Rate my SIPP - ITV high conviction

Juno_Moneta

I learned plenty. 

I don’t work for ITV. 

vacheron

FIREDreamer said:

Sarahspangles said:

Bostonerimus1 said:

FIREDreamer said:

penners324 said:

Juno_Moneta said:

The main thing that attracts me to ITV is that they have a ‘hidden’ asset “ITV Studios” which is generally thought to have a value on its own of around £3bn and is on the brink of being carved up (eg article today below). 

However the value (market cap) of the entire ITV Group (which owns it) is just £2.9bn currently. So by hidden I mean ‘value not recognised’. 

It reminds me of Wall Street asset stripping!

Well I think it’s worth a punt. Watch this space. 

https://www.broadcastnow.co.uk/broadcast-international/potential-itvs-deal-supported-by-investors-report/5201770.article

For balance - there are plenty of reasons NOT to invest in ITV - eg some think ITV Studios isn’t worth that much. 

And with this position size, £30k up days are as common as £30k down days - so a strong stomach is needed. No share is up, up, up every day.

States on the article the share price has gone from 277p to 77p in 10 years.

If it carries on that trend....

You notice the difference in Corrie. Hardly anyone in the Rovers now as cast is paid per episode (and are complaining or leaving). The scripts and plots defy credulity. Look at a few years ago and it was packed. In real life, pub footfall hasn’t reduced that much. Emmerdale probably the same but I don’t watch that. The Queen Vic in Eastenders is full probably thanks to taxpayers’ money. ITV doesn’t look on the up to me which is a shame. Dead cat bounce maybe.

"The Rest is Entertainment" podcast did an episode on the state of these soaps. Emmerdale viewership is holding up the best, but they have all fallen from peak viewerships of 10s of millions to a few million. That's still good, but the trend is downwards, just like ITV's stock price.

I think the demographic of this board may mean we’re less aware that TV watching is in decline. Neither of my 20-somethings even own one. I don’t watch TV programming at all, though OH does. I subscribe to National Theatre online and watch this on ‘his’ TV, but it’s starting to make more sense for me to go to the ‘NT Live’ screenings at the cinema. He’s already opted not to get Sky Sports in favour of walking up to the local Club.

I am 60. I watch more hours of youtube than terrestial/satellite television channels.

I’m 51, Oh is 42 and our son is 12. None of us watch any broadcast TV. We have 2 TV’s but neither are connected to an aerial ot set top box. All our tv watching is either from YouTube or our home media server.

We still have a TV licence though as it is required to watch live streaming (even on YouTube).

It seems utterly ridiculous to me that we can talk to our next door neighbour over the garden fence about his recent holiday, or he can send a video call to a WhatsApp group about it, but if he live-streamed that same story to us over YouTube, I need to pay £160 to the BBC for the privilege of watching him! 

My parents are in their late 70’s and my dad is an avid YouTube watcher now and has recently cancelled his sky package because he sees no value in it any more. 

penners324

Juno_Moneta said:

I learned plenty. 

I don’t work for ITV. 

So no you didn't learn.

Prepare for more tough times when the share price drops to 30p or lower.

Your SIPP investment is an extremely poor choice.

Gaberdeen

I could not countenance having that in a single holding. I've had a single holding be worth £800k before and I'm just very grateful I derisked and diversified when I did - same holding would be worth just £200k today.

Won't tell you that your SIPP choice is wrong, it's just wrong for me.

westv

vacheron said:

FIREDreamer said:

Sarahspangles said:

Bostonerimus1 said:

FIREDreamer said:

penners324 said:

Juno_Moneta said:

The main thing that attracts me to ITV is that they have a ‘hidden’ asset “ITV Studios” which is generally thought to have a value on its own of around £3bn and is on the brink of being carved up (eg article today below). 

However the value (market cap) of the entire ITV Group (which owns it) is just £2.9bn currently. So by hidden I mean ‘value not recognised’. 

It reminds me of Wall Street asset stripping!

Well I think it’s worth a punt. Watch this space. 

https://www.broadcastnow.co.uk/broadcast-international/potential-itvs-deal-supported-by-investors-report/5201770.article

For balance - there are plenty of reasons NOT to invest in ITV - eg some think ITV Studios isn’t worth that much. 

And with this position size, £30k up days are as common as £30k down days - so a strong stomach is needed. No share is up, up, up every day.

States on the article the share price has gone from 277p to 77p in 10 years.

If it carries on that trend....

You notice the difference in Corrie. Hardly anyone in the Rovers now as cast is paid per episode (and are complaining or leaving). The scripts and plots defy credulity. Look at a few years ago and it was packed. In real life, pub footfall hasn’t reduced that much. Emmerdale probably the same but I don’t watch that. The Queen Vic in Eastenders is full probably thanks to taxpayers’ money. ITV doesn’t look on the up to me which is a shame. Dead cat bounce maybe.

"The Rest is Entertainment" podcast did an episode on the state of these soaps. Emmerdale viewership is holding up the best, but they have all fallen from peak viewerships of 10s of millions to a few million. That's still good, but the trend is downwards, just like ITV's stock price.

I think the demographic of this board may mean we’re less aware that TV watching is in decline. Neither of my 20-somethings even own one. I don’t watch TV programming at all, though OH does. I subscribe to National Theatre online and watch this on ‘his’ TV, but it’s starting to make more sense for me to go to the ‘NT Live’ screenings at the cinema. He’s already opted not to get Sky Sports in favour of walking up to the local Club.

I am 60. I watch more hours of youtube than terrestial/satellite television channels.

