Net Asset Value (NAV) Write-down at DGI9

This blog gives you the latest topical news plus some informal comments on them from ShareSoc’s directors and other contributors. These are the personal comments of the authors and not necessarily the considered views of ShareSoc. The writers may hold shares in the companies mentioned. You can add your own comments on the blog posts, but note that ShareSoc reserves the right to remove or edit comments where they are inappropriate or defamatory.

This article reflects the opinions of its author and not necessarily those of ShareSoc.

Was fund manager Triple Point overpaid?

As Sachin Saggar comments in this piece, it is inconceivable that the manager of Digital 9 Infrastructure (DGI9), a Jersey regulated closed-ended fund, did not know the NAV, on which basis they received fees, was materially overstated.

It is time for the company to put the insurers of everyone involved on notice and for the Jersey regulator to step in and investigate Triple Point. The new board are blameless, but it is a regulatory requirement that fund managers have insurance and this is precisely why. Triple Point have lost hundreds of millions investing in assets that have not, as a class, slumped in value. It seems to me that it has been incompetence and hubris that has done for DGI9. That they have taken significant fees based on an alleged NAV of 79p at a time the market was valuing the company at 20p is shocking.

Investors have suffered here, and there is no merit in the company itself being investigated. It is the Manager and the valuers, who sucked up tens of millions in fees, which in my opinion have been inflated by incompetence, that are responsible. Twitter, bulletin boards and sites like Stockopedia are full of investors calling this out as fraud.

Let’s hope Jersey Evening Post covers this. A job for Ben Shenton if ever I saw one.

Paul de Gruchy, ShareSoc member
DISCLOSURE: The author holds shares in DGI9

2 Comments
  1. Charles Mitchell says:

    I hope the Jersey Regulator looks into Triple Point. I hold DGI9

  2. Sunil Chadda says:

    I quite agree, Paul.

    Fund managers watch the NAV like a hawk as their revenue is based on it.

    There is a market-wide issue relating to having two NAVs, one that is used officially for management and performance fee calculation (i.e. the NAV on which the fund manager is renumerated) and the other is the market valuation/NAV.

    We have had 14 years’ of QE and many NAVs went up quickly, but have been slow to come down. The FCA are looking at the 2 NAV issue and specifically the valuation of illiquid assets. EDHEC, a leading French business and risk school commented on some REIT NAVs last year. The word ‘fraud’ was mentioned.

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.