For second-half 2016, their net gain on trading derivatives was...

For second-half 2016, their net gain on trading derivatives was $3,936,061 leading to a total investment income of $3,682,860.

This was almost entirely paid out in the March dividend of $0.20 per share. So while it was part of the NTA for awhile, it's since been returned to investors. This has been completely transparent: read the announcements.

It's also been made clear in multiple announcements that the same is intended for the next special dividend: part of the profits booked around recent trading will be returned to shareholders as a special dividend.

Indeed, if the sale of JBFG happens, another special dividend is also planned to return some of the profit from this unlisted investment. It was previously going to be the in-specie distribution but they've since changed course, deciding it makes more sense for JBL to have the controlling stake in JBFG -- a wise decision I think, as it seems a more natural fit for the future expansion plans of JBL.

There's a pattern here: HML are running a quite prudent capital management strategy that involves returning capital to shareholders rather than trying to dramatically increase the NTA and risk either stretching themselves too thin or putting the money into poor opportunities. It shows, in fact, the Stuart is looking out for HML shareholders rather than trying to increase FUM for JBL in a short-term greedy way that could lead to poor longer-term outcomes through investment in sub-par opportunities just because they have too much cash on hand. The generous DRP offering means that they do get to retain some capital for future investments, but it gives the choice to the shareholder. You can take the cash or choose to re-invest it.

The reason the unlisted investments (and HHL etc) are the biggest driver of our NTA increase is because there haven't been liquidity events - yet. But one is planned for JBFG and we've been given very promising details about that. I can understand the criticisms of these unlisted investments and people want more information to back up the valuation, but as far as I'm concerned this is the *only* area where transparency is lacking. Either we'll get the expected ROI from JBFG this year or we don't - if we don't, hard questions need to be asked and we deserve answers; if we do, we all stand to benefit significantly. I'm not sure exactly how much more they could be doing to satisfy critics who don't even really try and understand what's going on for themselves. Those who don't like this aspect of HML are free to get out, but so far I've seen no reason to think we're not going to profit from our stake in JBFG.