READER INITIATED ALERTS

Below readers can post in the comments section items they believe are important to seen right away by all other readers.

For instance if we are not at our computer and a reader spots a new issue being issued they can post it below where others can come for ‘breaking news’ from other readers.

We want to keep this page ‘fresh’ so we will slick it off every 50 days so the items below remain only newer items.

We only ask that comments beyond the breaking news be kept to other pages or this page will be ‘out of control’ and not fulfilling what I hope is a handy alert page.

TO START A NEW THREAD GO TO THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE

435 thoughts on “READER INITIATED ALERTS”

  1. NEW ISSUE
    Silvergate Capital Corporation (“SI”)
    Expected Ratings (Moody’s/Kroll)*: Ba3 / BBB-
    Series A
    $100mm
    5.625% Area

    1. Well this should be interesting – a Bitcoin proxy company preferred…. It’ll be interesting to see how volatile this one will be…….. Surprisingly top tier underwriters……….

        1. I know this is a simplistic view but I have noticed over a couple of decades so many companies that work around salt water or have things that float tend to be bad investments over time. So much carnage in that sector that I have a personal rule of staying far away from all of it. There is something fishy about so many of the companies that are involved with it. Boom and bust. Even a preferred with a high yield from those types of companies is a no go zone for me personally. I would give this advice to almost everyone unless they know the industry so well they could get a career in it.

          1. It reminds me of the oil drillers from the 80’s like Global Marine. Big capital needs, lots of debt, and very cyclical. Most went bankrupt at some point.

  2. CEQP- owners. Conference call came out, financials appear good and they are starting a $175 million stock/preferred buy back, though it appears they may lean common units over preferred.
    With $2.1 billion in total debt, Crestwood’s pro forma leverage ratio has improved to 3.6x, now on the low end of our targeted range of 3.5x to 3.75x, allowing the company to continue investing in high-return bolt-on opportunities around our core growth assets and accelerate allocating excess cash flow generated toward common and preferred equity buybacks under our Board approved $175 million repurchase program.

    Can you just provide some details on how we should think about the preference between buying back the preferred units versus the common units, given both are yielding roughly 9% at the time?

    Robert Halpin

    Yes. I think it’s a balance of really kind of overall financial objectives. And obviously, with both of those instruments being publicly traded, the return profile changes every single day. I think while you commented on the common yield and kind of where it sits, obviously, we look kind of all the way through to distributable cash flow and the all-in return profile on the common. I mean, I think that as we sit here today, we see probably greater amount of value in the common unit, but obviously have the flexibility through our repurchase program to bounce back and forth as that potentially moves over time. The one thing we are 100% committed to is maintaining our balance sheet strength. So while we have all the flexibility in the world and have now fully achieved our long-term leverage target at being in the 3.5x to 3.75x range, we expect to start allocating some of that excess cash flow towards enhancing returns, but we’ll always be mindful of balance sheet as we navigate that.

  3. New Brookfield Asset Management preferred listed today. BPYPM. I got filled at $25.00. I think it should trade at a premium soon like the other BAM preferreds.

    1. That looks like a BPY (enclosed malls and offices) preferred not a BAM (IG asset manager) preferred.

      1. Brookfield Property Partners L.P. 6.25% Class A Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Units, Series 1 (BPYPM)

        1. Brookfield also owns Cincinnati Bell and Altera. That doesn’t mean they get Brookfield’s credit rating. Debt and preferreds of the subs are non-recourse to the parent. Nonetheless, this looks like a good issue. Thanks for bringing it to everyone’s attention.

    1. PTrader –
      I’ve been steadily increasing my holdings in Trtx-pc. The underlying common stock has an average estimate for their yearly eps of $1.06 this year and $1.18 next year with 6 analysts following . P/e should stay just below 10. Looks like a decently run operation and I’m happily scooping up the preferred c below par…

      1. I’m pretty sure the underwriter is dumping, there is no other explanation. The discount is at $24.21, so I am curious to see if they will sell below that level. Interesting to see some kind of subsidiary as an underwriter listed in the prospectus as well, TPG Capital BD, LLC, I suspect they could sell below the discount level

      2. TheOtherTim:

        TRTX redeemed a 9 million share preferred that was paying 11% with the proceeds from the 7M share preferred that you own that will pay only 6.25%.

        Will save them $13+ million/year. Very well done by the company. They have some office property loan exposure (55% of total loan portfolio), but some of it is life-science related – which is booming right now.

        Started buying some of the preferred today. Thanks for the idea!

  4. CMO-PE
    CAPSTEAD MORTGAGE – Proposed MERGER –

    each outstanding share of Capstead’s 7.50% Series E Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock, $0.10 par value per share (“Capstead Preferred Stock”), will be converted into the right to receive one newly-issued 7.50% Series E Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Share, $0.01 par value per share, of BSPRT (the “BSPRT Series E Preferred Stock”)

    1. Anyone understand why the preferred is reacting negatively to this news? Other cmREITs have been issuing at 6.5%, so 7.5% seems good for this new company.

        1. “ Because it’s callable?”

          They specifically said they will convert CMO-E into preferreds of the new company when the merger closes in Q4. So not being called until some time after that. Call risk was more yesterday.

      1. it was trading at a premium and has given that back today as it’ll be exhanged at par. might not be a bad buy at today’s price since you’d have to assume it won’t be redeemed between now & q4 when the deal closes. like u say..a 7.5% pref at par is hard to find even in mtg reits (i’m long mfa/pb)

        1. If it’s going to be exchanged for a new identical issue of BSPRT, won’t that be an equivalent issue, i.e. it will be exchanged @$25 but will include the exact accrued etc. that CMO-E will have on the day of exchange? If so, it seems as though a selloff is unwarranted but haven’t read the details yet.

      2. Even if it were to be called now with 30 day notice, you would incur little or no loss at current price of 25.15, but I would think that an immediate call would be unlikely based on what they have said:
        “ BSPRT will assume CMO’s $258 million of issued and outstanding 7.50% Series E cumulative redeemable preferred stock, which will be exchanged for new preferred shares of the combined company with the same terms.”
        I am adding to my position as the combined company will be stronger than Capstead as a stand alone.

        1. rk – that’s what I was thinking too – that the combined company will be stronger than Capstead, though I have no history with Capstead per se… And as far as the possibility of an immediate call, essentially that’s taken off the table completely because of the pending merger… and as far as a CMO-E holder being entitled to the same provisions, including accrued at the date of the transfer, if I get thru the legalese properly p. 14 or prospectus seems to confirm it – “For purposes of dividends or other distributions in respect of shares of Parent Class A Common Stock or Parent Series E Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock, as applicable, all whole shares of Parent Class A Common Stock or Parent Series E Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock, as applicable, to be issued pursuant to the Merger shall be entitled to dividends pursuant to the immediately preceding sentence as if such whole shares of Parent Class A Common Stock or Parent Series E Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock, as applicable, were issued and outstanding as of the Effective Time.” Dip doesn’t seem rational imho

      3. Maybe because the holders were looking at a safer 100% agency backed portfolio which is now gone. Too bad.

      4. Landlord Investor – I was eagerly also buying cmo-e for all 3 of my accounts. I could be wrong, but my read is that benefit partners is a subsidiary of Franklin Templeton , that the nee entity will be public. When they say the preferred c’s will be exchanged for shares with identical terms, I take it to mean a new 5 year call at same 7.5% coupon. If so, it would not be the first time that I received new preferreds with a new 5 year call. This does happen and appears to be the case here. Again, I only hope I’m right about new 5 year call…….

        1. TheOtherTim, identical terms means the existing terms, i.e., the original call date. You should not expect an additional 5 years of call protection – in fact, the price drop today is telling you that is not going to happen.

    2. I have always respected CMO for many reasons. One of the oldest and now with a full boat of agency adjustables to be bought out. Someone is making a firm statement regarding the bottom of interest rate environment and buying good talent. This management can manage and know how to hedge the pools they own.
      PS: Yellowstone slow and 45″ nights.

      1. Joel, if you are saying you’re on slow wi-fi because you’re in Yellowstone, then enjoy those 45º nights: they’re set for another set of 90º+ days down in Portland, OR. Condolences on the slow access, but I guess I can’t feel too sorry for you ;-).

    1. This puts a target on the back of COF-H. At a price of 25.66 and only 75 cents of divis before potential 12-1 call, the price is too high.

  5. Tim
    I think one ‘rule’ you should implement is that any comment with a symbol or a name MUST have both the symbol AND the name. It saves many of us leaving the site to go see just EXACTLY what product is being discussed. MGRD was mentioned in a comment today and I had to go to 2 other sites to see what company it was.
    It would have been helpful to have the name attached. Then the commenter said to look in your new issue list and there it was. Other sites do not have it listed yet.
    Thanks, howard

  6. SF-A redemption 8/20

    https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edgar/data/0000720672/000119312521220784/d199324d8k.htm

    On July 21, 2021, Stifel Financial Corp. (the “Company”) announced that it will redeem all 6,000,000 of its depositary shares relating to its 6.25% Non-Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series A (the “Series A Preferred Stock”) (NYSE: SF PRA). The redemption price will be $25.00 per depositary share plus accrued and unpaid dividends to, but excluding, the date of redemption, August 20, 2021.

      1. Bob – Assuming QOL has accurate info, from June 15 – Aug 20 = 65 days on a 360 calendar I think and = 25.28212 approx… No matter what, it’s trading too high..

        1. I skipped a month when doing this in my head, and you are correct. I could not understand why anyone would pay 25.35 for this.

      1. justin-
        Hard to find- right? Look at Tim’s New Issues – it’s there. Schwab trades it, but does not even give it a name.

  7. Fidelity site is down…at least for me. Had some slowness with Active Trader Pro. Decided to restart…mistake! Cannot log in…ATP says “slow or no internet connection” which is untrue. Web site is down on both Firefox ( log in page suggested a different browser) and chrome. “We are working to resolve the issue.”

