|
Post by richardsok on Jan 14, 2024 15:53:09 GMT
I backtested TR of PDI vs SPY for several time periods. Assume $10,000 to start, distributions re-invested, no withdrawals. I get:
2013 - present SPY 40,323 PDI 23,592 2018 - present SPY 19,709 PDI 11,872 2020 - present SPY 15,736 PDI 9,046 2022 - present SPY 10,326 PDI 9,311
Must admit I was really surprised by the magnitude of differences. I conclude: holding a declining asset for its yield really is a sucker's bet and (2) CEFs ( especially PDI ! ) are properly deployed as trading assets, not to buy-and-hold.
Numbers corrected, thanks to Karen.
|
|
|
Post by fishingrod on Jan 14, 2024 16:29:52 GMT
racqueteer , Great rebuttal. I also want to mention that PDI and PIMIX just like us, can bank capital gains and balance them against capital losses each year. So capital losses from turnover aren't necessarily a total bad thing. So selling something to get something better is a good thing. I think it comes down to interest rates not being at zero anymore. Unlike before, funds now have bonds in their portfolio with higher coupons that can act as a buffer against rising rates. Softening the loss of NAV with high interest that is ALREADY flowing. We don't have to wait for the funds to populate the bond portfolio with higher interest bearing bonds. We already have them that are paying a goodly amount, unlike before.
For instance PIMIX has a duration of around 5 years. So if interest rates went up by one percent, according to JUST its' duration, not any other attribute, the fund would lose around 5%. But it is already yielding 7%, so it would still have a positive outcome. Plus it will be able to start adding even better yielding bonds. Of course this takes into account absolutely nothing about anything.
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Jan 14, 2024 17:05:31 GMT
I backtested TR of PDI vs SPY for several time periods. Assume $10,000 to start, distributions re-invested, no withdrawals. I get: 2013 - present SPY 80,323 PDI 23,5922018 - present SPY 19,709 PDI 11,872 2020 - present SPY 15,736 PDI 9,046 2022 - present SPY 10,326 PDI 9,311 Must admit I was really surprised by the magnitude of differences. I conclude: holding a declining asset for its yield really is a sucker's bet and (2) CEFs ( especially PDI ! ) are properly deployed as trading assets, not to buy-and-hold. Um, you might want to link your sources on those calculations. The 2013 SPY data jumps off the page and doesn't pass a reasonableness test so I looked at it. I tested your first period (2013-Current) and get completely different results. Didn't bother testing the rest given how far off the first was. Maybe your SPY $80K number is a typo? S/B $ 40,323? -------------------------- www.portfoliovisualizer.com/backtest-portfolio#analysisResultsPerformance Summary Portfolio performance statistics Portfolio Initial Balance Final Balance Fidelity 500 Index $10,000 $41,193 SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust $10,000 $40,833 PIMCO Dynamic Income $10,000 $23,592 -------------------------------------------- www.morningstar.com/funds/xnas/fxaix/chartFXAIX +31,334.67 |+313.35% SPY
NAV +30,957.41 |+309.57% PDI
NAV +14,665.40 |+146.65% ---------------------------------------------- finance.yahoo.com/news/heres-average-stock-market-return-113000839.htmlSPY10,000.0 2013 32.15% 3,215.0 13,215.0 2014 13.52% 1,786.7 15,001.7 2015 1.38% 207.0 15,208.7 2016 11.77% 1,790.1 16,998.8 2017 21.61% 3,673.4 20,672.2 2018 -4.23% (874.4) 19,797.8 2019 31.21% 6,178.9 25,976.6 2020 18.02% 4,681.0 30,657.6 2021 28.47% 8,728.2 39,385.8 2022 -18.04% (7,105.2) 32,280.6 2023 26.06% 8,412.3 40,693.0
|
|
|
Post by FD1000 on Jan 14, 2024 17:13:57 GMT
|
|
|
Post by yogibearbull on Jan 14, 2024 17:23:41 GMT
Karen, to post PV run results, use the Link icon in the portion where the run results begin. Just using the URL at the top gives the PV Backtest template.
