michael_selway
Coal & Phosphate, thats it!
- Joined
- 20 October 2005
- Posts
- 2,397
- Reactions
- 2
GreatPig said:
do you own mig?
thx
MS
MIG - Macquarie Infrastructure Group
- Thread starter profithunter
- Start date
do you own mig?
thx
MS
Anyone got any thoughts on MIG?
They have a strong forecast for this year, in their reports their tolls seem to be making good money and increased profit, their buying back shares, low pe and peg ratio. Seemed to have bounced back a bit today aswell.
They have a strong forecast for this year, in their reports their tolls seem to be making good money and increased profit, their buying back shares, low pe and peg ratio. Seemed to have bounced back a bit today aswell.
- Joined
- 22 July 2006
- Posts
- 852
- Reactions
- 1
Super John
I think you should read through a MIG financial report to understand what the financial wizards at MBL are doing...
MIG makes nothing but real losses, both cash and P&L wise, if you get rid of the rubbish theoretical revaluations.
Essentially, as most of MIG's investments are equity instruments where they have less than a 50% interest, they may apply a mark to market model to their investments. Now those of you who may have a little accounting knowledge may be asking yourself, but hold on a second, if they hold less than 50 but more than 20, then thats and associate, and they should equity account. Ah, those little Mac bankers are smarter than you think - when A-IFRS was introduced, so to was an exemption in the investment in associates standard that allowed an alternative way of accounting for such an investment, based on the financial instruments standard.
So, in summary, the reason why they have such a great profit is because, for intensive purposes, in accordance with our accounting standards, MIG's profits can be whatever Macbank say they are.
MIG is a giant disaster waiting to happen - if you think that Sub prime RMBS are illiquid, what about bonds and notes in trusts for road tolls? MIG is a vehicle that is dependent on either refinancing or asset recycling for distributions. Add to that, MBL ride the fund for a nice little management fee, although at least they have forced MBL to take it in scrip. Do some research on what the actual gearing of the fund is, because I think you would be surprised at just how geared this entity is, if you account for MIG"s share of it's equity investments gearing.
These guys are so dodgy accounting wise, they don't even disclose Stephen Allen's salary because apparently they get around the related parties disclosure due to the fact that he gets paid by the Bermudan trust that doesn't have to comply with accounting standards.
All in all, I think MIG is just a giant joke to superannuation - the vehicle is designed to generate a fee for MBL, plain and simple. I fail to see how their financial's give a true and fair view in accordance with Corporations Act, but hey, who I am to say!!! I think if you want exposure to road tolls, buy some Transurban - at least they are honest about what's going on.
Cheers
MIG $3.06 bought 3000 shares today had to be done.
My broker tells me it is undervalued.
MIG is a very choppy stock.
The yield is 6.6% at current price.
I believe the stock is now good value.
I will justify my purchase when I sell at $3.80-$4.20
This is my plan with MIG.
My broker tells me it is undervalued.
MIG is a very choppy stock.
The yield is 6.6% at current price.
I believe the stock is now good value.
I will justify my purchase when I sell at $3.80-$4.20
This is my plan with MIG.
- Joined
- 8 September 2007
- Posts
- 376
- Reactions
- 0
I got to say I'm right with Reese55 on MIG, it is a trainwreck......an accountants paradise.....if anyone on this website can tell me how much debt MIG is carrying then I'll stand and applaud......cause its not on its balance sheet, its not on Mac Banks balance sheet.....its somewhere in Bemuda apparently attached to individual assets........since when can you attach debt to assets and then bring the assets onto a balance sheet and put debt on them again....people were wrong when they said Mac Bank is the next Enron....they are wrong because Mac Bank does not carrry the debt......MIG carries it, MAP carries it......Don't believe it, check out everybody's favourite article at the moment from fortune magazine....this is the bell ringing on the 'Mac Bank model'
http://money.cnn.com/2007/09/17/new...unds.fortune/index.htm?postversion=2007091810
http://money.cnn.com/2007/09/17/new...unds.fortune/index.htm?postversion=2007091810
- Joined
- 22 July 2006
- Posts
- 852
- Reactions
- 1
Thanks for the links rainmaker, it was a good read.....