  8. Brookfield Property Inc., BPYU and BPY Brookfield Property Partners LP has made the announcement as summarized in SA. I called Fidelity and their Bloomberg machine says the EXACT wording.

    https://seekingalpha.com/news/3717170-brookfield-gets-final-court-approval-for-privatization-transaction-brookfield-property-reit-to-redeem-shares#comment-89541272
    It iWs crystal clear that BPYUP 6.375% will be redeemed. I do not own BPYUS but has lots of BPYPP, 6.5% coupon. While the press release does not say whether, it will be redeemed, I hate to see lots of unrealized gain become quite a bit less if it will be also be redeemed. After studying whether to buy more WCC-A, QRTEP, I bought more of Brookfield’s other grandchildren from another less pristine parent, the old TK Offshore, which still loses money but less. Despite market fear of the issue gets de listed, the dividend was NEVER suspected, the company was never delisted but relisted under new symbols. ALIN-A, B and E. ALIN-E is the best, marginally above par, mid point to the next ex div date, 8.875% QDI call protected until Feb 2025. I have most of these in my IRA, transferred some out to non IRA just in case that I am wrong (which happens for sure). Please be careful NOT to exceed $1,000 of INCOME per IRA or tax deferred account. I have strengthen Gridbird’s LBRDP and picked up some EP-C. These are actually safer than buying Stifle new 4.4%. FATBP under pressure. I am not worried. Apparently the market has no love its investment in Mexico. Hold onto my Safe Bulkers preferreds, which I deem as the safest of the high yields. If the owners want to suspend the dividends he would have done it many years ago, when it was universally considered as the FIRST one to file for bankruptcy vs. the God awful Navio MaritiMime trash with its evil CEO. BTW, ALIN-E just went down a little. I paid $0.05 too much. Thanks to zero commission, helps to save lots of time with my sloppy or impatient trading.
    Best wishes to all,
    Disclosure: the Market acts as if there is no fear of redemption from Brookfield Property Partner LP preferreds. BPYUP is now trading slighgtly above par. So, the news is well circulated.
    PP

    1. JKC, can you post a link with more information about the “Please be careful NOT to exceed $1,000 of INCOME per IRA….”?

  9. For those feeling a little frisky and like a little past call yield juice, CDR just declared dividends for the Series B and C. “B” is 7.25% and last traded at $25.34 today. So the 45 cent divi payable August 20 is officially in the bag. Note the 6.50% Series C actually trades higher at $25.48 since its still call protected. I own some of the B from this ragtag outfit myself.
    https://seekingalpha.com/pr/18401805-cedar-realty-trust-declares-dividends-on-common-and-preferred-stock

  10. KSU/P might be in play. Recall that Kansas City Southern was going to sell itself to Canadian National subject to board approval. Bloomberg ran a story saying that the Biden administration might block the merger based on antitrust. The buyout was going to pay $37.50 US dollars per share of KSU/P. It had been trading roughly in the $37.00 to $37.50 the last two months. Today with the potential antitrust action, it fell as low as 33.49 and closed at 34.17. If you were holding until the buyout went through, you have taken a hit. It was trading in the 36.00 to 40.00 before the buyout was announced.

    And all of this is a little strange considering it has been callable @ 25.00 for literally decades according to QOL. Hard for me to forecast where it will trade at IF the deal falls through. If you are confident the deal WILL go through, back up the truck! Of course the truck better be a kids toy truck since the number of shares you can probably buy without running the price up is less than a typical III investor position. If 50 III’ers put in market buy orders, the price would be >>$100 in about a microsecond.

    Link to Bloomberg article:
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-07-19/biden-s-antitrust-initiative-threatens-kansas-city-southern-railroad-deal

    We have no positions or orders in any accounts.

    1. Tex, Quantum is wrong.. KSU- is not callable at issuers option. KSU has slowly been buying some way over par year after year, so this was the read flag.
      Then I checked annual filings and it comfirmed this.
      1. PREFERRED STOCK
      a. The holders of the Preferred Stock shall be entitled to receive from the net earnings of the Corporation dividends thereon up to but not exceeding the rate of four percent (4%) per annum, as the same may be ascertained and determined by the directors, and in their discretion declared, before any dividends shall be declared or paid upon New Series Preferred Stock or the common stock for the same period, but such dividends on the Preferred Stock shall not be cumulative, nor shall the Preferred Stock during such period be entitled to participate in any other or additional earnings or profits, but such additional earnings or profits may be subject to application by the directors to dividends upon New Series Preferred Stock or the common stock or other uses of the Corporation, as they may determine.
      b. In case of liquidation or dissolution of the Corporation, the holders of Preferred Stock shall be entitled to receive payment in the amount of the par value thereof before any payment or liquidation is made upon New Series Preferred Stock or the common stock, and shall not thereafter participate further in the property of the Corporation or the proceeds of the sale thereof.

      Fidelity has it correct though. If you look at bottom of page it will state its not callable.
      https://eresearch.fidelity.com/eresearch/evaluate/snapshot.jhtml?symbols=KSU/P

      1. Crazy. There are a handful of old Canadian issues that do the same, that is leave the amount of a PREFERRED dividend to the discretion of the Board of Directors or the company.

        1. Didn’t that trade up to like 60 bucks on the merger announcement?
          A few other thoughts.
          1. Couldn’t they reduce the dividend to almost nothing to push the holders into redeeming back to the company, if they chose to
          2. So no “change of control” callability?

    1. 730Cap – And thank you for posting the notice. I hadn’t caught up with it having been on the riding mower mowing the lower 40 all afternoon.. Thanks!

  11. Although I was on a wait list at first, all my orders for the new Wells Fargo issue were filled.

    As Early Bird already posted, deal priced @ 4.25

    RB

  12. SLMNP that went ex-dividend last week trading at $1038s. Yields 5.77% though not QDI., and perhaps a good almost sock drawer buy ?

    Does anyone know if the interest it pays is subject to UBTI (so to avoid to buy in IRA)?

    1. It is a decent buy. The problem is being too heavy in one single preferred. How much is too much?

      1. I believe SLMNP will be subject to the new SEC rule in September and will be delisted from OTC. LYB does not public financials on the issuer of SLMNP and there is no indication that they plan to. So I think SLMNP will become “Pink No Information” at some point and the brokers will not trade it. It’s possible that SLMNP continues trading on OTC for awhile, since OTC currently shows SLMNP as “Pink Current Information” but my belief is eventually that will get corrected. The spirit of the new SEC rule is that if there is no current financial information on the issuer, then it can’t be traded, and that is the case with SLMNP.

        1. If this new SEC rule does indeed make SLMNP or similar old OTC securities to stop trading at retail trading platforms shouldn’t their prices start going lower before – say by end of August?

          What do us small investors do in case we are left holding them besides plead with your broker to exit at any price?

          1. Msquare, You can always take a 20% haircut and tender to company for about $850. :)… I notice under OTC they describe the issue as just LyondellBasell. Of course selling now is the safest. But many subsidiary preferreds have read are ultimately responsibility of parent if they cant pay (assuming they dont get walled off as a separate company). If LYB is ultimate guaranteer then its moot and explains why OTC describes the parent and not the subsidiary Advanced Polymers in its OTC description. FWIW, I am taking mine over to the dark side.
            But Im also betting the public parent info is good enough. I will find out in time, I guess.

            1. I bought more SLMNP today, Grid, and will take mine to the dark side with you. Light a candle for me. 😉

              JMO

              1. Camroc, we put our big boy pants on and take our chances. I dont pretend to know legalese and never really got interested until this discussion of the SEC regs and SLMNP. But I really think ultimately this is the obligation of the parent and that is why it is being portrayed as current info from LYB’s consolidated filings.
                And this is stated clearly in merger filings at least to my smallish cranial capacity.
                Section 1.01 The Merger. Upon the terms and subject to the conditions set forth in this Agreement, at the Effective Time, Merger Sub shall be merged with and into the Company (the “Merger”) in accordance with the DGCL. By virtue of the Merger, at the Effective Time, (a) the separate existence of Merger Sub shall cease, and (b) the Company shall continue as the surviving corporation in the Merger (the “Surviving Corporation”).
                …And the key part..
                Section 2.01 Effects of the Merger. The Merger shall have the effects set forth in this Agreement and in the applicable provisions of the DGCL. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing and subject thereto, at the Effective Time, all of the property, rights, privileges, immunities, powers and franchises of the Company and Merger Sub shall vest in the Surviving Corporation, and all debts, liabilities and duties of the Company and Merger Sub shall become the debts, liabilities and duties of the Surviving Corporation, in each case, as provided under the DGCL and other applicable Law.
                https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1489393/000119312518046665/d536459dex21.htm
                ….Maybe someone with more initiative will contact LYB, IR to confirm or refute. We will find out one way or the other in time.

                1. or sloppy coding at OTCMARKETS, since the financials are from 4 years ago, and they just checked to see if they were present and not whether they were recent….

            2. Right now I’m beginning to wonder which is more of a nanny state, the SEC or Fidelity….. It just feels as if this new rule to come, if implemented as planned, begins with the premise that you are too stupid to feel comfortable with the information available to you at the time you purchased X, Y, or Z and we’re going to protect you from yourself by doing our best to destroy the value of what you already comfortably own and we are doing this for your own protection because of course we know better than you do what’s good for you….. Gee, thanks, SEC… I feel so much better for the work you’re doing……..

              I own a few issues that will probably fall under this new rule, SLMNP being one of them… I, too, am comfortable taking them over to the darkside, partially because I just can’t believe this will end up going the way it’s currently shaping up… But I’m also of an age that I wonder what my heirs will have to do with these issues once it becomes time to liquidate my estate and distribute the proceeds… I might be willing to own these forever, but I’m beginning to realize my forever is not forever.

              1. The logic, as stated by the SEC, is to reduce pump and dump schemes on opaque companies. But since there is no simple criteria to identify which securities might actually get used for those purposes, they came up with an overly broad definition of “risky” securities and their net is catching some securities that don’t belong.

                And since this website is mostly focused on legitimate income securities, it makes it look like the net is completely ineffective because those are the only ones most will recognize on the list. But there are thousands of securities on the list, and no doubt many of them are garbage and some will be used for pump and dump schemes, so it’s really hard to conclude whether, in total, the overall scheme helps or hurts investors. III investors are clearly hurt, but presumably the type of people who are prey to pump and dump scams will be better off (except now there’s crypto for that!)

                You would like to think you could just say to the SEC with respect to LTS, for example, “Hey, these are liquid bonds that are not in default, can you just let them trade?” But the SEC wants nothing to do with that and has put the onus on the companies to comply, which means investors have to ask the companies, which will usually lead to dead ends.

                1. SLMNP may not be restricted. I don’t believe it appears in the preliminary list of Rule 15c2-11 securities (http://www.oddballstocks.com/2021/07/sec-rule-15c2-11-restricted-securities.html), though with 162 pages of such securities on the early list, I may have missed it. Is the notion that it may be included based on it being consolidated into the parent’s financials? If so, many of the legacy ute issues have the same issue and they are not on the list.

                  1. SLMNP and the utes (APRDM and such) are not on the SEC Restricted Securities List, as of June 30. The only one I have listed on there is LMIBL, and I believe the public consensus is that it will be called anyway.

                    So if SLMNP and the utes are not on the restricted list, is it safe to assume they will remain tradable?