|
|
|
Post by retiredat48 on Jan 14, 2024 17:29:53 GMT
racqueteer ,...I consider the disconnect in our posts (you primarily considering everything is a "wash") is this: We are discussing a BET; a bet which starts TODAY. Means going forward returns. It assumes one is buying PDI TODAY, not a long standing holder. So that buyer of PDI is getting the nav price decline, NOW, along with a yield that is 14% based on today's fund price. With a weighted price of 81 to par, you are paying $810 today for $1000 face value asset. (Edit to add: Of course easy to see why PDI sells at a premium today) . PDI sells it, buy a 7% mortgage rate instrument, you immediately increase yield (swapping cap gain for yield), without any loss of principal to the NEW PDI buyer of today. With that leveraged higher yield it is easy to see a 10% return. If the yield curve goes back to normal slope versus inverted, PDI lowers its borrow cost and has available higher yields to buy, thus even better than 10%. Investors will buy up more and more CEFs if the dividends can just be maintained, let alone rise in amounts. 14% too good to let stand alone. Here is what poster Capecod recently wrote about this same thing: Many popular bond-ish income CEFs still sport 11+% to 14+% distribution yields. My guess is that the next leg up --- which may begin soon or be delayed --- will be driven by a recognition that these yields may not be available again for years. Diminishing but omnipresent fear of distribution cuts is really the only thing restraining immediate advances. Interestingly, an institutional buyer grabbed hundreds of thousands of shares of high premium PIMCO CEFs PTY and PCN Friday afternoon. Those now yield about 10.4% along with DSL and some other multi-asset CEFs ---- IF IF IF there are no distribution cuts and PDI rises to rate parity with these at. (say) 10.4%, it's market price will rise to about 25.40 and PAXS to 17.23 and WDI to 16.50. And, of course, IF IF IF Fed funds drop to (say) 3% with 10yrs not much higher, there is no reason to believe 10.4% assets would not be bought up like hotcakes, driving yields down further...------------------------------------------ R48
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Jan 14, 2024 17:48:15 GMT
Karen , to post PV run results, use the Link icon in the portion where the run results begin. Just using the URL at the top gives the PV Backtest template. Thank you! I think another poster took care of linking it properly. I don't think my M* link worked either. To re-create, I used the Chart for FXAIX and compared SPY and PDI.
|
|
|
Post by yogibearbull on Jan 14, 2024 17:56:00 GMT
Karen , to post PV run results, use the Link icon in the portion where the run results begin. Just using the URL at the top gives the PV Backtest template. Thank you! I think another poster took care of linking it properly. I don't think my M* link worked either. To re-create, I used the Chart for FXAIX and compared SPY and PDI. M* issue is that new multi/edited charts are not linkable - so, only the opening chart page shows. To post M* charts, you have to take a screenshot and then post it as attachment or upload to an image hosting site such as ImgBB and then link that URL.
|
|
|
Post by richardsok on Jan 14, 2024 18:25:11 GMT
Thank you, Karen, you are correct -- I have amended the number in my post.
|
|
|
Post by habsui on Jan 14, 2024 18:34:25 GMT
IMO, this all comes down to your expectations for stocks (SP500) over the next few years. Looking backward to compare stocks vs bonds over the last 10-12 years (a very good decade for stocks, and ZIRP) is not very helpful. Bond returns over the next five years are much more predictable when one can lock in rates of 5-8% now. Question is what is more likely, stocks returning 12% average or 6% average over the next few years. Place your bets..
|
|
|
Post by racqueteer on Jan 14, 2024 18:36:59 GMT
R48... As noted previously, if we're going to move the goal so that we start from this point, then as the potential gain for PDI is the sum of its dividend (presumably a fixed rate of income) added to any change in its selling value (capital gain) for existing holdings, the only room for 'improvement' lies in a rise in potential capital gains; which, it would seem, requires rates to fall; making the existing holdings more valuable because they pay out at a higher rate.
Somehow or other, you have to be placing a bet that the future value of the assets will increase. Swapping of assets with different characteristics doesn't get you there by itself. You need for there to be the prospect that rates will fall (eventually) or you have to be purchasing mispriced assets. PIMCO has lots of methodologies which can help to support the dividend, and they may, or may not, be successful, but merely swapping of assets you mention only benefits you if, at some time in the future, rates fall -or- PIMCO does a great job of generating excess dividends. I mean, at least so far as I can see.