Bethany McLean incidentally was the author of one of the few articles back in 2000 that criticised Enron's model and asked the question of whether it was overvalued (the stock)....... It's funny though, because every time this kind of question comes up (about the sustainability of the infrastructure model and their unique conflicts of interest), somehow it eventually dies down and MBL are on their way........ But I think my previous post really summed up my feelings on this one!!
Cheers
Reece
I'm up 12% on MIG. I purchased at 2.95 for on the 23rd of November. I'd say it's simply institutional buying of a share the Market considered over sold or under priced.
- Joined
- 22 July 2006
- Posts
- 852
- Reactions
- 1
Anyone pick up on the huge spike in MIG today, the share got all the way to 3.90 before cooling down....... Is it a short squeeze or something else, either way very interesting price action today....
Cheers
Cheers
I saw that and thought it was a mistake!
I can't even guess why a stock would shoot up so high and plummet back down. Maybe the MAC boys are playing "funny-buggers" with the stock??? MIG seems to be one of those stocks that no one "gets". I took a 8 day, 15% ride and got off so I'm happy.
Weird.
I can't even guess why a stock would shoot up so high and plummet back down. Maybe the MAC boys are playing "funny-buggers" with the stock??? MIG seems to be one of those stocks that no one "gets". I took a 8 day, 15% ride and got off so I'm happy.
Weird.
- Joined
- 22 July 2006
- Posts
- 852
- Reactions
- 1
Anyone listen to MIG's last earnings call...... very interesting stuff........
Maple Abbott Brown put some very important question to John Hughes, the new CEO in charge (3 months in the job)... It went something like this....
"How is the potential internalisation of MIG coming along" MAB
John Hughes, a bit stunned, asked if he meant privitisation of MIG, which the MAB rep replied yes. John dodged the question by stating that at present, it was business as usual and his role was to add value for shareholders..
Then:
"Well then how do you plan on lifting the share price, because you have executed a buy back that did nothing and never before has MIG traded at such a discount to its supposed net asset backing?" MAB
Once again, John was stuck for words, but scrambled together that MIG had outperformed the market in light of recent volatility (never mind the stock is the same place it was 2.5 years ago and yields less than a bank account)
Then, my favorite:
"How many shares does Macquarie own in MIG?" MAB
John stated around 11%
"No, get rid of the funds management arm, I mean as principal"
John states he didn't know...
Fairly forward questions put out there by the Maple Abbot Brown and I guess gives you the picture of the discontent with this fund by insto's. The fund booked like a 12% gain on their investments for the half, once again with lowering of risk rates due to "Macquarie's confidence surrounding the certainty of their cash flow forecasts" (to quote their seemingly inocent pommy CFO)..... The reality is that the market has now completely turned off to MacBanks artistic accounting and no one around is buying the stock except for MacBank itself (and it's plowing it's FUM into it) and utilizing a buy back. MacBank are all to keen to retain the management rights to this beast because it's reliable income management wise and then they can take a swag on refinancing/asset acquisitions.
How's the conflict of interest with MacBank keeping the stock valuation afloat with their super money to ensure their managers fee is maintained at a certain level???????????
Link here if you are interested.....
Maple Abbott Brown put some very important question to John Hughes, the new CEO in charge (3 months in the job)... It went something like this....
"How is the potential internalisation of MIG coming along" MAB
John Hughes, a bit stunned, asked if he meant privitisation of MIG, which the MAB rep replied yes. John dodged the question by stating that at present, it was business as usual and his role was to add value for shareholders..