                  2. Oldman, I like oddball. Hadnt read it in a while. Anyways did you see the link on Oddball, letter of protest written by Aztec Land and Cattle company?
                    https://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-14-19/s71419-6587840-201852.pdf
                    In the letter they state what I have long suspected on many issues here. “at some point our shares began trading on OTC. We never sought or applied to have our shares listed on OTC. Aztec does not want to be required to pay for OTC listing.”

                2. Okay, I am an evidence-based guy and I was willing to give the SEC the benefit of the doubt on this regulatory change, assuming they have some reasonable logic backing it up. But now we have some evidence on the efficacy of this regulatory “net” being cast around Pink No Information stocks in the fight against stock scams – and it does not look good. This is a small sample size, but if it applies to the larger set of securities, it looks really, really bad. To the point that someone who really cares about this issue might want to write the SEC a letter.

                  The SEC has arrested a man for penny stock pump and dump schemes (https://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2021/comp-pr2021-135.pdf), presumably the exact type of thing the new regulation is intended to reduce.

                  “From not later than August 2019 through at least September 2020 (the “Relevant Period”), Abujudeh, acting in concert with others, schemed to fraudulently sell the stock of microcap companies Odyssey Group International, Inc. (“Odyssey”), Scepter Holdings, Inc. (“Scepter”), and CannaPharmaRx, Inc. (“CannaPharmaRx”) to investors in the public United States securities markets.”

                  These security symbols are ODYY, BRZL, and CPMD, respectively. I looked them up on OTC Markets and NONE are listed as Pink No Information! Which means none of these stocks are going to have the new trading restrictions put on them, even though the stocks were actual targets of past schemes. So based on this small sample, the logic to create restrictions specifically on Pink No Information securities does not appear to be a valid method.

                  1. To me, good intentions are not enough. This is a regulatory agency with huge clout, a huge budget and a huge staff. They have an obligation to get it right, or approximately so, and this new rule misses by miles.

                    And I don’t even credit them with good intentions. I see too much evidence to the contrary. The first 20 pages of the 297 page rule is basic a self-loving, self-congratulatory statement on why the SEC is so wonderful.

                    1. I see it as a 3 prong problem. The SEC regs are not as nearly as annoying as what OTC is doing and then brokerages being more strigent. For issues I am concerned with, I have no problem with buying and selling grey market. For several years up till a couple years ago, I would buy and sell no problem on them. But most got converted to bid/ask for some reason and a few others got redeemed. Its the brokerage block part the personally bothers me the most.

              2. The SEC rightly wants to make these things available to only the most sophisticated investors who do the due dilligence.
                Look at the Fannie Mae preferreds.
                Those were worth nothing but traded for $9.00 a share before that court case became final.
                The people who shorted those starting in May/June in advance of the decision being handed down made a mint because they were sophisticated and knew they were worthless.

                1. Justin – you and I can’t directly buy many things that the SEC deems high risk. Like the securities of many of the biggest companies in the world. Because the securities are 144A, or private placement, or not SEC registered. You can buy them through a fund, but then you have to pay the fund fee. It’s an SEC-blessed toll road.

                  But legally, with the full blessing of the SEC, I can directly buy endless piles of garbage from numerous sources. And I can follow the “advice” of a true pump and dump operation like HDO with no intervention from the SEC. HDO is subject to essentially zero disclosure requirements. They buy, they pump, they dump, all in plain sight, and it goes without challenge. They don’t even have to tell you who they are.

                  Disclosures: I own no shares in SEC and I don’t subscribe to HDO.

          2. 1. Sell now
            2. Beg your broker (which probably won’t do any good)
            3. Beg Lyondell…(which also may not do you any good)
            4. Have a certificate issued, and then you can sell it to whoever you can find to buy it

            1. Justin these can be tendered back to company at about $850 per terms of the convertible and acquisition of A Schulman. Most brokerages allow sells but no buys, but if everyone is seller and cant buy that doesnt help much, ha. They appear to be setting up an “experts” trader that will allow purchases. But I take that as a way to get fleeced.

                1. MCG, That isnt correct based on anything I have read.. Here is what TD states for me…
                  Take no action. You are not required to sell these securities; however, starting August 13, 2021 we will restrict these securities to liquidation-only transactions. You may continue to hold them, but you may have difficulty selling them in the future and there is no guarantee as to what their future value will be.
                  So clearly I can sell, but to who is the major problem. Not counting the newly designated “market experts” ready to buy and fleece me.

                  1. You’re right, I was misremembering. After the end of Sept there will be no quotes, so it will be a true gray market. Unclear if your broker will allow you to place orders in an unlit market. In theory, you should be able to buy as well (just without quotes).

                    The expert market appears to be a completely different liquidity pool than the standard otc gray mkt, the two will not cross transact. So the experts will not be fleecing you but trading amongst themselves.

                    1. Given there will be no published quotes on these issues, I would not be surprised if most brokerage went the Fidelity route. We all know that Fidelity is more restrictive on what they let customers buy/sell for fear of a customer complaint later on.

                      Since all of these brokerages are know doing free trades, if I am Fido/Schwab/TDA/Merrill/Vanguard/etc. why would I let customers buy/sell ANY of these non-quoted securities that represent 0.0001% of trading volume? If you let customers trade these, the odds of a FINRA arbitration claim would seem much higher than on quoted issues. The related question is if we assume a trade is consummated on the “Expert poo/exchange”, will it get reported on a TRF or ADF and published for the world to see in real time? It is theoretically possible that all of the brokerages could report high/low/last prices/volume while NOT showing a bid/ask.

                      Really bad risk/reward for the brokerage to allow these trades IMO.

                      Wouldn’t it ironic if the only brokerage that allows trading these is RobinHood?

                      Lots of known unknowns surrounding these issues.

                    2. The expert market is changing coming up with the new reg changes…
                      The SEC’s amendments to Rule 15c2-11 will effectively eliminate public quoting in securities of issuers that do not make current information publicly available. This means that without an alternative approach, such securities on the Pink Market will fall to the Grey Market. The Grey Market is an opaque market where broker-dealers are not willing or able to publicly quote OTC securities given the lack of investor interest, company information or regulatory compliance. OTC Markets Group has submitted a proposal to the SEC to operate an Expert Market as an alternative to the Grey Market.
                      What is the Expert Market?
                      OTC Markets Group currently operates an Expert Market within OTC Link for a small number of companies. However, the proposed Expert Market would operate differently. Following the upcoming changes to Rule 15c2-11, the Expert Market tier will include the broader group of companies that will no longer be eligible for public quoting under the rule and will serve the pricing and best execution needs of qualified investors. Broker-dealers will be able to quote and trade Expert Market securities on OTC Link, however quotes in Expert Market securities will only be available to certain sophisticated investors, known as “Qualified Experts.”
                      Texas joked in a separate post about Robinhood allowing trading. It is possible some may just go on and allow in effect grey market trading. I have one brokerage that allows it and hasnt mentioned a peep about new regs, so maybe I can find some bargains there when the dust settles. The problem ultimately lies more with brokerages than the actual regs themselves.

                    1. I have the same question. None of the Ameren, Connecticut Light & Power, Alabama Power, Wisconsin Electric, or Pacificorp so-called “illiquids” appear in the 15c2-11 preliminary lists. The draft rule states that the list is incomplete. All of these company’s parents identify the outstanding legacy preferreds in various filings (but I doubt a separate $5,000 is paid for each preferred–it seems to me no public company is likely to pay $5,000 for EACH preferred or other tradable security annually and submit separate and distinct financials–there are no such financials for preferreds!). Is the parents filing suitable to permit these issues to continue to trade? These are fairly large public utilities so one would think that their securities would be unaffected by the rule. But the same statement can be made about LYB–it is a very large company with almost daily filings. I’m skeptical that any of these will move to the grey market. Brokerages should continue to permit buys or sells with each–but this is pure speculation. Does anyone have authoritative information?

                    2. Lou and Oldman.. Who knows..
                      Here is the OTC “gold standard” type of ute preferreds.
                      https://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/CNIGO/security
                      Notice its OTCQX. You will see the financials and all pertinent info including security details. An old illiquid WELPM follows procedures, too.
                      https://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/WELPM/security
                      OTC wants them this way, (major fees) unfortunately most are not since they were just delisted to avoid fees. Its like an “official NYSE” listing to dirtbag OTC.
                      Now lets look at say AILIM
                      https://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/AILIM/profile
                      Under financials nothing shows as available. Yet under company profile it shows link to latest 3-31-21 posted financials. Do I think Ameren is paying them $5k annually? I bet they aint paying squat. Will that screw us? If JD is correct ultimately it could.
                      Now here is one you will 100% get screwed on.
                      https://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/MSSEL/profile
                      Notice the stop sign… This is a high quality BBB rated preferred. But NGG isnt accommodating OTC over this and possibly the financials arent even broken out (I dont know). They will give OTC the middle finger before they give them a buck.

                    3. When I think it through, it would be absurd to apply the rule to any public company preferred for which the parent has current 8k and 10q filings. Do JPM or Wells or any comparable public companies break out financials for their preferreds? Of course not, because there is nothing to break out. The preferreds are like bonds or new issues of common stock or the assumption of debt–they are capital raising mechanisms that appear as liabilities (obligations) of the larger companies. There is no separate P & L or balance sheet that can or should be created for a preferred stock. The new rule should apply to sham companies or companies whose parents fail to file financials that enable retail investors to perform due diligence before making an investment. Preferred stocks are not companies. I fear there is no way to conclusively determine what the SEC or individual brokerages will do in the application of the rule. But there is overt absurdity to the notion that the rule will apply to the preferred issues of well-capitalized public companies who routinely make financial filings when so required. For this reason, I’m hoping that the illiquid preferreds of Ameren, CL & P, NStar, Pacificorp, et. al, would be exempt from the rule. Wishful thinking? I’ve asked for an opinion from the Fidelity compliance department. I fear that despite my logic, that they will be far more conservative than is necessary. We’ll see.

              1. Specifically regarding the Lyondell issue. Is it considered no information?
                They have dated financials from 2017, and it isn’t like Lyondell don’t file any information, the parent files with the SEC.
                But that put option will either keep a floor under the price, or allow a quick buck to be made for any institution that can buy them for under that price.