All things considered, the current climate, in which interest rates may fall, supports FI of all kinds, basically; PDI included. So, yes, as I've said recently, and FD has repeated, FI (PDI) should do well this year. Will that be better than the S&P? Not sure, but I'm not seeing a five-year tailwind; rates aren't that high, and I'm certainly not seeing enough for your original bet to work out with only a bit more than three years to run and already behind by a sizeable amount.
Now if there was some obvious mispricing of assets to capitalize upon, as there was during the financial crisis, then that would be an entirely different situation.
|
|
|
Post by retiredat48 on Jan 14, 2024 21:33:42 GMT
racqueteer,...You do not seem to acknowledge some things that will increase total return outlook...such as: --payment of mortgages off which is done at par full face value. Note that the fast rise to 7% mortgage rates has resulted in both commercial and homeowners being locked-in to their property. This increased the duration for PDI (bad) as average home ownership is seven years, now extended. But these loans will be paid off someday at full face value, thus cap gains to either be used in dividend distributions, or reinvested for more assets/income. --Premiums increasing on PDI price. PDI is closed end--you sell to others, not back to the fund. A favorable return will likely increase the premium on PDI, as capecod posts above. Note PDI got above 30+% premium a couple years ago. This would add to total return. Could happen again. --A return-to-normal non-inverted yield curve can help on both the net borrowing side, and reinvestment rollover return. The bet/outlook is for next five years; I expect these things to happen by then. R48
|
|
|
Post by racqueteer on Jan 14, 2024 23:18:07 GMT
I recognize that there are market forces which conspire to cause people to feel that a premium should be paid for an asset. That, however, increases cost rather than representing a profit to the owner. Yes, some are buying 7% mortgages, but many more are avoiding new mortgages because it is to their advantage to be holding their existing 3% mortgages and paying those off very gradually while owning safe assets paying better than 5%. This is the type of thing you yourself are doing. I would consider that to be the "locked in" condition to which you refer. So I don't presently see some new influx of income for PDI. It's a low-rate environment, which may be about to go lower, in which case, holders of older debt are not incentivized to retire that older (and lower) debt. At some undetermined time in the future, things may be the reverse, but I don't see anything dramatic happening right now. Still, it's a better environment in which to generate income than it was. The capital gain end I'm not too sure about. Maybe I'm just not perceptive enough...
|
|
|
Post by habsui on Jan 15, 2024 5:16:52 GMT
What are your expectations for the SP500 for the next 5 years?
|
|
|
Post by yogibearbull on Jan 15, 2024 11:49:09 GMT
If everyone who offered a bet was asked to analyze, overanalyze, explain, there won't be any bets made.
A bet was offered, make it - yes or no or skip, and check back in 5 years.
|
|
|
Post by racqueteer on Jan 15, 2024 13:28:21 GMT
Yogi, your point is well made if we're talking about people arguing in favor of this or that outcome. Asking for the thinking behind an investing approach to foster understanding is what we should be about here. I don't care who's 'right' about the outcome. If you can't ask questions here, then what is the purpose of the forum?
Btw, ordinarily I would have initiated my questions privately, but the discussion was already proceeding. I just took it out of the other thread so as not to (further) sidetrack it.
|
|
|
Post by racqueteer on Jan 15, 2024 13:46:50 GMT
What are your expectations for the SP500 for the next 5 years? Is this meant for me, habsui? If so, what I think reasonable would be for the market to rise slowly or be flat in anticipation of rates being cut (which, imo, would be premature if that happened before mid-year). I think tech will continue to lead through that period. That said, I also think the worst is behind us for these next five years. I think fixed income is better off now (higher rates), but the eventual lowering will hurt to some degree as those older assets will appreciate, but there should be less demand for new issues. I think allocation funds might have a resurgence. The build out of AI is the bull case for the markets, imo, and the rest is rate movement. That last part is the conundrum.
|
|
|
Post by Norbert on Jan 15, 2024 14:28:04 GMT
R48 offered an interesting bet. He's sensing opportunity in leveraged FI and seems to think stock market returns will be below average going out five years.
I think he has a good chance of winning the bet, regardless of how many times it's pointed out that the S&P 500 clobbered PDI over the past decade.
