Dredging/Mooring in Gloucester Docks

[Allan(nb Albert)]

2 hours ago, IanD said:

 

 😞

Other similar sized property developers are likely to have much more lucrative portfolios than CART, who AFAIK mainly own old buildings in industrial areas.

 

 😉

 

This is completely untrue. CRT uses the MSCI property benchmark. For the last ten years its performance has always been in the upper quartile. Also, it can no longer be described as "mainly old industrial buildings" due to its group investment policy that dictates that it sells low value property and buys fewer high return properties.

 

That aside, it is probably better to compare CRT's financial performance against its long term projections rather than others with propery portfolios. 

 

On that basis, it is rather a dismal failure  ...

Edited April 17, 2023 by Allan(nb Albert)

[Alan de Enfield]

2 hours ago, IanD said:

Other similar sized property developers are likely to have much more lucrative portfolios than CART, who AFAIK mainly own old buildings in industrial areas.

 

C&RT are becoming a 'major' (new) housing development business :

 

From their 2022 accounts :

 

2022/23: 1,332 units under construction currently. A further 1,613 units anticipated to commence construction before April 2023. Approximately 1,929 units forecast to be completed in 2022/23

[Allan(nb Albert)]

19 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

C&RT are becoming a 'major' (new) housing development business :

 

From their 2022 accounts :

 

2022/23: 1,332 units under construction currently. A further 1,613 units anticipated to commence construction before April 2023. Approximately 1,929 units forecast to be completed in 2022/23

Actually, they seem to be pulling out of the joint ventures that build these houses and investing the proceeds, if any, in property or diversified assets.

 

If you read the small print, it says that the numbers include sites where CRT has disposed of its interest

[Alan de Enfield]

6 minutes ago, Allan(nb Albert) said:

CRT has disposed of its interest ...........

 

(These figures also include development sites previously disposed of by the Trust. These are not formally monitored by the Trust and are reported on the basis agreed previously with the Homes and Communities Agency)

 

 

One wonders why there would be any need to continue to report on them if they had totally divested themselves of them ?

 

[Mike Todd]

16 hours ago, Allan(nb Albert) said:

The facts are:-

CRT knowingly agreed to a funding deal that would see -

- a fixed core grant of £39m for the three years 2012/13, 2013/14 and 2014/15 with no index linking.

- an extra £10m per year from 2015/16 to 2021/22. However, only the core £39m would be index linked rather the whole amount. In real terms CRT agreed to a reduction in income!

- from 2022/23 to 3036/27 CRT agreed to grant being fixed at the 2021/22 level. In real terms a greater reduction in real terms compared with 2021/22.

You make it sound as if CaRT was an independent body at the time of the agreement to that funding. It was my understanding - and you may be able to correct me if I am wrong - was the the Gov set up a new company called CaRT which they owned but which they subsequently cut loose. However, by the time there was an independent Board of Trustees, the deal had already been nailed down by the Gov.

[Allan(nb Albert)]

2 hours ago, Mike Todd said:

You make it sound as if CaRT was an independent body at the time of the agreement to that funding. It was my understanding - and you may be able to correct me if I am wrong - was the the Gov set up a new company called CaRT which they owned but which they subsequently cut loose. However, by the time there was an independent Board of Trustees, the deal had already been nailed down by the Gov.

The company was incorporated with both CRT and government as subscribers (i.e. owners). The board of directors consisted of both BW directors and "independents".

 

The directors subsequently approved changes to the articles of association, entered into other documents and applied for registration with the Charity Commission to become the CRT we know today.

 

In truth, much of the negotiation was done by Hales and Evans with the board rubber stamping.

Edited April 17, 2023 by Allan(nb Albert)

[Orwellian]

18 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

(These figures also include development sites previously disposed of by the Trust. These are not formally monitored by the Trust and are reported on the basis agreed previously with the Homes and Communities Agency)

 

 

One wonders why there would be any need to continue to report on them if they had totally divested themselves of them ?

 

It is a requirement of the original Grant Agreement that figures on housing are included in the Publication Data. Quite why this should be is anyone's guess.

Edited April 18, 2023 by Orwellian
correct spelling

[Bod]

Who are these houses for?

Sale to general public, or Grace and favour for CaRT employees/retired.

 

Bod

[Orwellian]

1 hour ago, Bod said:

Who are these houses for?

Sale to general public, or Grace and favour for CaRT employees/retired.

 

Bod

Not the latter for sure. CRT/BW have spent the last 20 years selling most if their own stock of former operational houses.