Then:
"Well then how do you plan on lifting the share price, because you have executed a buy back that did nothing and never before has MIG traded at such a discount to its supposed net asset backing?" MAB
Once again, John was stuck for words, but scrambled together that MIG had outperformed the market in light of recent volatility (never mind the stock is the same place it was 2.5 years ago and yields less than a bank account)
Then, my favorite:
"How many shares does Macquarie own in MIG?" MAB
John stated around 11%
"No, get rid of the funds management arm, I mean as principal"
John states he didn't know...
Fairly forward questions put out there by the Maple Abbot Brown and I guess gives you the picture of the discontent with this fund by insto's. The fund booked like a 12% gain on their investments for the half, once again with lowering of risk rates due to "Macquarie's confidence surrounding the certainty of their cash flow forecasts" (to quote their seemingly inocent pommy CFO)..... The reality is that the market has now completely turned off to MacBanks artistic accounting and no one around is buying the stock except for MacBank itself (and it's plowing it's FUM into it) and utilizing a buy back. MacBank are all to keen to retain the management rights to this beast because it's reliable income management wise and then they can take a swag on refinancing/asset acquisitions.
How's the conflict of interest with MacBank keeping the stock valuation afloat with their super money to ensure their managers fee is maintained at a certain level???????????
Link here if you are interested.....
- Joined
- 22 July 2006
- Posts
- 852
- Reactions
- 1
MIG's Net Asset Backing is looking awfully silly now....
The stock is now retesting it's August 2006 lows and bar that has not been this low since December 2004......
$2.67 market value versus $4.59 MacBank super valuation model value.....
Still, I guess it has faired better than BBI infrastructure, which has halved compared with MIG's 34% decline (although they have different classes of assets, with toll roads having a lower perceived risk).
Cheers
The stock is now retesting it's August 2006 lows and bar that has not been this low since December 2004......
$2.67 market value versus $4.59 MacBank super valuation model value.....
Still, I guess it has faired better than BBI infrastructure, which has halved compared with MIG's 34% decline (although they have different classes of assets, with toll roads having a lower perceived risk).
Cheers
- Joined
- 22 July 2006
- Posts
- 852
- Reactions
- 1
MacBank announced today they have bought another 26.8 Mil shares in MIG, raising there stake to almost 13%..... Are they the only fund manager in town buying this stock??? Slight conflict of interest, as usual.......
Cheers
Cheers
Hi
I was wondering whether anyone had any further information on this stock. based on their current performance and price I see there could be some potential value but don't know much about them.
I have heard a bit of talk and a few whispers here and there but would like some more concrete information.
Thanks
Gusto
I was wondering whether anyone had any further information on this stock. based on their current performance and price I see there could be some potential value but don't know much about them.
I have heard a bit of talk and a few whispers here and there but would like some more concrete information.
Thanks
Gusto
Ok so i am the 3rd reply to myself on this thread but i will keep it going!! Really interested in peoples thoughts on the fundamentals of this stock. I hold and have been quietly appreciating...today though they seem to be on the run.
Thanks
Gusto
Thanks
Gusto
- Joined
- 24 April 2009
- Posts
- 1,114
- Reactions
- 0
They've fallen considerably today ~5% on the day before ex-dividend which is 10c (7%) so why has it fallen so much on the day before ex-div??
I'm thinking about buying for the dividend, but im worried about its movement today...
nulla nulla
Positive Expectancy
- Joined
- 24 September 2008
- Posts
- 3,588
- Reactions
- 133
I hold and I'm not a happy investor. I accumulated a parcel averaging $1.432 in the lead up to the share going exdiv with a dividend of $0.10. I anticipated that when the dividend would be announced there would be a surge in the share price like MAP etc.
Problem is when they announced the div, they snuck in a line that this was the final div where the surplus funds would be used for dividend purposes. In other words, like many other infrastructure funds, they would only pay future dividends from surplus operating income after expenses. Surplus funds will on hand and or from the proceeds of sales (hopefully) would be used to pay down debt or continue with their share buy back.