Good discussion trying dig into the Whys, however.
|
|
|
Post by yogibearbull on Jan 15, 2024 14:42:51 GMT
I understood R48 fine. He isn't very optimistic about this narrow tech-led US market (Magnificent 7, etc). He thinks that leveraged multisector bond CEFs such as PDI may do better going forward - note that he isn't saying any/all bond funds. May be, or may be not - but, that was the bet he offered.
|
|
|
Post by mnfish on Jan 15, 2024 15:11:48 GMT
racqueteer ,...You do not seem to acknowledge some things that will increase total return outlook...such as: --payment of mortgages off which is done at par full face value. Note that the fast rise to 7% mortgage rates has resulted in both commercial and homeowners being locked-in to their property. This increased the duration for PDI (bad) as average home ownership is seven years, now extended. But these loans will be paid off someday at full face value, thus cap gains to either be used in dividend distributions, or reinvested for more assets/income. --Premiums increasing on PDI price. PDI is closed end--you sell to others, not back to the fund. A favorable return will likely increase the premium on PDI, as capecod posts above. Note PDI got above 30+% premium a couple years ago. This would add to total return. Could happen again. --A return-to-normal non-inverted yield curve can help on both the net borrowing side, and reinvestment rollover return. The bet/outlook is for next five years; I expect these things to happen by then. R48 PDI's last holdings report (09/2023) shows a 48.7% holding of NON-AGENCY MORTGAGE-BACKED SECURITIES. The average interest rate for those 636 holdings is 5.87%. It has a 29.4% holding in ASSET-BACKED SECURITIES. The average interest rate for those 259 holdings is 5.1%. Isn't pre-payment a risk to a holder of an MBS or ASB? And, since prepayment risk is typically highest when interest rates are falling, if rates are going to (supposedly) go down what would that mean? Another question. The holdings report is an Xcel document and has 2 columns. One for "Amount Owned" and one for "Value". In the case of the MBS holdings the Amount Owned is stated as $3.670B and the Value is stated as $2.231B. Does that mean that they have 64.5% leveraged position in those MBS? FYI - According to CEF Connect, PDIs premium topped out at 23% in 11/2019. Not nit picking, just for the sake of accuracy.
|
|
|
Post by yogibearbull on Jan 15, 2024 15:35:53 GMT
mnfish , "FYI - According to CEF Connect, PDIs premium topped out at 23% in 11/2019. Not nit picking, just for the sake of accuracy." The long-term CEFConnect data may be weekly or monthly. But if you force it spit out daily values in late-2019, it was 24.45% premium on 11/8/19. 11/8/2019 $33.64 $27.03 24.45%
|
|
|
Post by rhythmmethod on Jan 15, 2024 15:50:26 GMT
If everyone who offered a bet was asked to analyze, overanalyze, explain, there won't be any bets made. A bet was offered, make it - yes or no or skip, and check back in 5 years. +1,000. The discussion had some good points but perhaps has outlived the upside of it's speculative nature. May be time to pony up or pony out on the bet and leave some digital space for some other topics. Emerging markets, for example.
|
|
|
Post by racqueteer on Jan 15, 2024 17:01:34 GMT
I’ve got to say, I’m a bit perplexed by some of these latest responses. Firstly, this thread grew into more than I expected; I was just looking for some answers. Secondly, I got the answers I was looking for. But if you’re done with the thread, then just stop reading! And RM, it isn’t like the thread is going to so exhaust anyone as to prevent them from posting on other threads if they want. The thread will die when it dies! I truly don’t understand what all the fuss is about?
|
|
|
Post by retiredat48 on Jan 15, 2024 19:23:19 GMT
I’ve got to say, I’m a bit perplexed by some of these latest responses. Firstly, this thread grew into more than I expected; I was just looking for some answers. Secondly, I got the answers I was looking for. But if you’re done with the thread, then just stop reading! And RM, it isn’t like the thread is going to so exhaust anyone as to prevent them from posting on other threads if they want. The thread will die when it dies! I truly don’t understand what all the fuss is about? I agree. RM, this is a spinoff thread from a discussion underway on another forum. Rac started a separate thread based on his questions about my couple posts. I'm trying my best to provide answers. Where's the foul? Just don't follow this thread if desired. But I suspect some or many posters may be learning a thing or two from this brief thread. R48 Edit to add. OK, from memory I used 30+% as high premium for PDI a few years back. Let the record show it was 24.45%! close enough for senior citizen's. Not sure any context is changed however.
|
|
|
Post by retiredat48 on Jan 15, 2024 19:30:09 GMT
I understood R48 fine. He isn't very optimistic about this narrow tech-led US market (Magnificent 7, etc). He thinks that leveraged multisector bond CEFs such as PDI may do better going forward - note that he isn't saying any/all bond funds. May be, or may be not - but, that was the bet he offered. And R48 explained he owns BOTH Mag7/AI funds and leveraged FI CEFs.
|
|
|
Post by racqueteer on Jan 16, 2024 15:19:14 GMT
Thanks again for taking the time to clarify my thinking, R48...
