Author Topic: SYTE - Enterprise Diversified  (Read 211851 times)

gg

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 223
Re: SYTE - Enterprise Diversified
« Reply #560 on: November 06, 2018, 08:10:40 PM »
I wasn't clear on the 8-k .... is Jeff no longer on the board of ENDI? My reading was that he was no longer an officer of Mt Melrose, but wasn't clear on his position with ENDI.

On Friday, October 5, 2018, the Board of Directors of the Company, acting unanimously, appointed Director, Steven L. Kiel as Chairman of the Board of the Board of Directors of the Company.  As Chairman of the Board, Mr. Kiel replaces Jeffrey I. Moore, whose service on the Board of Directors continues in the capacity as a regular Director.

This is from early October. Says Jeff moved from Chairman to Director. Nothing in the November release says whether he's a director still or not.


matts

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 202
Re: SYTE - Enterprise Diversified
« Reply #561 on: November 06, 2018, 08:14:49 PM »
I think the implication is that if nothing was disclosed then there is no change from Oct 5. If Moore was removed or resigned as director I'm almost certain it would need to be filed with the SEC along with the other announcement.

Tim Eriksen

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 753
Re: SYTE - Enterprise Diversified
« Reply #562 on: November 06, 2018, 09:16:14 PM »
Corporate expenses are not a part of book value.  So my point still stands.

If you want to discuss intrinsic value and factor in corporate expenses, fine but it washes with internet operations. 

Please explain how there would be huge write down in Alluvial.  Of course the fund could go down due to performance but the revenue royalty is carried at zero.

Kiel is not 0 for 2.  Alluvial has worked fine.  Mt Melrose is not a failure that is a huge assumption. 

You all are not being rational.  To say that because HVAC didn't work and Mt Melrose had a hiccup that therefore Alluvial may now be suspect is illogical.   

Tim Eriksen

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 753
Re: SYTE - Enterprise Diversified
« Reply #563 on: November 06, 2018, 09:17:44 PM »
I think the implication is that if nothing was disclosed then there is no change from Oct 5. If Moore was removed or resigned as director I'm almost certain it would need to be filed with the SEC along with the other announcement.

A board cannot remove a director.  And yes director changes have to be filed within a few days.

DTEJD1997

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1667
Re: SYTE - Enterprise Diversified
« Reply #564 on: November 07, 2018, 09:43:18 AM »
Corporate expenses are not a part of book value.  So my point still stands.

If you want to discuss intrinsic value and factor in corporate expenses, fine but it washes with internet operations. 

Please explain how there would be huge write down in Alluvial.  Of course the fund could go down due to performance but the revenue royalty is carried at zero.

Kiel is not 0 for 2.  Alluvial has worked fine.  Mt Melrose is not a failure that is a huge assumption. 

You all are not being rational.  To say that because HVAC didn't work and Mt Melrose had a hiccup that therefore Alluvial may now be suspect is illogical.   

The properties that Mt. Melrose has requires close supervision and "hands on" management.  This is going to be farmed out to an outside management company.   Odds are that an outside management company is NOT going to do anywhere near as good a job as what was being set up.
Over time, properties will deteriorate, there will be tenant issues, and other problems will crop up.

Thus, I would suspect that the properties are going to be in a much position in a year or two than they are now.  Management will get tired/frustrated at things not working out and decide that they want out.  Wanting out, they sell, and will sell at a discount.  Thus, the write off.

I would also not call what has happened a "hiccup".  What was told to shareholders in prior communications has been completely reversed. 

How are shareholders to think that anything OTHER than the wheels are falling off?

valueyoda

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 234
Re: SYTE - Enterprise Diversified
« Reply #565 on: November 07, 2018, 10:05:45 AM »
What is the AUM of the Alluvial Fund and Bonhoeffer  fund? At least, then we can make some assumptions what those revenue streams could be worth.

Tim Eriksen

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 753
Re: SYTE - Enterprise Diversified
« Reply #566 on: November 07, 2018, 10:10:11 AM »
Corporate expenses are not a part of book value.  So my point still stands.

If you want to discuss intrinsic value and factor in corporate expenses, fine but it washes with internet operations. 

Please explain how there would be huge write down in Alluvial.  Of course the fund could go down due to performance but the revenue royalty is carried at zero.

Kiel is not 0 for 2.  Alluvial has worked fine.  Mt Melrose is not a failure that is a huge assumption. 

You all are not being rational.  To say that because HVAC didn't work and Mt Melrose had a hiccup that therefore Alluvial may now be suspect is illogical.   

The properties that Mt. Melrose has requires close supervision and "hands on" management.  This is going to be farmed out to an outside management company.   Odds are that an outside management company is NOT going to do anywhere near as good a job as what was being set up.
Over time, properties will deteriorate, there will be tenant issues, and other problems will crop up.