              2. Grid, where did you find the $850 tender amount for SLMNP?
                The 2020 LYB annual report lists the following:
                Redeemable Non-controlling Interests
                Our redeemable non-controlling interests relate to shares of cumulative perpetual special stock (“redeemable non-controlling interest stock”) issued by our consolidated subsidiary, formerly known as A. Schulman, Inc. (“A. Schulman”). Holders of redeemable non-controlling interest stock are entitled to receive cumulative dividends at the rate of 6% per share on the liquidation preference of $1,000 per share. Redeemable non-controlling interest stock may be redeemed at any time at the discretion of the holders and is reported in the Consolidated Balance Sheets outside of permanent equity.
                The Balance Sheet also lists 115,374 shares outstanding at a value of $116 million which is $1,000 per share.
                I appreciate all of your great input to this site.

                1. Hi Steve, I will give you some back history as others have helped to sort it out. Originally when I bought several years ago, I was under the impression the above you posted meant I could redeem anytime at $1000. As about 7% of shareholders redeemed at $1000ish when merger consummated. So I assumed that was just the standing offer.
                  However that was incorrect, there was a small open window of time for people to exercise and most chose not to. So the standing redeemable offer is the original convertible terms of the convertible when first issued by A Schulman. Off top of my head it is 19.111 shares X the share buyout price of $42. So that nets about $803…
                  But there also was a CVR involved which SLMNP also shares in the bounty…
                  LyondellBasell will purchase 100 percent of A. Schulman common stock for $42 per share in cash and one contingent value right per share and assume outstanding debt and certain other obligations. In addition, the contingent value rights generally will provide a holder with an opportunity to receive certain net proceeds, if any are recovered, from certain ongoing litigation and government investigations relating to A. Schulman’s Citadel and Lucent acquisitions.
                  Mr. Conservative has posted a few times the exact CVR amount that his brokerage provided him, but I cannot find it here on search forum. Anyways the $803 plus the $40 some bucks of the CVR (as litigation has been settled apparently) made the redemption value a shade under $850. Several people have contacted IR and they have been helpful in confirming above. But try finding it in their SEC filings. I never have.

        2. I posed to a question to my brokerage (TDA) about SLMNP. They responded [my edits in brackets]:

          “This is a great question! As of right now, since it is not on the list, then the most up to date information that we have is the it will not be affected. With that being said, the list [of issues being dropped] is continuously updating so it is hard to say what could happen in the future and since it sounds like it does meet the requirements, it is possible that it could be added [to the delisted securities list] at any time.”

          I don’t claim to understand this very well at all, but it seems to me the issuer has zero incentive to get it listed, because this is a way to semi-effectively call an uncallable preferred, though yes, some will hold it to the end of time.

          1. His response might have been, “Ask me no questions and I will tell you no lies.” Truth is, he doesn’t know, the brokerage doesn’t know, OTC doesn’t know, and the SEC doesn’t know. And now you don’t know, too!

            There are many parties here with perverse incentives, starting with SEC, continuing with OTC (massive conflicts of interest) and the brokers, and continuing on to many issuers.

            I am still not feeling protected.

            1. Bob, I dont think you give them credit for the protection you are receiving. I mean they are clearly going to allow you to by any Freddie or Fannie preferreds that are trading about $3 a share and havent paid in over a decade.
              https://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/FNMAG/overview
              They are verified and OTC “gold standard” OTCQB issue.
              Now buy MSSEL which has a BBB credit rating and has paid unmolested since the 1940s? No way, that aint safe!
              https://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/MSSEL/quote

  13. PSECV not trading. I bought this in my Schwab account and it still shows up as PSECV, but I can’t sell it, etc. Anyone know what is going on with it?
    Thanks.

    1. schwab has been slow recently in changing symbols on shares in customers’ accounts. Used to be they just changed overnight. Now some symbols get stuck in “limbo” for a day or two with a number instead of a symbol.

      Personally, I think Schwab IT dept is cracking under the pressure of having so many different systems, plus the TDA acquisition – but I have no direct knowledge.

      1. tdA sent me two surveys thsi year adn both times I said the same thing. Keep everything as it is, don’t make me use schwabs system or their reps.

      2. Private-
        Yeah- right now Schwab has two symbols working for ECCC for trade and look-up. They use ECCPP in the portfolio list.

        1. I guess on the bright side some existing preferred will go up in value 😐
          4.25 qdi. Sigh. It makes that last JPM pref look really good. Their timing is great. For them.

          1. Given where WFC-C is trading, there is really no upside on this one. Better off sticking with the L shares.

              1. Thanks. I paid too much on the new Stifel about 2 hours after market opens.
                I placed a small order on WFPDV to test at $24.88. With the low coupon, it all seems to depend Demand vs. Supply.

  14. AATRL (PAR $50) just tanked. It had been ranging from $58-62, give or take. Now it’s under $52. The parent is down 3% today, but considering the market today (down ~2%), that’s not unreasonable. It’s been callable for 9 years — did someone announce a call?

        1. No, AMG can call AATRL when AMG gets to $260, actually a bit less since conversion ratio was slightly modified

          1. “if the price of the common stock exceeds 130% of the conversion price for 20 of any 30 consecutive trading days, the company may, at their option, cause the preferred shares to be converted into common shares at the then prevailing conversion price.”

            Potato, potahto – they go away as stock –from the wording.- no cash.

              1. First page.
                It is AMG’s option to pay stock or cash on an early conversion by the investor.

                “At any time prior to the maturity date of the junior subordinated convertible debentures, AMG has the option to unilaterally and irrevocably elect to settle its obligation to deliver shares of AMG common stock with respect to trust preferred securities converted following such election in cash, and, if applicable, shares of common stock.”

                the part you quoted goes to IF they can redeem it. (prior paragraph)

                1. My read is the paragraph you quoted relates to the conversion at the holders option, not at AMG’s option but its plausible that it could be cash or stock. Not a well written prospectus imo.

                  1. As I read it, what all this means in substance is that if AMG gets to $260 or so, AMG can call AATRL, so if you hold AATRL, then you have a choice, sort of. You can convert, and get $260 in AMG stock, or you can do nothing and get $50 in cash, which is not really a choice. I think that’s what they mean by “cause to be converted.” If you snooze, you lose, on steroids. For the time being, this seems a moot point.

                    1. And yet on June 30, with 6 days left to the you’re screwed date, SPE-B had over 500k shares still outstanding… I don’t think SPE has announced how many actually got called, but a nice little gift to SPE shareholders for each share called not converted……

                    2. Not 50.00, the adjusted issue price, this is debt not equity like SPE-B.

                    3. Never mind. it is $50.00, or a mix of shares and cash, at AMG’s option.

                      cash in an amount equal to the lesser of (1) $50.00 and (2) the conversion value, as defined below (the “required cash amount”), and
                      if the conversion value is greater than $50.00, a number of shares of AMG common stock, (the “remaining shares”) equal to the sum of the daily share amounts (as defined below) for each of the ten consecutive trading days in the conversion reference period (as defined below), subject to AMG’s right to deliver cash in lieu of all or a portion of such remaining shares as described below.

              2. mcg-
                I pulled the quote from quantumonline- possibly in error since I cannot find any wording exactly like it in the prospectus. There is something similar in various places, but it usually referring to the ability of the holder to convert to common.
                Definitely a bit of a mess.

    1. Common price was about $95 from the $200 x 1.3 conversion price. More concerned about the ability to suspend for up to 20 qtrs.
      Although, someone might be using insider info if they use the funds from the recent 4.2% issuance:
      The net proceeds of this offering are estimated to be $194.9 million after deducting the underwriting discount and estimated offering expenses payable by us.
      We intend to use the net proceeds of this offering for general corporate purposes, which may include the repayment of indebtedness, share repurchases and investments in new and existing investment management firms.”
      The bottom fell out right after I bought @ 58.47, but sold a few min later at 61.89 Need to let this thing calm down & see what’s going on.

      1. Suspension of payments is extremely rare.
        Less than 30 did it, and only 3-4 of those securities have ever done it and not gone bankrupt.
        It puts them more in line with cumulative preferred shares.
        Look at PCG. If I didn’t know any better, I think they are just going to keep the preferreds hanging out there accumlating dividends until after fire season is over to see if they are going to be filing bankruptcy again and if they end up filing again, wiping out the preferreds instead of allowing them to pass through the bankruptcy unscathed, like they did before.

        1. I think the PCG preferreds are too hot to handle now myself. But from what I have read they are still under a separate federal judge mandate concerning tree trimming (or lack of progress thereof) that does not allow any type of dividend payments until either they have met the mandates or his jurisdiction time period ends.

          1. We are here in California for the summer and PG &E are stating their equipment may have sparked the 30,000 acre fire.

            1. Reportedly PG&E’s filing with the PUC over the weekend about the cause of the Dixie fire (currently over 60,000 acres, which is almost a hundred square miles) says that a PG&E “repair man responding to a circuit outage on July 13 spotted blown fuses in a conductor atop a pole, a tree leaning into the conductor and fire at the base of the tree.”

              Bunch of monkeys….

            2. May I ask where in CA you are? Wife and I thinking of Sep or Oct in Mendocino or Carmel.

              1. Bob, I spent 20 years in Northern California and Carmel was a favorite weekend get away. It has great restaurants, and an upscale small town vibe. Lots of interesting stuff to see and do in the surrounding area as well. Monterey, Pacific Grove, Pebble Beach, and Big Sur are all in the vicinity.

                Mendocino has its charms, but Carmel is a “can’t miss” California destination.

              2. Bob, I second CW’s recommendation of Carmel. Great place pretty much year round. The aquarium is worthwhile, funded by Packard of Hewlett Packard. Big Sur is worth a short drive down highway 1. Hearta Castle is a worthwhile longer drive IF it is open. And you should buy tour tickets in advance.

                And you have to do the 17 mile drive if you have not done it before.

                On a longshot if you are taking grand kids, check out the Dennis the Menace Playground.

                1. Citadel & Tex – thanks both for the replies. We have a bit of history with both towns but the input is much appreciated. My wife is pushing for a return to Mendocino, which we last visited 3 years ago. I’m pushing for Carmel.

                  We are trying to lure the grand kids (and their parents) to visit and Carmel is clearly better in that regard. Getting to Mendocino is a bit of a trial but the drive through the Anderson Valley is great. Love Navarro, and Goldeneye, and Roederer, and Scharffenberger ……

                  1. Bob, I am guessing that none of the wineries are open for tours, but if they are there is a unique one in Napa Valley: Schramsberg. Obviously it is a little south of where you had planned on being, but it is a unique place out of the many in Napa/Sonoma. They have caves supposedly hand dug by Chinese “railroad workers.” That is where they store/age their “sparkling wines” aka champagne.

                    Lots of places with great wines, but this has a unique setting.

                    OTOH, if you head to Carmel, take Grid with you and play a round a Pebble Beach.

                    1. Tex – CA changes the rules so often that you can’t be sure of what you will get when you get there. I’m hoping that by fall Newsom will have paid his bill at the French Laundry and things will be open.

