benchmark I think it will have failed this year, yes, along with many many other HYPs here too. Back O/T, I'm afraid I know little of SMDS, but it's on my shortlist to examine further.

[Wizard]

Likewise a share that used to qualify but currently does not can also be discussed here.

That is why I was not all out in criticising pyad's comments. There was for instance a discussion not that long ago re Unilever which it was decided may be discussed on the HYP -P Board as it yielded sufficient at one time to be considered suitable for a HYP. That criteria surely applies to D S Smith although as I said it has come to something when a non payer is considered suitable. These are though as they say, unusual times.

I agree with RVF though that the classic HYP is now all but dead. In the final analysis, it has failed the stress test.

Dod

I think it was more subtle than that wasn't it Dod? The practical management of a portfolio that already contained Unilever was OK for HYP-P, but while it had too low a yield discussion of new purchases or top-ups was not. If that is correct and was still applied then discussing existing holdings of DS Smith would be OK, buy not so a top up at a current yield of 0%.

However, there is wriggle room in the current guidance as pointed out in the Biscuit Bar discussion. When referring to the shares that are OK for HYP-P discussion the use of "should" rather than "must" presumably means that there is no issue with Arb saying he topped up a share on 0% yield. But how tolerant would the HYP-P regulars be of somebody saying they should buy NatWest preference shares and then pointing out that it is OK because of the use of "should" in the guidance? On HYP-P it is too often more about who says something rather than what is said.

[Alaric]

But how tolerant would the HYP-P regulars be of somebody saying they should buy NatWest preference shares and then pointing out that it is OK because of the use of "should" in the guidance?

The answer to that is almost certainly not at all. The "HYP Stategy" is usually stated to explicitly exclude Preference Shares along with overseas shares and Investment Trusts even though shares of no current yield now seem OK.

[Itsallaguess]

I tried running an HYP for about 3 years, like others I have concluded it is not for me.

I tried playing squash for a while.

That wasn't for me either, but I don't feel the need to bang on about it all the time...

I find the most interesting and worthwhile contributions on these board come from people who discuss what they do, not what they don't....

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

[88V8]

I find the most interesting and worthwhile contributions on these board come from people who discuss what they do, not what they don't....

Not very interesting, but I topped up today at two-ninety-something.
It'll be alright on the night.

V8

[webbm00]

I find the most interesting and worthwhile contributions on these board come from people who discuss what they do, not what they don't....

Not very interesting, but I topped up today at two-ninety-something.
It'll be alright on the night.

V8

Me too on the hope that the sell off has been overdone and the share price rebounds. Not very HYP but I'm bored with waiting for the next big drop when the world figures out the pandemic isn't over

[88V8]

I'm bored with waiting for the next big drop when the world figures out the pandemic isn't over

Next big drop? Would be nice, but nah.... Even if the panpanic returns, the strategies for minimisation are ready, the market will look through to the sunlit uplands.
Other than Travel/Hospitality, no big drop.
Hope you filled your boots in March, that was the decade's bargain basement.

V8

[Walrus101]

I opened this thinking it was something dubious accounting that was being questioned.

These topics are wearing. It is pretty clear no one posting here with the exception of maybe 1 or 2 run these pyadic HYPs. Why cant DS Smith just be discussed as an investment.

FWIW I dont hold it and dont intend to. My suspicion is packaging is another industry ripe for disruption, I have invested in shared that have stopped the dividends, HSBC, Norwegian Cruise Liners and Gregg's, I would probably prefer to invest in an active trust that looks for such opportunities rather than these single share dice rolls, but we will see.

[dealtn]

Why cant DS Smith just be discussed as an investment.

It can.

Post away on Share Ideas. Or with respect to news on Company Share news (LSE Main Market).

Some would rather post about it in a High Yield context, or in the case of this thread about the context of the morphing of what was previously disallowed, but seemingly now allowed, in a particular strategy.

Personally I would welcome more discussion about shares, and less about strategies, and see more traffic on the Boards highlighted above.

[Wizard]

It looks like that some amount, some time in the future yield is up again this morning as it can be based off a 3% lower share price now.

[dealtn]

I am getting very nervous about SMDS. Down almost another 4% on a generally up day. What do people know that I don't?

RVF

Well that's hard to answer without knowing what you don't!

Probably better to discuss on a thread actually about SMDS though I would think rather than here.

Not sure what there was for an income investor to get excited about in the latest update.

Not sure what there was for an non-income investor to get excited about in the latest update.