Probably posting into an echo chamber, but finally exited this embarrassment, masquerading as an investment vehicle.
Yes, it does fulfil part of its mandate by returning some management fees for socially worthy causes, but that's where it ends. The equally important part is to provide SH returns that reward holders for the risk of investing in equities. The claim of "strong investment performance" is debatable, but what is irrefutable is the extent to which that performance is retained within the vehicle. 66c/share retained profit reserve at 30/12/24 and growing. 8.9 years of dividend cover!
I submitted a question to Caroline Gurney in the hope that it would be addressed at Zoom meeting some months back, seeking comment on this situation and whether the board would consider a special dividend. Its was one of two SH questions that were selected and the answer was just a flat out no, citing the need for growing and regular dividend distributions, but 9 years of reserve to do this is beyond ridiculous. Of course, retained profits equal a larger FUM and a growing and regular source of management fees and is yet another reason why ETF's have been the way to go for very long time.
One of my reasons for investing initially was to also setup seperate, modest holdings for each of my children, in order to facilitate a unique opportunity to pique their interest in equity investing and to have them actively research & select which cause their "donation" would go to. On this measure it has been a resounding success.
So, after ten years, and 30cps of capital growth & 27cps of dividends, I'd ask Caroline, is 57cps in actual returns on an investment MTM of $1.40, really considered "strong investment performance" from a SH's perspective?
Expand
(20min delay)