Is anyone here invested in Hoivatilat? I’m attracted to the relatively defensive growth and the company’s growth-oriented strategy.
Demand is spot on Hoivayhtiöiden miljoonat virtaavat nyt kuntien kiinteistörötisköihin - jos sote kaatuu, kuntien pitäisi rakentaa itse | Talouselämä
Yes, we are! My biggest investment in my small portfolio for the aforementioned reasons.
Ps. Funny that @Verneri_Pulkkinen started the thread with this news, I was just about to do the same 
I also invested in this after Inderes made a simple video about Hoivatilat… It was perhaps one of the best videos for amateurs like me. Thanks for that! What was that loan thing they recently announced?
Thanks Kalle_P! 
So the video can be found here for those of you reading the thread Suomen Hoivatilat rautalangasta vääntäen - Inderes
Hello Sweden!
I bet Inderes and others’ forecasts will go up tomorrow.
Add fuel to the fire https://www.inderes.fi/tiedotteet/suomen-hoivatilat-oyj-uusia-liiketoiminta-avauksia
This is good. But school projects are still nowhere to be seen or heard. Should we be worried?
The sales cycle for school projects is significantly longer than for care facilities. Portable solutions will certainly bring more tools to that sector as well.
Have you noticed: ABG Sundal Collier AB has become active in buying this. Today, robots there have been buying in small increments, steadily and relentlessly, at a price of €8.00, which seems to set the floor price for today.
Does anyone have more information about this player? At least according to 4-traders, no new analysts have joined to follow this (Hoivatilat - Consensus)
It’s a shame that Hoivatila’s stock is stuck even though the strategy is progressing according to plan. Have I understood correctly that when interest rates rise, real estate companies like Hoivatila fare poorly because they use leverage and a better return on investment is required then? I’m a little scared now that interest rates are about to rise.
In some of Inderes’ interviews, Jussi Karjula mentioned that rental income, etc., is tied to the interest rate. As interest rates rise, the company’s income grows accordingly. (I don’t remember which video or the exact wording).
P.S. As things stand, it’s almost certain that interest rates in the EU will not rise significantly before the start of 2020. Hoivatilat’s almost certain NAV at the end of 2019 is about €8.0, which is today’s share price. A significant portion of this NAV consists of ongoing or not-yet-started but agreed-upon projects. This part is often forgotten in online discussions. → If you buy today at €8.0… and Hoivatilat operates until at least the end of 2019 and then winds down by realizing its assets, you would, in principle, get your money back.
It depends hugely on the situation. In this video, I generally discussed how interest rates affect real estate companies: Miten korkojen nousu vaikuttaa kiinteistöyhtiöihin - Inderes
The video was largely based on Jesse’s article, as he is our real estate pro ;): Korkotason nousulla voi olla huomattava vaikutus kiinteistösektoriin - Inderes
Rising interest rates often indicate an increase in economic activity, which in turn supports real estate companies.
Rents are usually tied to inflation, not interest rates
I found the Trader DI Broker Statistics after a bit of searching. I recommend saving the link. ABG’s buying spree, which has lasted a week or two, seems to have already netted them over 700,000 € worth of shares, and it continues today.
Edit2: Is it related to Partnera’s divestment?
Partnera is currently Hoivatilat’s largest owner, owning 4,767,012 Company shares, representing 18.74 percent of all Hoivatilat shares and votes.
Edit: Here’s a little daily tracking:
Edit3: It’s good to follow the development of trading on Morningstar.
At least the underlying trend is favorable for Hoivatilat, but how will the sale of old properties from the public sector to private entities affect care facilities… Dozens of municipalities selling their care properties (MTV)
I don’t quite understand what the hype about Finnish care facilities is based on. Most of the profit comes from non-cash property revaluation.
Is it the case that as the required rate of return on properties decreases, the value of the properties increases and more profit can be recorded?
Hoivatilat’s (Care Facilities) revenue last year was just under 13 million and its market value was 200 million. When expenses are subtracted from revenue, not much is left. The valuation of Hoivatilat is thus seemingly based purely on the belief that growth will continue to be tremendous and the value of the properties will only increase. From a cash flow perspective, this cannot be a reasonable investment unless revenue grows significantly. However, growth is becoming increasingly difficult for Hoivatilat as well.
Indeed, the profit from care properties is largely “excel-gains” in as much as the company doesn’t start trading its properties. This is a somewhat difficult situation, because as yield requirements decrease (perhaps temporarily), the company’s financing levels look good, allowing growth to be pursued with loans. If the trend reverses, the company could face problems. Growth is only interesting from an investor’s perspective if it generates good cash flow. With last year’s operating profit (5.436 million euros) and the amount of interest-bearing debt at that time (71.91 million euros), it would still take 13 years to pay back the debt with income financing. The ratio is the same for Citycon and Technopolis.
Share issues are to be expected as growth continues. How is such a factor taken into account when determining the value of a share?
Edit: I would add that in this case, the shareholder hopes for an increase in the share price. The higher the price, the less the shareholding is diluted in connection with a share issue, because the company receives more money in cash for each new share. A share issue for a real estate company with a P/B of 1.5 is not as devastating as a share issue for a company with a P/B of 0.7.
Even though I own Hoivatilat (Care Properties), I’m annoyed by the company’s decision to distribute dividends during its strong growth phase, when all income financing could much rather be reinvested back into the business.
CEO Jussi Karjula seemed to justify this by saying that some owners want dividends, and this decision aims to respect that wish. In my opinion, that’s not a valid reason. The fact that some owners don’t understand that dividends destroy shareholder value doesn’t justify that destruction.
There was a lot of talk about the threat of a share issue throughout the spring, and it remains a possible financing method for the company’s growth in the future. As long as this is the situation, all possible operational cash flow should be poured directly back into the company. And if that’s not enough, then it’s much more acceptable to dilute the ownership stake of current shareholders.