THE unexpected perils of launching a limited life split-capital investment trust seven years ago were underlined yesterday with results from Ivory & Sime Optimum Income showing an 80% loss of capital for ordinary shareholders. Preference shareholders, meanwhile, have been paid out a full 8.78% a year as promised.
Ordinary shareholders have, however, fared better than those in many rival trusts, as Optimum has at least paid out a 4% return a year in dividends.
The preference shareholders will be paid out in full providing the trust loses no more than 6.1% of current value by its wind-up date in March.
Alex Hammond-Chambers, trust chairman, said the board was about to offer shareholders the options of being paid out
in cash, or rolling over into another vehicle.
Optimum Income was itself a rollover from a previous trust in 1997, and attracted a large army of private shareholders who, until 2000, believed that both classes of shareholder had taken a good option.
The assets at November 30 stood at (pounds) 85m, a rise of 7.3% since launch, beating the 2.5% rise of the benchmark all-share index. However, the net asset value of the ordinaries was 19.15p, a fall of 80.5%. The obligation to the zeros amounted to (pounds) 33.5m, ''eating into the total assets and leaving less and less for ordinary shareholders''.
Hammond-Chambers said that over the past three years the trust had looked at ideas designed to mitigate the effect of the bear market, in vain. ''If the life of the company had been longer, it might have helped, if the amount attributable to the ZDP shareholders at the outset had been less, it would have helped but ordinary shareholders would have received lesser dividends.''
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article