                      Actually my last Navarro newsletter said they were reopening the tasting room, outdoors and for a fee, but they will be back in business. The last cheap date in the valley will be gone.

                      I am “retired” from golf but for grid I will make a comeback. My knees and back are shot from years of recklessness on the ski slopes so I’m going to need strokes. I’m thinking three (per hole). Plus the drinks are on him.

    2. La compagnia Usa AmTrust è pronta a cedere le attività europee, Italia compresa. Un business che vale complessivamente più di 1 miliardo di euro e per individuare pretendenti il gruppo guidato da Barry Zyskind avrebbe dato mandato ai consulenti di Jp Morgan. Se negli altri Paesi europei, come Spagna e Olanda, i business assicurativi di Am Trust sono variegati, dalle assicurazioni speciali all’Rc Auto, per l’Italia in ballo ci sono in particolare le polizze di responsabilità civile medica.
      MilanoFinanza/Italy

      1. Fabrib-
        For those wondering (per Google):
        The US company AmTrust is ready to sell its European assets, including Italy. A business that is worth a total of more than 1 billion euros and to identify suitors the group led by Barry Zyskind would have given a mandate to the consultants of Jp Morgan. If in other European countries, such as Spain and the Netherlands, Am Trust’s insurance businesses are varied, from special insurance to RC Auto, for Italy at stake there are in particular medical liability policies.
        MilanoFinanza / Italy

      1. Guess I briefly played market maker in AATRL today as my GTC orders on E*Trade both filled. Bought 100 shares at $53.77 at 12:28:05 p.m., sold them for $61.90 at 12:56:32. My most productive lunch hour ever and I didn’t even know it at the time. Crazy volatility.

          1. I sold my last AATRL, great gift from Tim McPartland. THANKS, Tim.
            It is VERY THINLY traded. It took me a very long time. Even though I placed my ask price below what it shows on FIDEDLITY Active Pro screen, or Schwab. Nothing got done. Then one day, it got filled, almost $1.5 more than my ask. So, please don’t give up. I got an supplemental notice from one of my few mutual Funds, PRBLX Parnassus Core Equity as follows:
            On July 6, 2021, Parnassus Investments (“Parnassus Investments”), the investment adviser to the series of Parnassus
            Funds trust and Parnassus Income Funds trust (each series a “Fund” and, collectively, the “Funds”), announced that it
            had entered into a definitive agreement to sell a majority equity interest in Parnassus Investments to Affiliated
            Managers Group, Inc. (“AMG”). AMG is a leading partner to independent active investment management firms
            globally with approximately $738 billion in assets under management as of March 31, 2021′
            BTW, I called Fidelity and learned that AATRL is basically not callable, probably sunken Preferred like WFC-L or BAC-L

  15. AAIN filled at TD 24.75.
    Report from Worland WY: There are NO oil pumpers cranking and most of the servicing sites for contractors are looking closed. Don’t think investors or banks are wanting to sponsor the game against big oil, the Russ and Sauds.
    Lots of cattle out on range in every state and corn looks Very good everywhere.
    A little color from eyeballs on the road. Nice to be able to con tact the world from just about anywhere now.

      1. Yes, it is a safe company. I looked at the books and it is not going bankrupt in the next month.

        1. American Security is another safe company – “We all have things we want to protect. American Security has the security safes and security solutions to keep your most precious possessions out of harm’s way.” ha

  16. Question—if the intention is to call WTREP, why bother to delist it? Why not just call it? Is there some logistical/legal reason to delist it first?

    1. Randy, the company is now in effect private. They would have to pay SEC filing and administrative costs for a preferred that isnt even the actual parent company. They may also not want to report their financials publicly anymore also or at least segment out the Watford financials. This is very common and typical practice. This cost can be eliminated quickly. This is why all those old utility preferreds are delisted. The common stock was bought out and owned by holding company now. Even though they still have a public hold co, they dont have to pay costs for the old preferreds now.
      They did mention they needed to arrange the financing after consummation to get proceeds to redeem issue. That would seem to be next on the things to do
      list. But I will certainly be pleased if there is a delay or change of plans. It has happened before.

    2. I believe the answer is that the issue no longer met the criteria for an exchange listing given that the parent had privatized. They had no choice, or so I believe Watford would say.

      Unclear what will happen next. It could pop up on OTC, or not, or it could be redeemed, or not. If it pops up on OTC it may be pink no information and may be difficult or impossible to trade.

      I still look for a call sooner rather than later. If it turns into an 8% annuity I would be happy. It would certainly keep the wine cellar stocked.

      1. Bob, that is the surprising thing about tiny TECTP. They are paying for SEC filings for a private financial bank just for a ~ $15 million preferred. Im sure they meet the sub 300 owner threshold (or whatever it is now) since each brokerage only counts as one owner no matter how many people own it through that brokerage.
        Bob, refresh my memory as I dont want to dig back into old WTRE filings. Is this an 8% or 7% minimum floor since its now gone adjustable?

        1. Hi Grid and Bob,

          https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1601669/000162828019000643/c88072_ex4-1.htm
          Below is the relevant part in Exhibit # 4.1 (Certificate of Designation for WTREP) in the Form 8-K, filed 7/2/2019. It’s on page 4. The last sentence refers to the floor of 1% (when the 3-mo LIBOR is <1%) to be used when calculating the spread.

          Section 4. Dividends
          (a) Rate Holders of Preference Shares will be entitled to receive, only when, as and if declared by the Board of Directors, out of funds legally available for the payment of dividends under Bermuda law, cumulative cash dividends payable quarterly on the last day of March, June, September and December, commencing June 30, 2014 (each, a “Dividend Payment Date”). Dividends will accrue (i) from (and including) the Closing Date to (but excluding) June 30, 2019 (the “Fixed Rate Period”) at 8½% (the “Fixed Rate”) of the $25 per share liquidation preference per annum (equivalent to $2.125 per share per annum); and (ii) from (and including) June 30, 2019 (the “Floating Rate Period”), at a floating rate per annum (the “Floating Rate”) equal to 3 month U.S. dollar LIBOR plus a margin determined on the Closing Date and calculated as the difference between (x) the Fixed Rate and (y) the 5 year “mid” swap rate to the Floating Rate as set out on the IRSB18 at noon Eastern Standard Time on the date of calculation (the “Margin”); provided, that, if, at any time, the 3 month U.S. dollar LIBOR shall be less than 1%, then the 3 month U.S. dollar LIBOR for the purposes of calculating the Floating Rate at the time of such calculation shall be 1%.

          1. Thanks MBG.. But you also made me realize my memory sucks. I remembered it was a minimum floor, but forgot totally I have no clue what it is (and still dont, lol). I have no clue what the “x” and “y” numbers are.
            I did notice that despite low base rates, it still adjusts some. This was last divi..
            Boston, MA., Jun 07, 2021 – WATFORD HOLDINGS LTD (NASDAQ: WTREP) today declared a preferred stock dividend of $0.4786 per share payable on June 30, 2021 to shareholders of record as of June 15, 2021. Dividend amount recorded is an increase of $0.0053 from last dividend Paid.
            So I guess its floor is somewhere around 7.65% ?

            1. Bob, did you notice in above post that the divi actually increased a small amount? That would make no sense, using your formula since Libor has been trapped well below 1% for a long time. So there has to be something else going on as referenced in MGB’s post doesnt it appear?
              It probably doesnt matter much, I just never paid enough attention in the past to notice the divi wobbles around some even though Libor floor is in effect.

              1. Grid – The difference is related to the number of days in the quarter. They don’t just divide in 4 like everyone else.

                1. Shame on them, they shouldnt call it a divi increase should they, lol. Doesnt matter but pennies anyhow, but I was curious for some rare reason.

                  1. WTREP has a number of quirks, one being that the record date can be anywhere from 10-60 days before the pay date of 9-30. I don’t know if the new Watford will announce the pref divi. It may just show up without any announcement. Or it may be called Monday morning.

                    For almost 8% I will live with some lack of clarity.

                  2. I don’t think I posted this before but I did ask a few question of IR on July 2 and was surprised to get a timely response or a response at all as I knew I was asking a question I didn’t deserve to get an answer to. I choose to believe that just their saying that they cannot say or disclose anything implies that there does exist something to disclose. It implies to me that the issue will not be outstanding for very long…. Here’s my email and their response:

                    “I see where you intend to delist this issue.  I also see where  effective July 1, 2021 Arch will no longer consolidate the results of Watford in its consolidated financial statements….  I am currently an owner of WTREP and had no plans to sell it, however, will there be forthcoming some clarification of the financials for the company that will now be backing WTREP?   It’s unclear to me what exactly will be the company now backing this issue.

                    Would appreciate your help – also is there any thought that this will be called in the near future?”

                    From Watford: “We’re prohibited by SEC rules from discussing or disclosing anything that isn’t in the public domain, so cannot provide any color as to future plans beyond the delisting and deregistration described in the press release that it sounds as though you’ve seen:

                    https://investors.watfordre.com/news-releases/news-release-details/watford-intends-de-list-and-de-register-its-cumulative

                    I hope that’s been somewhat helpful.”

                    1. No surprises. During the whole merger time frame, which was 6 months or so, all parties were 100% tight lipped except for press releases and SEC filings.

                      But worth a try!

  17. Re WTREP, the listing has disappeared from my account. When it was delisted the broker still showed it, just at a zero value. Now that they are not showing it in any form, does that mean I won’t be receiving dividends going forward?

    1. no, it doesn’t mean that. you still own it and are entitled to all dividends that are declared.

    2. Bur, MCG knows and can explain the morass better than me, but delisting has absolutely nothing to do with payment or contractual terms of the issue. There are all sorts of private issued common stocks that never are or can be traded. They receive dividend payments too if that specific company distributes dividends.
      I imagine in time some place holder lettering or numbers will be inserted in place of it in time, until a new OTC ticker is assigned. I have had that happen to delisted shares in the past until it makes it through out the other side of “suspended animation”. I have zero concerns of this process. The real worry on eventual tradability (not payment) is how this issue falls within the new upcoming SEC guidelines.

    3. Curious – what broker do you have? at schwab, it just changed the symbol to a string of numbers (not sure what it is – its not the cusip). I have several things that are that way and have been paying dividends for years.

      I can’t imagine they would stop paying. Their obligation to pay is separate from any listing. The impact on their credit rating/deal closure/etc. of not paying would be far greater than the few dollars they would save.

    4. a) Thanks for the reassurance, b) the broker is E*TRADE, and c) mea culpa: it is indeed still listed, under the CUSIP (G94787119).