Thus, I would suspect that the properties are going to be in a much position in a year or two than they are now.  Management will get tired/frustrated at things not working out and decide that they want out.  Wanting out, they sell, and will sell at a discount.  Thus, the write off.

I would also not call what has happened a "hiccup".  What was told to shareholders in prior communications has been completely reversed. 

How are shareholders to think that anything OTHER than the wheels are falling off?

That is a lot of assumptions.  I don't understand why Mt Melrose properties require increased hands on management versus other properties.  These aren't low income properties or high maintenance, or likely high turnover.  Unless they have a different way of complying with the 40 Act they won't sell.  They need a leveraged entity.

The trade off of farming out versus in house is current cost versus long term risk .  With a management company costs are known and overhead is spread over your properties and others.  In house means multiple people, an office, increased audit costs, etc.  Farming out is probably 15k less cost per month.  It is the difference of being profitable or not if revenue is only 100k a month.    At 300 properties the cost structure probably flips the other way.  The decision makes sense to me.

To armchair quarterback it is to assume that management is now irrational.


Tim Eriksen

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 753
Re: SYTE - Enterprise Diversified
« Reply #567 on: November 07, 2018, 10:15:05 AM »
What is the AUM of the Alluvial Fund and Bonhoeffer  fund? At least, then we can make some assumptions what those revenue streams could be worth.

So you drew a conclusion before knowing the facts???  =)

Alluvial 22.4 million 
Bonhoeffer 13.8 million

DTEJD1997

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1667
Re: SYTE - Enterprise Diversified
« Reply #568 on: November 07, 2018, 10:22:19 AM »
Corporate expenses are not a part of book value.  So my point still stands.

If you want to discuss intrinsic value and factor in corporate expenses, fine but it washes with internet operations. 

Please explain how there would be huge write down in Alluvial.  Of course the fund could go down due to performance but the revenue royalty is carried at zero.

Kiel is not 0 for 2.  Alluvial has worked fine.  Mt Melrose is not a failure that is a huge assumption. 

You all are not being rational.  To say that because HVAC didn't work and Mt Melrose had a hiccup that therefore Alluvial may now be suspect is illogical.   

The properties that Mt. Melrose has requires close supervision and "hands on" management.  This is going to be farmed out to an outside management company.   Odds are that an outside management company is NOT going to do anywhere near as good a job as what was being set up.
Over time, properties will deteriorate, there will be tenant issues, and other problems will crop up.

Thus, I would suspect that the properties are going to be in a much position in a year or two than they are now.  Management will get tired/frustrated at things not working out and decide that they want out.  Wanting out, they sell, and will sell at a discount.  Thus, the write off.

I would also not call what has happened a "hiccup".  What was told to shareholders in prior communications has been completely reversed. 

How are shareholders to think that anything OTHER than the wheels are falling off?

That is a lot of assumptions.  I don't understand why Mt Melrose properties require increased hands on management versus other properties.  These aren't low income properties or high maintenance, or likely high turnover.  Unless they have a different way of complying with the 40 Act they won't sell.  They need a leveraged entity.

The trade off of farming out versus in house is current cost versus long term risk .  With a management company costs are known and overhead is spread over your properties and others.  In house means multiple people, an office, increased audit costs, etc.  Farming out is probably 15k less cost per month.  It is the difference of being profitable or not if revenue is only 100k a month.    At 300 properties the cost structure probably flips the other way.  The decision makes sense to me.

To armchair quarterback it is to assume that management is now irrational.

The assumption that SYTE management is irrational may be perfectly fine. 

Mr. Moore, who built Mt. Melrose, did it by being "hands on".  He had help from a "crew" of people that he vetted & hired.  I would have to assume it was known by SYTE's management how Mr. Moore did things.  Further, I would have to assume, that they had a good idea of how Mr. Moore was to proceed in the near future in having a team to work on the properties.

Mr. Moore, who built Mt. Melrose, decided on how to do it.  If it were better/cheaper to simply farm out management/supervision to an outside management company, would he have not already done that.  Would he not have done from VERY EARLY stages of Mt. Melrose? 

Finally, Mr. Moore was DIRECTLY involved with those properties, working on some of them himself.  I would trust his judgement on how to proceed/work those properties over the management of SYTE.

In the end, does not matter what I think...only thing that matters is how much $$$ SYTE can make and what the stock price is. 

We will see.

valueyoda

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 234
Re: SYTE - Enterprise Diversified
« Reply #569 on: November 07, 2018, 10:35:18 AM »
Thanks. Yes, I did my assumptions before knowing all the facts. Easy to do so when  you have no position haha. I still fail to see how with the revenue sharing agreements based on those AUMs and normalized returns really adds substantial value, unless AUM really grow substantially or if they would continue to perform well. Hedge fund partnership interests are notoriously undervalued by the market due to the erratic nature of the performance fee cash flows.