You said: "With a weighted price of 81 to par, you are paying $810 today for $1000 face value asset. (Edit to add: Of course easy to see why PDI sells at a premium today) . PDI sells it, buy a 7% mortgage rate instrument, you immediately increase yield (swapping cap gain for yield), without any loss of principal to the NEW PDI buyer of today. With that leveraged higher yield it is easy to see a 10% return. If the yield curve goes back to normal slope versus inverted, PDI lowers its borrow cost and has available higher yields to buy, thus even better than 10%. Investors will buy up more and more CEFs if the dividends can just be maintained, let alone rise in amounts. 14% too good to let stand alone."
So here is my understanding, and feel free to correct me...
The bank has a, say, 4% bond it wants you to buy, but the prevailing rate is 7%. You (rightly) balk. The bank says, "Tell you what, I'll sell you a face value of $1000 in X years for only $810 to compensate; how about that?" That works out the same, so you agree to buy it. You now have your 7% bond, but the seller (fund) is going to be 'in the hole' for an extra 3% a year in generated return. Additionally, the fund promises you a dividend of $0.22 a month (currently a 14% per year return). So, to fully meet its obligations, PDI has to generate a 17% return this year. If the perception is that PDI can do that, the NAV(?), Price(?) should stay steady. If the perception is that PDI will overearn, then those values increase; or vice-versa. All of this already includes the 7% return on the underlying assets, so we don't get to add that in again later as a "built-in capital gain". All good so far?
So the question becomes: Can PDI generate 17% comfortably in the prevailing financial climate? If so, how much risk is involved? If it falls short, by how much? What is my PDI worth to a potential buyer of my shares? Each person would have to then evaluate those figures. Tailwinds would be a run-up in interest rates leading to an anticipated fall in those rates (thus making current holdings more valuable), or the purchase by the fund of assets which are fundamentally undervalued. Added to this we have the sentiment of potential buyers.
This is my understanding of the situation; does all of this sound right to you?
|
|
|
Post by retiredat48 on Jan 16, 2024 16:28:19 GMT
Thanks again for taking the time to clarify my thinking, R48...
You said: "With a weighted price of 81 to par, you are paying $810 today for $1000 face value asset. (Edit to add: Of course easy to see why PDI sells at a premium today) . PDI sells it, buy a 7% mortgage rate instrument, you immediately increase yield (swapping cap gain for yield), without any loss of principal to the NEW PDI buyer of today. With that leveraged higher yield it is easy to see a 10% return. If the yield curve goes back to normal slope versus inverted, PDI lowers its borrow cost and has available higher yields to buy, thus even better than 10%. Investors will buy up more and more CEFs if the dividends can just be maintained, let alone rise in amounts. 14% too good to let stand alone."
So here is my understanding, and feel free to correct me...
The bank has a, say, 4% bond it wants you to buy, but the prevailing rate is 7%. You (rightly) balk. The bank says, "Tell you what, I'll sell you a face value of $1000 in X years for only $810 to compensate; how about that?" That works out the same, so you agree to buy it. You now have your 7% bond, but the seller (fund) is going to be 'in the hole' for an extra 3% a year in generated return.
R48 REPLY...No...not all good so far. Here's my take. From an accounting standpoint, PDI has to take a hit on mark-to-market in its asset value for the $1000 face bond. BUT IT DOES NOT GET THE CORRESPONDING HIGHER INCOME THAT THE MARKETPLACE PROVIDES. Because that bond has a built in cap gain. You still get the same income as past years unless you sell the asset and buy the higher coupon bond. You are "swapping" cap gain for income.
Rac: Additionally, the fund promises you a dividend of $0.22 a month (currently a 14% per year return). So, to fully meet its obligations, PDI has to generate a 17% return this year.