      1. Bur – if you’re nervous about your WTREP I am here to help. Just like Rida. How many shares are you looking to unburden yourself of?

      2. Bur, the irony of it all is WTREP is just going full circle. It was not an IPO issued preferred. Its genesis was a private placed insider purchase. A ticker was established several years later. I wouldnt be surprised at all if its trading days are over and its redeemed by next divi.

        1. The divvy is too high each day it’s not called is a bonus for buy&hold investors. As a trader I was hoping to get more time to sell like other recently de-listed stocks. I don’t know the nuances well enough to tell the difference.

          1. In this instance the market knew a redemption is to be completed sometime after merger as that was stated in earlier SEC filings. The pricing mirrored the just redeemed SESCF, as ATCO stated this issue would be redeemed, thus it hugged par at delistment just like WTREP.. Unlike say GMLPF which was just getting a naked delistment as the issue isnt callable nor does it look possible financially near term. Thus you got the sell off after delistment notice.
            Of course nothing is guaranteed. As SESCF didnt get redeemed for over a year because covid hit. So I guess its never over until the fat lady sings and actually redeems it.

    5. Bur,

      You can rely on the input from mcg. He has shown consistently on this chat board that he understands the details of all aspects of preferreds (issuance, dividends, redemption, etc.)

      Bill

  18. OPP-A has the potential free upside option of being redeemed at par if OPP is converted to an open end mutual fund. I had mentioned a few months back that I wasn’t sure that would happen since the discount on OPP was low and it has an artificially high distribution rate that would go away in an open end fund.

    The board came out against the conversion in the proxy statement this week, so I’d say the odds of conversion are pretty minimal:
    “The board of directors of OPP unanimously recommends that you vote Against proposal 2, to convert the Fund from a closed-end investment company to an open-end investment company.”

    https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/0001678130/000139834421014322/fp0066919_def14a.htm

    The good news is if you bought OPP-A at a lower price hoping to get out at par, you can come close by just selling it in the market right now and it might look even better after the next dividend payment if the price doesn’t drop too much ex-div.

      1. Just higher rates. It has a low coupon, so more sensitive to rate moves than other issues.

  19. BPY, BPYU, BPYUP – Tomorrow is the shareholder’s vote for acquisition by BAM…… There are a lot of moving parts which I don’t pretend to fully understand, but I doubt the vote results is in question and this acquisition is probably a done deal….. One questionmark will be how quickly BPYUP will be called. BPYUP will be called upon closing as per Plan of Arrangement – dated June 8 proxy for meeting to be July 16, but I’m not certain if that means it can be called immediately or upon the standard 30 days notice… Immediate call would most likely mean July 20.

    Also as a consequence of this, I believe shareholders of BPY will receive a new 6 1/4% $25 preferred with a 60 year term as partial payment. This might represent an opportunity as there’s certain to be some shareholders uninterested in holding preferreds… Does anyone have any more info on this new 6 1/4% such as where, if anywhere, it will be listed? Press release is here – https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/0001545772/000110465921082834/tm2112801d16_ex99-a7.htm…..

    1. I picked up some LTSH today. Thankful for the unexplainable price drop (10% in 2 weeks!). This was at $24 a few weeks ago.

      1. If the situation doesn’t change, these won’t be tradeable to the average joe in a month or two. I think that goes a long way to explain the weakness

        1. The Advisory merger closed Feb. 2020, with Ladenburg announcing intention to delist the prefs shortly after. Why are these still listed? How does one know when dividends are declared? No updates to their website since 2020.

          1. They are listed on the OTC exchange. They were delisted from the NYSE back in 2020 after the merger. I get regular interest on these every Jan 1, Apr 1, Jul 1 and Oct 1 like clockwork. They don’t have to make public announcements on these baby bonds since they are a private company.

            1. Chris (& others): you need to look through other posts here about new SEC rules going into effect in September. This isn’t about the NYSE delisting. It’s about not being able to trade OTC, buying or selling.

              It may be that you will hold these issues until maturity with no opportunity for liquidity before then. Still not clear to me but that’s the worse case.

              1. I have no problem holding these until maturity. Where else can I get a 12% YTM with similar risk?

                Like many here, I am looking for an income stream I can rely on.

            2. Thanks. @mcg – can you clarify about LTSH not being tradeable in a few months since the listing is already on the OTC?

                  1. Those are Ishares Ireland that trade in Euros in the Irish market…Most have a US equivalent.

      2. LTSH cannot be purchased at some brokers such as Vanguard, Fidelity, WellsFargo. That could be a reason for the drop in price.

        1. Does de-listing typically mean higher risk poorer quality than it was a week ago? If it’s merely an inconvenience then this is a bargain.

          1. No but supply and demand economics tell you there will be less demand available to the same supply for trading, but no difference if you hold to duration. OTC markets has some information out but I’m wondering is the accredited investor something you just affirm to or is there like a license issued to you after someone checks? There’s clear discussion if it’s the issuer that you’re purchasing it from but not so clear otherwise.

          1. Maybe LST bonds at InteractiveBrokers. I don’t have an account with them so I don’t know for sure.

            1. First time in years Im actually pleased I still have Ally as one of my brokerages. I wouldnt put it past these inept fools to “not get the memo”, and still let you buy and sell these. Of course that would require me to call them and let me trade what I own because they say I dont own many of my issues, when I have tried to sell them. But they still pay me my dividends anyways.

              1. If anyone still has an old tradeking (ally) account it seems to be all powerful when it comes to new preferred on OTC, oddballs on OTC, and etc.. both could still be bought today. LTSA and LTSH. Out of every broker I have ever used this one seems to be the most on top of things which really confuses me why ally seems to be so poor.

                I doubt this will help anyone but just an fyi if you have one sitting around from the past.

    2. It sounds like I would be better off with interactive brokers vs Schwab regarding pink no info upcoming restrictions. Any insight, anyone?

      1. I don’t think you’ll be able to trade on either unless you meet the qualifications for the expert market (and your broker supports it)

        1. There’s the notion that some brokers will be able to facilitate trading in certain “no info” issues better than others, so I could only hope IBK would have a better platform in place.

          1. Don’t hold out any hope for IB. They already do not support trading in any of the gray market or expert market current stocks, so even if the currently otc ones this new SEC law will be hating on end up trading in the expert market instead of gray (still TBD on the SEC agreeing with OTCM to allow this), I fully expect them to be untradeable at IB.

            Between FINRA and the SEC compliance efforts, otc stocks have become a toxic nightmare for brokers, who get sued for millions related to failing to see some after the fact problem, and I’m sure they just wish people would stop trading them altogether. Come Sept, that will be almost true of another nearly 3000 otc stocks. Mission accomplished.

            Haven’t you heard? Buy and Hold is the best investment strategy, and if you don’t believe us, we’re going to force it on the shareholders of those companies by wrecking the trading market and pressuring brokers not to allow trading in them even after kicking them off to Expert/Gray.

            If the regulators understood how the market really worked, they wouldn’t be punching a clock for the feds. Instead, they’ll destroy untold millions in shareholder value in order to put out a feel good “consumer protection” press release. Meanwhile, feel free to gamble your retirement account on GameStop calls, just don’t do it with one of those sound, hundred year old value stocks like Boston Sand and Gravel who aren’t paying the OTC Markets shakedown fee for publishing their financials.

    1. They issued SAk , a 7.25% yielder last summer during the midst of covid which had me scratching my head at the time.

      1. In the retail market Saratoga issues baby bonds with ridiculously short times to first call. The advertised rate is a teaser as they will likely call the issue within 2-3 years of issue.

        They can’t and don’t do that in the institutional market. The rate on the reissue is a lot lower, 4.375%, but it’s not callable for 5 years.

        1. Bob,
          Any way you can update any current list of institutionals that are “of interest” to you .Your recent guidance on both Edison and Energy Transfer issues proved to be invaluable and I’m looking to do a deep dive into any similar issues, particularly from Financial Co’s.
          There really doesn’t seem to be a central place for collating/researching these at moment, And BTW Vanguard STILL hasn’t figured out how to handle these when it comes to front facing on line accts..
          Much Appreciated,
          Adrian

          1. Adrian – I will go through my list and see if anything jumps out. Some of the scare has gone out of prisons and pipelines so I suspect not. I don’t think you’re interested in Saratoga at 4.375%. I’m not.

            Same experience with Vanguard. My account is overstated by several million $.

          2. Adrian – I have a list but it doesn’t update automatically and I only do it manually for the issues I own or are of interest. It’s not a long list right now. Most of the issues I own are much closer to being sale candidates than buy candidates. I have sell orders in on some of them.

            The one issue I sort of like at present price is 29273VAN0 Energy Transfer. 5.86% YTC and 5+ years to first call. Resets off 5yT and would reset flat if resetting today.

            Even there, I would probably buy ENB, EPD or MMP over any ET issue. I did add to EPD and MMP when the market took a dive last week.

            The new institutional issues coming to market are all very low rate and I haven’t looked at them beyond a quick glance at the FWP.

            PS – I get prices from FINRA Morningstar site. If anyone knows how to make these prices load automatically into a spreadsheet we can do some trading.

  20. TD has been sending messages about the new SEC rule and tradeability of stocks of companies that don’t provide financials but in the list of stocks affected it includes Canadian companies that are fully compliant with SEDAR reporting and companies that send me quarterly/ annual financial statements.
    Not sure if they are wrong in how they generate their affected stock list( and they say that it is preliminary) but it could affect a bunch of companies that you would not expect.

    1. There are many errors on the OTC list, meaning companies listed as “no current info” when they are in fact SEC reporting. Problem is the brokerages are going to use that list, correct or not.

      Relatedly, it makes zero sense to require big Canadian companies to file with the SEC in order for their stock to be traded OTC. It’s not like Canada is a third world country (forget the dead Indian children and the church burnings and the drama teacher turned prime minister for a minute). SEDAR filings should be sufficient.

      Same for companies in many other countries.

      1. Using TDA, I have attempted to buy ENDTF, Canoe EIT Income fund, a LARGE Canadian closed end fund, larger than many USA based funds, but they won’t allow the trade. I have made my suggestion to them, but to no avail. ( It is not a split share fund ) .Thanks, howard

  21. To infinity and beyond!
    GOODO just traded @ 28.34!!!

    Sold out all all accounts too early.

    Recommend selling all if you still own any.

    1. It traded as high as 28.99.
      Problem is, you can’t sell at those prices- the bid is still 26.78 and unless the mad buyer comes back, doubt it’ll trade up there

      1. MCG, I agree not everybody could sell at 28.34 or 28.99 today, but it is probably a good idea to have a standing sell order in that range if you own GOODO. It appears to have been a classic liquidity melt up where they blew through the book. .