.

We still have a TV licence though as it is required to watch live streaming (even on YouTube).

It seems utterly ridiculous to me that we can talk to our next door neighbour over the garden fence about his recent holiday, or he can send a video call to a WhatsApp group about it, but if he live-streamed that same story to us over YouTube, I need to pay £160 to the BBC for the privilege of watching him! 

My parents are in their late 70’s and my dad is an avid YouTube watcher now and has recently cancelled his sky package because he sees no value in it any more. 

Is that correct? I thought a licence was only requires if you watched content from the main broadcasters.

vacheron

westv said:

vacheron said:

FIREDreamer said:

Sarahspangles said:

Bostonerimus1 said:

FIREDreamer said:

penners324 said:

Juno_Moneta said:

The main thing that attracts me to ITV is that they have a ‘hidden’ asset “ITV Studios” which is generally thought to have a value on its own of around £3bn and is on the brink of being carved up (eg article today below). 

However the value (market cap) of the entire ITV Group (which owns it) is just £2.9bn currently. So by hidden I mean ‘value not recognised’. 

It reminds me of Wall Street asset stripping!

Well I think it’s worth a punt. Watch this space. 

https://www.broadcastnow.co.uk/broadcast-international/potential-itvs-deal-supported-by-investors-report/5201770.article

For balance - there are plenty of reasons NOT to invest in ITV - eg some think ITV Studios isn’t worth that much. 

And with this position size, £30k up days are as common as £30k down days - so a strong stomach is needed. No share is up, up, up every day.

States on the article the share price has gone from 277p to 77p in 10 years.

If it carries on that trend....

You notice the difference in Corrie. Hardly anyone in the Rovers now as cast is paid per episode (and are complaining or leaving). The scripts and plots defy credulity. Look at a few years ago and it was packed. In real life, pub footfall hasn’t reduced that much. Emmerdale probably the same but I don’t watch that. The Queen Vic in Eastenders is full probably thanks to taxpayers’ money. ITV doesn’t look on the up to me which is a shame. Dead cat bounce maybe.

"The Rest is Entertainment" podcast did an episode on the state of these soaps. Emmerdale viewership is holding up the best, but they have all fallen from peak viewerships of 10s of millions to a few million. That's still good, but the trend is downwards, just like ITV's stock price.

I think the demographic of this board may mean we’re less aware that TV watching is in decline. Neither of my 20-somethings even own one. I don’t watch TV programming at all, though OH does. I subscribe to National Theatre online and watch this on ‘his’ TV, but it’s starting to make more sense for me to go to the ‘NT Live’ screenings at the cinema. He’s already opted not to get Sky Sports in favour of walking up to the local Club.

I am 60. I watch more hours of youtube than terrestial/satellite television channels.

.

We still have a TV licence though as it is required to watch live streaming (even on YouTube).

It seems utterly ridiculous to me that we can talk to our next door neighbour over the garden fence about his recent holiday, or he can send a video call to a WhatsApp group about it, but if he live-streamed that same story to us over YouTube, I need to pay £160 to the BBC for the privilege of watching him! 

My parents are in their late 70’s and my dad is an avid YouTube watcher now and has recently cancelled his sky package because he sees no value in it any more. 

Is that correct? I thought a licence was only requires if you watched content from the main broadcasters.

EDITED POST:

Acutally, the wording seems to have been tweaked since I last saw it.
https://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/faqs/FAQ33

It now mentions "Part of a TV Channel" which means that youtube streamers are now excluded, as opposed to being "included by association".

Your query may have saved me some money this year! 

Actually I used to be happy to pay my Licence to fund the radio stations, especially Radio 4 / World Service, but you don't even need a licence to listen to these. 

Juno_Moneta

Gaberdeen said:

…
Won't tell you that your SIPP choice is wrong, it's just wrong for me.

Thanks Gaberdeen. I think that’s exactly the point - everyone has different choices and different tolerances to risk. 

Some of the replies here have been mildly/passively aggressive which is very interesting!

One poster suggested I might be “a troll”. 

One poster preaches that “you didn’t learn”. 

I think it shows human nature is to react negatively to something out of our own comfort zone or experiences. 

There are probably many other investors with unconventional SIPPs, but rarely any sharing the details. 

bjorn_toby_wilde

Juno_Moneta said:

Gaberdeen said:

…
Won't tell you that your SIPP choice is wrong, it's just wrong for me.

Thanks Gaberdeen. I think that’s exactly the point - everyone has different choices and different tolerances to risk. 

Some of the replies here have been mildly/passively aggressive which is very interesting!

One poster suggested I might be “a troll”. 

One poster preaches that “you didn’t learn”. 

I think it shows human nature is to react negatively to something out of our own comfort zone or experiences. 

There are probably many other investors with unconventional SIPPs, but rarely any sharing the details. 

Well you asked people to rate your SIPP in the title. Surely you must have anticipated, maybe looked for, that reaction?

Hoenir

Juno_Moneta said:

There are probably many other investors with unconventional SIPPs, but rarely any sharing the details. 

For some entirely unknown reason those Forum Members tend to disappear never to be seen again. Never provide long term updates on how their ideas pan out. 

Tucosalamanca

Hoenir said:

Juno_Moneta said:

There are probably many other investors with unconventional SIPPs, but rarely any sharing the details. 

For some entirely unknown reason those Forum Members tend to disappear never to be seen again. Never provide long term updates on how their ideas pan out. 

The same happens on financial bulletin boards. 
Gurus come and go all the time....