The dividends announcement was followed by a surge in the share price which faltered as the future aspects of dividends was taken on board. Today the share fell, following on from the fall in the dow overnight offset partially by buyers comming in for the $0.10 div.
What happens next is anyones guess. The share backing, in excess of $3.00 per share on valuations as at 31/12/08 is expected to fall due to downward revaluation as at 30/06/09, however I was told by the Investor relations that my guesstimate of $2.70 asset backing per share was below their expectations. This means at $1.405 the share price would be almost half of the revised(?) asset backing per share.
The value of infrastructure and reit's was driven down by hedge fund shorting in the peak of the global financial crisis to the point that many of the stocks were trading well below their asset backing. Many of the reit's have recapitalised and reduced their gearing and are now solid investments going forward. MIG, in my opinion, does not appear to be in need of recapitalising, having been buying shares back on market. They can hardly justify going back to the market now to raise capital having spent so many millions buying shares back with surplus funds.
Yield predominantly determined interest in mig in the past. The $0.20 distribution per annum was a steady income. Capital gain was a bonus, which was underlined by a capital return a year or two ago.
There is huge foreign interest in Infrastructure at the moment. The CIC has taken a stake in Goodman and the Canadians have bought out Macquarie Communications. Asset backing; long term value, with capital gains as the world economies recover; and the prospects of a take over or buy out, would seem to be the hope for future gains in the mig share price. My only hope is that mig remembers that they have many small investors they need to keep in mind, not just investors at the big end of town.
Problem is when they announced the div, they snuck in a line that this was the final div where the surplus funds would be used for dividend purposes. In other words, like many other infrastructure funds, they would only pay future dividends from surplus operating income after expenses. Surplus funds will on hand and or from the proceeds of sales (hopefully) would be used to pay down debt or continue with their share buy back.
The dividends announcement was followed by a surge in the share price which faltered as the future aspects of dividends was taken on board. Today the share fell, following on from the fall in the dow overnight offset partially by buyers comming in for the $0.10 div.
What happens next is anyones guess. The share backing, in excess of $3.00 per share on valuations as at 31/12/08 is expected to fall due to downward revaluation as at 30/06/09, however I was told by the Investor relations that my guesstimate of $2.70 asset backing per share was below their expectations. This means at $1.405 the share price would be almost half of the revised(?) asset backing per share.
The value of infrastructure and reit's was driven down by hedge fund shorting in the peak of the global financial crisis to the point that many of the stocks were trading well below their asset backing. Many of the reit's have recapitalised and reduced their gearing and are now solid investments going forward. MIG, in my opinion, does not appear to be in need of recapitalising, having been buying shares back on market. They can hardly justify going back to the market now to raise capital having spent so many millions buying shares back with surplus funds.
Yield predominantly determined interest in mig in the past. The $0.20 distribution per annum was a steady income. Capital gain was a bonus, which was underlined by a capital return a year or two ago.
There is huge foreign interest in Infrastructure at the moment. The CIC has taken a stake in Goodman and the Canadians have bought out Macquarie Communications. Asset backing; long term value, with capital gains as the world economies recover; and the prospects of a take over or buy out, would seem to be the hope for future gains in the mig share price. My only hope is that mig remembers that they have many small investors they need to keep in mind, not just investors at the big end of town.
nulla nulla
Positive Expectancy
- Joined
- 24 September 2008
- Posts
- 3,588
- Reactions
- 133
On 24 June 2009, mig went exdiv and closed at $1.305 (down 10c from the previous day) on turnover of 8 million. Today, 25 June 2009, mig bounced back to close at $1.39 with volume of 20 million (of which 8.1 million turned over between 3:00pm and 4:00pm with a further 3.5million turned over in the closing auction). There was a big surge in buying from 3:00pm onward pushing the price up from $1.36. Does some-one know something?