    1. How about those buying in early June….I never understood why someone would pay a 10% premium on a callable security.

  22. FRBSV otc ticker.

    First Republic Bank San Fransciso, Dep shs 1/40th Perpetual Preferred Stock Series M

    1. Thanks aview–wish they would do there filings with the SEC instead of FDIC–but you caught it.

  23. Confusion on RILYG –

    Normally today would be ex-div date for RILYG’s 7/31 interest payment but it’s been called for 7/26. I don’t think there is an actual ex-div date because of the call, however, right now Mr. Market does… market showing at 25.02-25.11 down 32 cents but call on 7/26 will be for about 25.42. I don’t know which is right, but how can there be an ex-div for the full 7/31 coupon amount when it will be called 5 days earlier? Either it’s worth under $25 or it’s worth where it was trading yesterday it seems

      1. Fidelity uses a vendor, but the call and the interest payment are separate entries.
        here is the language from the prospectus:
        “such 7.25% 2027 Notes will not begin to accrue interest until the interest payment date immediately following such record date, and the interest payable on each interest payment date will be paid only to holders of record”

        Here is the prospectus:
        https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1464790/000121390020030828/ea128026-424b5_brileyfin.htm#prossupplement_007

        1. Justin – But how does that language jibe with the call notice where the call happens 4 days BEFORE the usual coupon date but 12 days AFTER the ex date??? It says,

          “LOS ANGELES, June 24, 2021 /PRNewswire/ — B. Riley Financial, Inc. (NASDAQ: RILY) (“B. Riley” or the “Company”) today announced it will redeem all of the issued and outstanding 7.25% Senior Notes due 2027 (the “Notes”) on July 26, 2021 (the “Redemption Date”). The Notes have an aggregate principal amount of $122,793,450.

          The redemption price is equal to 100% of the aggregate principal amount, plus any accrued and unpaid interest up to, but excluding, the Redemption Date, as set forth in each notice of redemption delivered to noteholders (the “Redemption Payment”).”

          It looks as though an institution figured out definitively around 2:30 that there is no ex-div date for this situation and that RILYG will pay around 25.42795 on 7/26 with no ex date. 26k traded up to as much as 25.37 at that time. I think they are probably right but I wasn’t willing to open my wallet for more RILYG on the premise so just stayed the course without adding… I think some easy money was made but not certain…

          1. RILYG …. this being a note, not a preferred, the payment isn’t declared. The record date here will be 2 days before the redemption date and if you own it on the record date you get it all. That’s what I think anyway but I am no expert in market mechanics. Clearly, the market was confused.

            But thanks to those who brought this to our collective attention. I took the bet, risking 8 cents for 42 or whatever it will be. It would be nice to make money on a call for a change.

            1. No, this isn’t correct. There isn’t a record date in connection with a redemption proceeds, you’ll get par + accrued as long as you purchase it on the redemption date/last day of trading.

    1. Spoke with B. Rily IR: he said no record date/no ex-date for final (partial) dividend.

      Spoke to investor services about GECCL. Also no mention of a record or ex-date.

      1. Thanks, that seems like the right answer and worth a trade for RILYG. 7 cents downside if it’s wrong / 35 upside if correct

      1. Same here…but at $25.48. Company looks good. Decent earnings and good balance sheet. The only downside is the fact that it is in an industry fighting the clean air revolution, but coal is still needed in steel mills and will be for a long time. Definitely worth the risk in my book.

  24. New Issue: First Republic Bank (“FRC”)
    Series M Preferred Stock
    Size: $250mm
    4.250% Area

  25. FULL CALL
    The below security was affected by a Full Call.

    CUSIP: 23131LAB3
    Description: CURO GROUP HOLDINGS CORP BOND 8.25000% 09/01/2025 CALL MAKE WHOLE
    Rate: 8.250%
    Maturity Date: 2025-09-01

  26. I find an opportunistic disparity in the Arlington Asset issues. The preferred C shares are barely over $25, coupon 8.25%, first call 30 March 2024. The new Arlington baby bonds have coupon of only 6% and are replacing other baby bonds, symbol AIW, with coupon of 6.625%. It’s safe to surmise they will call the preferred C’s, and I increased holdings accordingly, C shares are VERY attractive here…….

    1. I think the problem for a lot of us is that we do not want to be over weight mreits. AAIC, during the covid crash, was a poor performer compared to others which all performed poorly. AAIC still does not pay a dividend on the common to this day I believe. Basically when it comes to mreits the bottom of the barrel is probably MITT with AAIC right next to it. Not sure I want to add that type of mreit or any others at this stage. Enough is enough for me.

    2. TOT – Don’t forget you’re comparing a perpetual preferred F/F that would see its coupon drop about 250 basis to about 5.80% were it to begin floating today to a 5 year note that’s higher in the capital stack….

      1. Thanks 2WR and fc – aware of these points, would think if AIW was redeemed for $25 million at 6.625%, then surely preferred C, which is only $30 million outstanding should be called at 8.25%….fully aware of the differences. I would almost bet that the new baby bonds will come out during IPO at about $24.60, if their coupon is only 6.00%, regardless of their seniority in structure.

        1. Other Tim, When AAIC-C becomes callable, the coupon will be 5.8% based on today’s rates. Why would they call a 5.8% preferred? You want to think this one through.

          1. I stand corrected there! Watching to see how the new baby bond comes out for Arlington…. anyone know the ticker on new issue yet?

  27. My GTC WTREP buy order cancelled today at Schwab. WTREP quotes/info scrubbed from database.

    1. Ditto here. For now, my account lists the old WTREP by cusip only: G94787119, and my sell order was cancelled by Schwab.

    1. And free money for the taking… It is trading at 25.13, and they have very nicely announced the dividend paid on the redemption of $.18 cents per share.

  28. RNR-E called for August 11. No surprise there. Looks like you’ll get about $25.27. Good-bye old friend.

    1. +1 bought last Nov hoping the party would keep going but still a 3.6% YTC so it could be worse.

  29. WTREP…..Posting this for any new people who have not taken a listed security into delisting before. WTRE just filed this today, so delisting will be imminent.
    The security may disappear for a while. Or it may reappear very quickly under a new ticker. Or… it could stay delisted until its redeemed. If that is the case it shouldnt drag out exceptionally long. The key is not to worry as this was announced and coming. One way or the other it will come out on the other side or redeemed. … As far as pricing goes post delisting, I have seen it go both ways.. I remember couple years ago holding a 6% bank preferred that delisted around $24 after sell dump, and reappeared a month later on OTC with next trade at $26 and never looked back. On opposite side, which I didnt own prior to delisting SESCF reentered many months later and at around $24 which I then sopped up. So we will see, but something is happening real soon, now.

    https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/0001601669/000160166921000071/form15july122021.htm
    https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/0001601669/000160166921000073/form25july122021.htm

    1. Grid,

      Thanks for the heads-up on WTREP.
      What are your thoughts on bonds like LMIBL, IPWLO that are no longer available to purchase at many financial institutions. I am on the fence as to sell or hold.

      Thanks,
      Leslie Joy

      1. Hi Leslie. IPWLO should not be on that list. Their holding company (IPALCO) and parent (AES, majority owner) both submit SEC filings. That is a flat out clerical error on OTC’s part. As twin sisters IPWLK and IPWLP both are correctly listed as Pink Current. Some hell raising should be in order or perhaps email to OTC to straighten that out. If you can get out of it without losing money I understand, but a 4.6% or so ute and well under par and a good company are not a bad hold for a ute.
        Mason is an odd one and I havent followed since it got bought out. Templeton is a solid outfit. And your yield and credit rating are strong there. Is it possible if you can contact Templeton and see if they are going to help support the issue by providing financials to OTC? You still have some time to get this sorted out to your comfort level if they are willing to give you info. Let me know if you get anywhere. I would hate to be put in position to get screwed down the road, but they seem worth fighting for if they will help you.

        1. Thanks for your rapid response!
          I will contact the above mentioned companies and will report back if I receive any pertinent information.

          Thank,
          Leslie Joy

          1. Ha, you beat me, I was just going to tell you, I emailed OTCmarkets myself. If I get a response back from OTC I likewise will share info. Maybe strength in numbers will help!

            1. Good for you. I sent OTC a list a couple years back about various misclassifications but it got no action, even after a few phone calls. I think a better route may be going to the IR departments of companies on the soon to be banned list and ask them to deal with OTC.

              Of do what I did, get an account at IBKR and buy the issues directly.

              Why is it that the SEC will allow one of the biggest pump and dump operations of all time to operate right under their nose while at the same time shutting down trading in some of the biggest companies in the world because they are not U.S.-based?

              Same comment on 144A issues.

        2. I went through the list today. There are many issues that should not be on the list, even by SEC’s criteria. Two of the 7 or so Enbridge preferred with OTC tickers are on the list. You cancel the XL pipeline and now you jolly stomp on a bunch of preferred from up north. You aren’t making friends, Joe.

      2. Leslie – I have standing bids and offering in on LMIBL at Fidelity and have had a few trades recently, so no problem. LMIBL has probably a 99% certainty of being called on 9/15

        1. White roses,
          Thanks for your reply.
          Just to clarify, the ability to buy will change shortly.
          TD Ameritrade said in a letter;
          “Ahead of the regulatory enforcement date, we will only accept orders to liquidate positions (i.e. no new buy orders) starting August 13, 2021. After the amendment officially goes into effect on September 28, 2021, it may be more difficult to liquidate these securities. Quoting and market liquidity may also be very limited. “

          Leslie Joy

          1. Leslie – yes, I got it… After posting it dawned on me what you meant… sorry ’bout that… and I too got the same TDA letter. To me, it’s meaningless on LMIBL because the call is going to happen no matter what happens to interest rates due to the acquisition by Franklin.

    2. You beat me to it on WTREP. The only certainty here is that it will be delisted. Some delisted issues have turned up on OTC almost immediately and others have taken months. Even if it show up with an OTC symbol it is unclear which OTC catagory it will be in and therefore if it can be traded.

      All I care about is call/no call. If it stays unlisted and untradable forever my grand kids can clip the coupons. They should be so lucky.

      1. Bob, I didnt even think about the tradeable aspect from new regs. Oh well, its too hard to give this one up here at this price. I still think we will be fortunate to have that problem as company likely will yank from us at some point.

        1. WTRE is gone, the new holding company is deconsolidated from Arch’s financials and the other two owners are private companies. By OTC’s definitions I think it would be grey no information. May WTREP live so long that we find out.

      2. Is there any danger that they’d simply stop paying the dividend? I recall someone mentioning that as a danger with GLMPF.

