Green & Ethical Investment News and Suggestions

Martyn1981

ASavvyBuyer said:

Martyn1981 said:

I've been in Abundance since 2013, and only had issues with the schemes I considered higher risk.

I have signed up on the Abundance site and started looking at the various investments/schemes. It looks very interesting and I like the idea of supporting the green schemes. Starting slowly as I gain confidence in the process.

Can I ask if, those that have invested via Abundance, if most of your investments are from original launches or from the "market place". There seem to be a lot of sell offers in the market place, but most seem to be at a higher price than the nominal value.

Hiya. Most of my investments are from original launches, but I'd guess that most of my monies now are from the Marketplace. This is because when I've had spare cash, or received monies from the Abundance schemes, I've rolled it back into more. Also, many of the schemes pay back the capital as they go, eg a 10yr scheme with 6 monthly payments, would return 1/20th of the capital with each payment, so returns are higher than just the interest/dividend, and I'd rather it tick along, as this is my pension/CO2 offset*.

The Marketplace prices represent the investment monies you'll be taking over, plus the money the seller would like to have to release it. So for instance they may be selling £100 in a 10yr 5% scheme, and the bidding may be 105%, as the seller not only has the £100, but also a place in a scheme where the money is earning. Personally, and this is based on nothing technical at all, I like to pay one years interest max on the price, so in that example 105% max. Also as Joe mentions, I tend to check for payout dates, as buying them close to the next payout, is far better than just after a payout - the same way share prices tend to drop a bit just after dividends have been paid.

One (big) problem with the Marketplace is that it's 'too fair'. Neither the buyer nor the seller have to pay Abundance any fees, and neither are forced to complete the sale. They can drop out after the auction time ends. So I've often found that if I win a really low price sale, perhaps 101%, the seller decides to not complete, and will most likely have another go and hope for more interest in the sale next time.

*CO2 offset - I'm trying to reduce our emissions. I've done the PV, and hoping to add a bit more, moved some heat to the A/C, with another to be installed soon, and moved most mileage (all soon) to a BEV. But leccy generation doesn't quite offset all consumption now, and there's the gas we consume, and of course all the emissions related to normal life, purchases etc.. So I'm hoping that by building up enough investments in RE schemes, and efficiency schemes etc etc, that I may be able to tackle the other emissions that we are responsible for ...... IYSWIM.

joefizz

Martyn1981 said:

Thanks. TBH I've done the opposite of you, and focused the bulk of my money in the longer term schemes, perhaps 10-17yrs (originally) as they are so much safer being linked to the various government RE subsidy support schemes,

Interesting the different perspective. My argument against the long term schemes is the return of the money not return on the money. It takes a long time on those to actually get your capital back, so you actually only start 'earning interest' in say year 10 of a 15 year scheme. Waiting 10 years to break even I may as well put it into other things that directly benefit me with some residual value eventually.  At least with the short term ones if Im going to lose my capital I'll know quite early on ;-)

The current approaching depression will put the long term schemes into focus as I wouldnt put any government subsidy scheme as 'safe' as at some point all these billions will have to be paid for or debt forgiveness or inflation or  ubi or any combination of invented up stuff.

Just looking at the marketplace there are a few with lower than 100% performance already. Unsurprisingly the latest property ones seem to be trading at or below 100%. There were a fair few people who bought initially just to trade on the marketplace who might be left holding as Martyn points out.

Martyn1981

I'm struggling (as always, sorry) to understand what you are saying.
Para 1. If the capital is repaid over 10 or 15yrs, I still get interest annually (or twice annually), I don't start 'earning interest' in year 10.
Para 2. Having worked in internal auditing I'm aware that whilst you need to consider all risks, you also have to consider probability. Assuming or even suggesting that the government will default on green energy schemes in the future, a future where we have to increase RE generation, seems an odd conclusion as this would undermine public and corporate confidence at a time when schemes are expanding. Also of course it doesn't make sense since the monies don't come from government spending directly, but from green tariffs on our energy bills, which are then distributed by the energy suppliers. If the Gov was to cut the subsidies, then it would also have to cut the 'green tax' making no net difference to the Gov.  [This is a form of Gov tax and spend (technically)]
And para 3, I've just checked, and other than a Monnow Valley scheme (which is in default and we've mentioned before) the only scheme I can see trading at less than 100% is Liverpool Community Homes at 99.4% and ironically this isn't a long term scheme but a very short one at 2.5yrs (2yrs 1 month remaining).
Are you sure your negativity is fair and balanced?

Coastalwatch

Coastalwatch said:

Two days later and the ISA has dropped from 92% to 90% of original while the Energy Storage fund is back to par, £1 or 100%.

So for the time being I make that Energy Storage Fund 1 - 0  ISA or, a win for clean energy sustainability over a worldwide mix of more traditional investments.

In percentage terms it will be interesting to see how long it takes the ISA to reach parity and/or catch up and pass ESF.

I'm hoping not another six years!

Is confidence in the stock market slowly returning?

ISA now                        95% 

Energy Storage Fund 103%

joefizz

Martyn1981 said:

I'm struggling (as always, sorry) to understand what you are saying.
Para 1. If the capital is repaid over 10 or 15yrs, I still get interest annually (or twice annually), I don't start 'earning interest' in year 10.

