Thursday, October 1, 2009
Franklin Templeton Limited Duration Fund's Shareholder Meeting (2009)
I attended Franklin Templeton Limited Duration Income Trust’s (FTF) annual shareholder meeting on September 24, 2009. This meeting was held by the specific fund, not Franklin Templeton (BEN) itself.
I was the only shareholder attending. No refreshments were available. There was no prepared informal presentation.
Four other persons, all from the mutual fund, attended the meeting. Glenn Voyles (Portfolio Manager); Helen Dong (Inspector of Elections); VP Karen Skidmore; and Sr. Corporate Counsel Jason Venner. I was most impressed with Mr. Venner. After the meeting’s formal portion concluded, I asked several questions.
Some background is necessary before explaining my first question. FTF is a closed-end mutual fund. Such funds typically trade at either discounts or premiums due to several factors, including potential liquidity issues. More specifically, unlike open-ended mutual funds, buyers may only purchase shares from existing owners. I asked about FTF’s approximately 8% discount to its net asset value (NAV). I also asked whether FTF’s approximately 20% Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac bond holdings might be the reason for the discount.
Mr. Voyles said there was “no fundamental reason for” the discount. He said during the last fiscal year, there were “more sellers than buyers,” meaning the fund's price was affected by supply/demand issues. He did not believe Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had anything to do with the discount. He indicated he did not believe the fund would reduce its exposure to Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac.
Mr. Voyles also talked about “mortgage dollar rolls.” I’ve never encountered this term before. According to FTF’s 10K, page 30, mortgage dollar rolls are “agreements between the Fund and a financial institution to simultaneously sell and repurchase mortgage-backed securities at a future date...The risks of mortgage dollar roll transactions include the potential inability of the counterparty to fulfill its obligations.” Did you get that? I didn’t, so I asked what they were.
Mr. Voyles said that these rolls were a form of leverage. He said that before investing in these rolls, the Fund’s leverage was in the form of auction rate preferred shares. He explained that the rolls were a form of leverage backed by mortgage-backed securities and increased the fund’s liquidity. However, he also said he could not tell me exactly how it works because he was involved in a different research department. (Mr. Voyles is on the high yield bond team, not the mortgage or leveraged loan team.) Mr. Venner was kind enough to show me the exact page in the 10K that defined the term.
When I asked about the auction rate securities (ARS) market, Mr. Voyles said Franklin Templeton was not experiencing any problems. The problem, he said, was that the secondary market (for ARS) has frozen.
Interestingly enough, Mr. Voyles said the “use of leverage has helped returns” by approximately 5 to 6 percentage points (from June 2008 to June 2009). FTF currently holds approximately 100 million dollars in ARS, down from 190 million dollars.
At this point, VP Karen Skidmore seemed concerned I was asking so many questions and told me I could ask only one more question.
I asked why anyone should choose Franklin Templeton over Vanguard or another investment firm. Mr. Voyles said that FTF had a large, experienced team, and its “fundamental research” was outstanding.
I don’t think FTF was prepared to have shareholders attend their annual meeting. I was pleased FTF’s senior counsel was able to show me the definition of mortgage dollar rolls, but I was concerned that even after the meeting, I still didn’t understand how FTF was using mortgage dollar rolls as leverage. My investor "spidey-sense" started going off when no one seemed to be able to explain exactly what the heck these things were.
Investors interested in preferred shares ETFs may also consider PGF, PFF, or PSK, but these investments seem heavily supported by financial companies. In addition, it is unclear whether these ETFs have been paying out dividends consistently.
Overall, I wish FTF was more prepared for its annual meeting. Other than Mr. Venner, I was unimpressed with everyone else at the meeting.
Disclosures: I own an insignificant number of FTF shares. I sent this article to FTF's corporate counsel prior to publication but did not hear back from him.
Wise Words from Neil Postman
From Neil Postman's Amusing Ourselves to Death:
George Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Aldous Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism. Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance. Orwell feared we would become a captive culture. Huxley feared we would become a trivial culture, preoccupied with some equivalent of the feelies, the orgy porgy, and the centrifugal bumblepuppy.
I love the centrifugal bumblepuppy, even though I have no idea what it means. I highly recommend Amusing Ourselves to Death.
Bonus: "The law is what legislators and judges have written. In our culture, lawyers do not have to be wise; they need to be well briefed." -- Neil Postman
Bonus II: hat tip to Popehat's Patrick for finding THIS incredible visual graphic/comic of the Huxley-Orwell divide.
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Riots in Pittsburgh
Here is sgtrob88 commenting on a youtube video of police tear-gassing students at the University of Pittsburgh:
I would imagine 75% or more of these kids are liberal, yet going through this will probably not dissuade any of them of the notion that over-sized government is BAD. Like their hippy parents they will continue to allow government to increase in size and power all in the name of "caring for the little guy," while ignoring their own experiences in governmental abuse. While corporations are no saints, government is the one able to beat your *ss and get away with it.
Makes sense to me, except we need to differentiate between government actions that have the power to harm citizens (police, unnecessary laws, etc.) and government actions that can protect the public (public defenders, VA hospitals, etc.). Of course, since few people will agree on which government actions will either harm or protect the public, it seems appropriate to have a bias against broad laws or power of any kind.
I would imagine 75% or more of these kids are liberal, yet going through this will probably not dissuade any of them of the notion that over-sized government is BAD. Like their hippy parents they will continue to allow government to increase in size and power all in the name of "caring for the little guy," while ignoring their own experiences in governmental abuse. While corporations are no saints, government is the one able to beat your *ss and get away with it.
Makes sense to me, except we need to differentiate between government actions that have the power to harm citizens (police, unnecessary laws, etc.) and government actions that can protect the public (public defenders, VA hospitals, etc.). Of course, since few people will agree on which government actions will either harm or protect the public, it seems appropriate to have a bias against broad laws or power of any kind.
Reason #15,473 Not to Go into Law: You Might Become a Real Prostitute
Reason number 15,473 not to go to law school: if you don't pass the bar, you might end up becoming a high-priced escort. See here for the story of a Stanford Law graduate who ran a high-priced call girl service.
If the link doesn't work, try googling "Cristina Warthen," "Brazil," and "Stanford Law." From the SJ Merc article:
Warthen gained notoriety when she was busted as a jet-setting call girl who sold her services to pay off her Stanford Law School debts. She got her law degree from Stanford in May 2001.
I wonder if she ever met Eliot Spitzer...
If the link doesn't work, try googling "Cristina Warthen," "Brazil," and "Stanford Law." From the SJ Merc article:
Warthen gained notoriety when she was busted as a jet-setting call girl who sold her services to pay off her Stanford Law School debts. She got her law degree from Stanford in May 2001.
I wonder if she ever met Eliot Spitzer...
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Monday, September 28, 2009
Guess Who?
Guess who made the following comment:
You’ve got to cut spending, you’ve got to balance the budget, you’ve got to stop fighting these wars, you’ve got to bring our troops home, you’ve got to quit expanding the welfare state here at home...
Hint: it's one of the few honest members of Congress.
You’ve got to cut spending, you’ve got to balance the budget, you’ve got to stop fighting these wars, you’ve got to bring our troops home, you’ve got to quit expanding the welfare state here at home...
Hint: it's one of the few honest members of Congress.
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Unusual Tax Deduction
No joke--a lawyer tries to deduct expenses relating to prostitutes and pornography:
http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2009/09/tax-court-denies-.html
The Tax Court shoots down his argument, of course.
http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2009/09/tax-court-denies-.html
The Tax Court shoots down his argument, of course.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)