        1. While nothing’s impossible it is all but unimaginable. Among other reasons, Bermudian financial regulators don’t allow such nonsense. Insurance is too big a part of the franchise. But it is uncomfortable to be in the dark as we are.

          Speaking of nothing’s impossible ….

          (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGUsRGuZb6k

    3. Grid – Neither one of these docs actually gives a date as to when WTREP goes dark, do they? .. Is it implied to be instantaneously by the meer fact of being filed? Guess we’ll find out tomorrow…

      1. 2WR, Short answer, I dont know. I have seen this a few times and it happened quickly after, but cant remember if it was next day or a few days after. The Seaspan issue didnt really drop much before delisting, but they mentioned it was going to be redeemed also. And then it didnt and people wanted out and dumped it after finally going OTC. Be interesting how it works out here. But I wouldnt be surprised if no dump gift ever occurs.

    1. I think this would likely delay closing of the EQC deal beyond end of August, if it happens at all.

      MNR management now has to analyze and consider if this new proposal is worth paying the penalty payment to EQC if they accepted it.

      Am assuming MNR-C will continue to pay its dividend until all this blows over, and a decision is made one way or another ( still a change of control no matter how they decide ).

        1. This could be the opening shot of what could turn out to be a long and expensive battle between Godzilla and King Kong ( EQC vs STWD )

          We are guaranteed the upcoming MNR-C dividend, but who knows what will happen beyond that?

          I hope we MNR-C shareholders will not be like a Tokyo skyscraper that gets stomped to smithereens as the giants battle. LOL.

        2. This is a tea party compared to the battle over Interpipeline. Turning into a Leafs vs Flyers game up there. The bare knuckles are out. Reminds me of that Dangerfield line, “I went to a fight the other night, and a hockey game broke out.”

          I’m rooting for Zell here. I don’t own any MNR (common) stock but if I did I’d rather have EQC stock than get cash or messy Starwood equity.

          1. LOL – love the hockey references Bob. Brookfield was dealt a blow yesterday by Alberta Securities Com as recapped in Globe below:

            In this country, Alberta’s securities watchdog has delivered a blow to Brookfield Infrastructure Partner LP’s effort to buy Inter Pipeline Ltd. The Globe’s Tim Kiladze reports that the regulator modified shareholder-voting requirements and shot down Brookfield’s request to quash a termination fee.

            The Alberta Securities Commission ruled in favour of Inter Pipeline and its friendly takeover partner Pembina Pipeline Corp. by raising the percentage of shares that must be tendered to Brookfield’s hostile takeover bid. Before the ruling, Brookfield needed the support of a simple majority of Inter Pipeline’s independent shareholders but it will now need the support of 55 per cent under a modified tender condition.

            1. CB – seems very strange to me that a security regulator would be the proper party to resolve what is essentially a legal matter but that must be the way in Alberta. In Delaware it would end up in Chancery Court and capable jurists would have actually applied the law to the facts.

              Too political. BAM got mugged by Good Ol’ Boys!

              I own both BAM and PBA so in that sense I am happy with either outcome. Proportionality, the acquisition will have a much bigger impact on PBA than it would on BAM.

  30. I think the entry here for PSA-D shows the wrong first call date … entry here shows Aug. 1, but the prospectus suggests July 20, 2021. FYI.

    1. Prospect Capital Corporation (PSEC)
      Series A Fixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock
      Expected Ratings: Ba2/BB
      Perpetual
      $100mm
      Price Guidance: 5.50% area

    1. Began trading last Oct. Also a convertible. QOnline does not have the call date-“Beginning on October 13, 2023, we may, at our option, redeem the Series A Preferred Shares, in whole or in part, by paying $25.00 per share, plus any accrued and unpaid dividends to the date of redemption.”

      Scraped from the bottom of the bilge in a tanker?

    1. Thanks for heads up J
      I decided to pick up a little of the -E and try to pick up a few bucks on a drift higher since some still left outstanding for some time longer ?

  31. FINRA: Enbridge looks new
    07/08/2021 13:27:03 Addition 07/08/2021 00:00:00 ENNPF ENBRIDGE INC CUM RED PREF SHS SER N (Canada) Other OTC

    Also- CDZAP changed to CDZIP – now on Nasdaq. permanent is supposed to be CDZIA. Changes getting to be ridiculous.

      1. Bob-
        thx- wasn’t planning to buy. I don’t see it on Q-online or at Schwab, etc. as N series in any form. Tried various input forms of the symbol. Oh well.
        Why the musical symbols?

        1. ENB.PR.N is the symbol used on the TSX, where this trades. With the exception of Interactive Brokers, you can’t buy using the TSX symbol from a U.S.-based broker.

          ENNPF is the symbol used by OTC for trading in the U.S., not that all brokerages will trade it. It is listed by OTC as grey market, and is one of those that may be effected by the new SEC rules on OTC trading. The labeling is wrong, but that’s what it is at the moment.

          Anyone buying this issue or other Canadian preferreds on OTC needs to go to the TSX website to get pricing and then convert those prices from CA$ to US$ to get a proper bid for OTC. The real pricing & liquidity happens on the TSX, not the OTC.

  32. New Issue
    Ramaco Resources, Inc. (Nasdaq: METC)
    Senior Notes due 2026
    $25 million
    Talk: 9.00% – 9.25%

  33. If anyone gets a toe position at the line in the new AICC issue, please post. I will nag TD’s desk. Got cash to allocate as I have had a barrage of calls and had the AIC sell limit nibbled away at by small buyers over the last two weeks., then just sold it off yesterday on the news. Actually surprised to see a new BB in this sector.
    Re: MDLY…a computer with a few basic math formulae could manage the business better. Here’s to Senior Secured Loans, Regulation, Objective Risk Management, management running private pools concurrently and Oversight. Self Regulating Orgs died with Reagan’s naivete.

  34. On July 6, 2021, Medley Management, Inc. (“MDLY”) was notified by the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) that the staff of NYSE Regulation, Inc. (“NYSE Regulation”) (i) intended to implement a halt in trading of MDLY’s Class A Common Stock (the “Common Stock”) and Medley LLC’s debt securities (the “Notes”) in anticipation of pending material news and (ii) then subsequently determined to commence proceedings to delist and immediately suspend the Common Stock and the Notes from the NYSE on July 7, 2021 in view of the filing of the Combined Disclosure Statement and Plan (as defined below) with the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware.

    https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1611110/000121390021036002/ea143874-8k_medleymanagement.htm

  35. MDLY/MDLQ = BK https://app.quotemedia.com/data/downloadFiling?webmasterId=101533&ref=115987542&type=HTML&symbol=MDLY&companyName=Medley+Management+Inc.+Class+A&formType=8-K&dateFiled=2021-07-07&CK=1611110

    On July 6, 2021, Medley LLC, in its voluntary case (the “Chapter 11 Case”) under chapter 11 of title 11 of the United States Code (the “Bankruptcy Code”) in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the “Bankruptcy Court”) (captioned In re: Medley LLC, Case No. 21-10526 (KBO)), filed with the Bankruptcy court a proposed Combined Disclosure Statement and Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization and Wind-Down of Medley LLC (the “Combined Disclosure Statement and Plan”). In connection with the Chapter 11 Case, Medley LLC intends to seek the Bankruptcy Court’s approval and confirmation of the Combined Disclosure Statement and Plan. There can be no assurances that Medley LLC will obtain the Bankruptcy Court’s approval and/or confirmation of the Combined Disclosure Statement and Plan, or that if the Combined Disclosure Statement and Plan is approved, that the reorganization and wind-down of Medley LLC will be successfully implemented as contemplated by the Combined Disclosure Statement and Plan (including the treatment of stakeholders described below). This Current Report on Form 8-K is not a solicitation of votes to accept or reject the Combined Disclosure Statement and Plan or an offer to sell or exchange securities of Medley LLC or MDLY. Any solicitation of votes or offer to sell or exchange or solicitation of an offer to buy or exchange any securities of Medley LLC or MDLY will be made only pursuant to and in accordance with the Combined Disclosure Statement and Plan following approval by the Bankruptcy Court. Capitalized terms used in this Item 8.01 under this heading titled “Proposed Combined Disclosure Statement and Plan” but not otherwise defined herein shall have the respective meanings given to such terms in the Combined Disclosure Statement and Plan.

    Also https://app.quotemedia.com/data/downloadFiling?webmasterId=101533&ref=115987542&type=HTML&symbol=MDLY&companyName=Medley+Management+Inc.+Class+A&formType=8-K&dateFiled=2021-07-07&CK=1611110#ea143874ex99-1_medleymanage.htm

    Info’s also already on QOL

      1. This POS has been trading well below par and with dividends suspended. No idea what the bag holders will end up with, maybe someone smarter than I have a SWAG. But seems it will end up being less than where the unsecured notes ($1.76 and $1.92) were trading prior to the BK filing. Maybe 10cents on the dollar? Maybe nothing? Always interesting to watch how these type of issues unwind when company fails.

    1. MCLEAN, Va., July 7, 2021 /PRNewswire/ — Arlington Asset Investment Corp. (NYSE: AAIC) (the “Company”), today announced that it has issued a notice of redemption (the “Redemption”) for all $23,821,025 aggregate principal amount of its outstanding 6.625% Senior Notes due 2023 (CUSIP No. 041356 304) (the “Senior Notes”) on August 6, 2021 (the “Redemption Date”). The Senior Notes will be redeemed at a price equal to 100% of the principal amount of the Senior Notes, or $25 per $25 principal amount of the Senior Notes, plus unpaid interest accrued thereon to, but excluding, the Redemption Date.

    1. For what possible reason? It’s callable “any” on 30day notice. I was surprised that ALLY left a few shares outstanding after the last call. At today’s close there is about a buck of call risk.

      1. Don’t know but someone big was buying, ending the day with big buy imbalance in the closing auction

  36. New Issue: Arlington Asset Investment Corp (AAIC)
    Senior Notes
    $25 Million
    BBB (Egan-Jones)
    Talk: 6% area
    Quarterly
    Maturity: 2026

    1. I had a bad result trading AAIC preferreds a few years back and haven’t looked at them since. One bad experience can scar us for life.

  37. I received a response from Amy Halvorson at Ladenburg Thalmann Corporate Relations regarding their compliance with rule 15c2-11 as far as their outstanding preferreds and baby bonds are concerned. Amy said that Ladenburg will continue to post pertinent info regarding preferreds and notes as agreed using DTC/LENS postings. As well, see Gary’s post from 7/6/21 regarding his inquiry about the Ladenburg issues in a phone call to Schwab, who told Gary that the Ladenburg issues should be fine.