I’d argue the price shouldn’t trade at a discount to NTA given...

I’d argue the price shouldn’t trade at a discount to NTA given this is a basket of stocks. Value can be placed on NTA normally, however a discount could be placed on it due to the mixture of stocks it holds. Franking credits shouldn’t matter unless investors expect the market to tank on labor getting in. Most large investors are holding this in a company structure or personal which would be a 30% to 46.5% tax rate anyway. So no issue.

Its probably worth noting that the asx has rebounded from the near 20% fall in nov/dec. Investors are wary of it, coupled with our market on 11 year highs and gaining traction to all time highs. This is a large risk. I personally can’t see a catalyst to send us higher. So why buy a stock that tends to underperform more often than not the index?

personally, while I dislike paying ‘professionals’ to invest on my behalf, I still own this, AFI and MLT. More so legacy stocks we compound when markets tank merely due to diversification that holds stocks I would never ever consider owning, ie a basket of mid caps. We’d be a top 200 shareholder of ARG with >100k holding. So I can confidently say I believe in this company as a whole. I own it more so diversify my overall risk, ie we hold enough to live off dividends with a modest lifestyle if $&@“ hit the fan.

what I’m trying to say is the market is too high, the discount to NTA probably reflects that rather than labor’s disgusting tax grab. Large holders are not effected by labor’s policy. Superfunds especially - attribution of pooled MITs is why.