R48 ...No. PDI obligation (goal) is to maintain the current dividend. If it does nothing but rollover maturing bonds, it may still pay at least the same dividend, and then some more. The reason to question why the dividend may be cut, is the margin situation. If your margin costs go high relative to your income, you may not be able to support the dividend amount. (Defaults could also impact income). Similarly, accounting rules do not permit showing cap gains as income, until realized. So the cap gain built in plays a role eventually. Note something good appears to be going on with PDI as the Return of Capital (ROC) has been reduced (getting smaller) each month in last few months. Only way this occurs is rolling over into higher income instruments, or...or...realizing cap gains by rollover. It is also why PIMCO has had this "december special dividend" thru much of its history (none this year.). Any special likely went to meeting the original dividend.
And certainly some other black-box stuff.
complex stuff...yes.
R48
|
|
|
Post by fishingrod on Jan 16, 2024 16:32:50 GMT
racqueteer, I am confused. I am having a hard time following. Why did you bring the bank into it? This is how I see it. PDI as of 12/31/2023 has an average weighted coupon of 7.27%. It has an average weighted price on it's bonds of 82.07. If one buys PDI now it would get the coupon of 7.27% in interest and over the life of those bonds would get the capital appreciation of the bonds price going from 82.07 to 100 par as the bonds approach maturity. I don't know how PDI is cultivating 14% in dividends.
|
|
|
Post by racqueteer on Jan 16, 2024 17:07:19 GMT
racqueteer , I am confused. I am having a hard time following. Why did you bring the bank into it? This is how I see it. PDI as of 12/31/2023 has an average weighted coupon of 7.27%. It has an average weighted price on it's bonds of 82.07. If one buys PDI now it would get the coupon of 7.27% in interest and over the life of those bonds would get the capital appreciation of the bonds price going from 82.07 to 100 par as the bonds approach maturity. I don't know how PDI is cultivating 14% in dividends. R48 and I seemed to be talking about the mortgages held by PDI and their rates, as a part of the underlying assets; so that's where I dragged in that reference to banks. Sorry for the confusion. Bear in mind that I have zero background in finance, so I'm trying to get at the meaning of the terminology in layman's terms. Terms like: "average weighted coupon" are a little vague to me. To me, the discount you paid in purchasing the asset was to cover the shortfall in the interest rate of that particular existing issue versus the prevailing rate being paid by new issues. I don't see that as a gain in the value of the issue itself (capital gain). To me, that is simply different terminology with the same underlying meaning. As to your last sentence, I don't see it either.
|
|
|
Post by racqueteer on Jan 16, 2024 17:49:22 GMT
R48... Thank you for your response. As I noted above to fishingrod , my terminology is not likely to conform with standard practice, and I realize that generates confusion. I confess that in reading your response:
The bank has a, say, 4% bond it wants you to buy, but the prevailing rate is 7%. You (rightly) balk. The bank says, "Tell you what, I'll sell you a face value of $1000 in X years for only $810 to compensate; how about that?" That works out the same, so you agree to buy it. You now have your 7% bond, but the seller (fund) is going to be 'in the hole' for an extra 3% a year in generated return.
R48 REPLY...No...not all good so far. Here's my take. From an accounting standpoint, PDI has to take a hit on mark-to-market in its asset value for the $1000 face bond. BUT IT DOES NOT GET THE CORRESPONDING HIGHER INCOME THAT THE MARKETPLACE PROVIDES. Because that bond has a built in cap gain. You still get the same income as past years unless you sell the asset and buy the higher coupon bond. You are "swapping" cap gain for income.
...It appears to me that we're saying the exact same thing using different terminology. You pay out more than is invested to compensate for not paying the prevailing interest rate (income). You say that is a built-in capital gain. I see it as making up the shortfall relative to the currently prevailing interest rate. It seems to me that this is a distinction lacking a difference? Consequently, I do, indeed, see that as swapping capital gain for income; so, to me, there is no longer any capital gain involved in the process. In terms of accounting? I certainly don't know how any of this is classified!
The second half is similar. To cover the income to me ( an additional 3%) and the 14% dividend, PDI needs to come up with a 17% return this year. Investors may or may not alleviate some of that concern through market inefficiencies (buying at a premium). Yes, lots of moving parts, but I can't see how any of what I wrote is factually in error aside from the terminology?
|
|