Return of the money Martyn, not return on the money. Most of the long term investments pay interest as well as part of the capital. Some dont repay capital until later in the term. Some only repay capital at the end of term. Unless you cash out through the marketplace you only get your capital back after x years, from then on its 'profit'. So if it goes belly up after 7 years you have 7 years of partial capital payments, 7 years of 'interest' and after the auditors/solicitors take their cut you have lost money. Ask anyone involved in Lendy etc and they will tell you. Doesnt matter if you have earned 15% for 3 years if it goes belly up and you dont get half of your capital returned. Hence my previous comments about other P2P, take the initial payments and sell out, making sure you 'pocket' the interest and profit. None of that factors in opportunity costs of the cash (although since start of may thats not really much - until very recently you could get 5% in regular savers etc)

Sorry quote system is playing up on me this morning. Re governments defaulting on green energy schemes. As Ive pointed out before many many times, they already have here on the flawed RHI scheme. Besides which they dont have to default on any scheme. As Ive mentioned before, all they have to do is tax the income from ROCs/FIT/export at source and that pushes out any date of return and probably kills a lot of the long term solar projects. Or they could nationalise all generation... unthinkable at the election in December, now.... Also look at the launch documents and see what happens in a default...

'Are you sure your negativity is fair and balanced? ' Not really negativity, you are just reading it as that, just pointing out it all isnt as rosey as some would portray. Have a look at the likes of FC, lendy, moneything etc etc to see what happens with P2P. As I have said before Abundance is slightly different but the merseyside homes and helping fund councils who have spent a lot of dough on commercial property is worrying and follows the trend in other P2P. Anyone who ignores history is doomed to repeat it.

Coastalwatch

Coastalwatch said:

Is confidence in the stock market slowly returning?

ISA now                        95% 

Energy Storage Fund 103%

Ah! Seems I might have been a little premature regarding confidence in the Stock market. At the time of posting the previous figures the FTSE had broken briefly above the 6000 mark for only the second time since the crash. It has subsequently fallen back to 5799 with the result that the value of our ISA has weakened too.

I also rediscovered this week that in times of financial instability Utility investments are considered a safer haven. Which may explain a little why the ESF has risen. Not that it is Utility owned, but it does rely on the fluctuation in demands upon the GRID, rather than demand itself to earn it's keep. Hence:-

ISA now @ 93.17%.

ESF            104%

The performance of other Renewable Energy Funds, be they Solar or Wind generation based, seem to be standing up well too. While the share price of one has fallen, in all four cases their annual returns have been between £0.0632 and £0.0831 per £1 share for each of the last three years. Figures below show the difference in share value of each from three years ago.

BSIF +14%, FSFL -9.3%, UKW +14.89%, TRIG +14.45%

How sad can I get playing imaginary monopoly with the Stock Market!

joefizz

BSIF +14%, FSFL -9.3%, UKW +14.89%, TRIG +14.45%

How sad can I get playing imaginary monopoly with the Stock Market!

You might already know this but just a word of warning about where funds are domiciled. The KID document for ESF shows its domiciled in the UK so is covered by the FSCS (up to 50k) but not for failure of the company (although they will have insurance for that).
I havent looked at the others but if not domiciled in the UK they arent covered by the FSCS. A lot of funds are domiciled in Ireland for tax reasons and the amount of coverage is significantly lower (20k IIRC but you would need to look that up as Im not current on it as I dont invest in funds anymore).
Just something to be wary of if spreading the odd half million around ;-)

Coastalwatch

Have to confess Joe that with my limited knowledge of such matters I'd just assumed that if the company you were investing in went bust then there would be little or no recourse of action open, whether they were domiciled in the UK or not. So perhaps sobering to learn that it might just be possible to claim some compensation should the worst occur. Thankfully, doesn't look like that'll be necessary for any of those listed in the short term at least.

joefizz

Coastalwatch said:

Have to confess Joe that with my limited knowledge of such matters I'd just assumed that if the company you were investing in went bust then there would be little or no recourse of action open, whether they were domiciled in the UK or not. So perhaps sobering to learn that it might just be possible to claim some compensation should the worst occur. Thankfully, doesn't look like that'll be necessary for any of those listed in the short term at least.

Its primarily just for the cash you hold within the wrapper but there is some recourse if there is fraud. Proving fraud is another thing!

For me anyway the ETFs, funds etc are another level of abstraction (and fees). Going back to P2P Id put the risk higher than investing in AIM stocks directly whereas funds do have slightly more regulation and hopefully spread the risk across multiple different companies. Its probably worthwhile researching the breakdown and allocation of each of the funds and having a look at each of the companies within it.

Again Im not a financial advisor and Ive not checked but worth seeing if any of the funds are heavily weighted towards just one or two companies (and if thats holding companies, not just named companies on the list). Thats not a negative, sometimes you might think its then worthwhile just investing in the individual companies if they are heavily weighted. I say invest when I really mean gamble ;-)

Coastalwatch

Received notification from Energy4All of a High Winds Community Energy Society offering shares to raise funds for the purchase of a neighbouring Wind farm. They are projecting annual dividends of 4.5-5% and with capital being repaid between 2025 and 2030.

Again not a recommendation, but as a community based project involving renewable energy it attracted my interest. Especially as, to date, I've nothing invested in Windmills.

https://mailchi.mp/81ce83fd04c6/high-winds-loan-note-and-share-offer-8th-may-794290?e=5a6fa07393