On November 2, OAO Gazprom posted ruble bonds, series A7 and A8, ac counted to RUR 5 billion each, with a nominal value of RUR 1000 rubles, with the maturity term of 3 and 5 years respectively. The annual coupon rate bonds series A7 paid every 182 days, as per the auction results on the MICEX, was established in the amount of 6.79 per cent per annum. The investors have made applications amounting to RUR 9.6 billion. The annual coupon rate bonds series A8 paid every 182 days, to the auction on the MICEX, was determined at the rate of 7 per cent per annum. Investors have made applications amounting to RUR 7.4 billion. The loans were arranged by the investment group Renaissance Capital and Rosbank OAO RUSSIAN ECONOMY IN trends and outlooks,with the Horizon investment company as a partner; the financial advisor was OAO Federal Stock Corporation.
On December 14, 2006 LUKOIL has placed two issues of non documentary interest bonds of OAO LUKOIL payable to the bearer, when they keep Series 03 and 04, for the total amount of RUR 14 billion. The contest coupon rate bonds series totals to the nominal value of RUR 8 billion for a period of 5 years, at the rate of 7,per cent per annum. The annual coupon rate on Series 04 bonds in the amount of billion rubles and treatment for 7 years was 7.40 per cent per annum. Price place ment of bonds Series 03 and Series 04 was set at 100 per cent of nominal value.
Early repayment of bonds and preferred right for the bonds’ acquisition is not pro vided. 152 applications were filed for acquisition of the bonds, worth over RUR bln, which exceeds the emission nearly 2.5 fold. As a result, LULOIL has become the first Russian private company, which has successfully placed bonds with a con tinuous maturity of 7 years. The issuance was executed by ABN AMRO Bank, Dresdner Bank and IB Renaissance Capital.
On December 20 an extraordinary general meeting of shareholders of OAO Mosenergo has approved an increase in the authorized capital of the Company by issuing additional shares in favor of a strategic investor. Shareholders of Mo senergo have approved the limit of issued ordinary shares in the amount of 500 000 000 and relevant amendments to the Charter of the Company with respect to the number of declared shares and the deployment of issuance of additional shares in favor pf OAO Gazprom and/or other affiliated entities of OAO Gazprom.
The price of shares will be determined as the weighted average value of RTS and MICEX trades within the six months, preceding the date of the meeting of share holders of OAO Mosenergo, but not less than 5 rubles per share. OAO Mosenergo is intended to implement an investment program of the Company amounting at to USD 2,1 billion for the issuance of additional shares.
Dividend Policy. We know that one way of enhancing the attractiveness of the shares is efficient dividend policy.
In May, the Board of Directors of Sibneft decided to advise the annual general shareholders' meeting of the company to pay dividends as per results of 2005 fiscal year in the amount of RUR $ 7.90 per ordinary share. The deadline for payment of dividends, according to the Articles of the company is May 31, On June 24 Rostelecom decided to pay dividends in the amount of RUR 3.per preferred share and RUR 1.56 per ordinary share. Total dividend payment as of results of 2005 amounts to RUR 2,040.8 billion.
Finally, on June 22, 2006 shareholders of OAO Gazprom Neft "at the annual meeting has approved payment of dividends as per results of 2005 in the amount of RUR 7.9 per ordinary share. Thus, payment of dividends will make RUR 37,456 bil lion. Dividends will be paid before May 31, Section Monetary and budgetary spheres 2.5.4. Investments of Pension Savings in the System of Mandatory Pension Insurance The main bulk of the funded component of the mandatory pension system, as before, is accumulated by a government asset manager, whose functions are per formed by the USSR Bank for Foreign Trade (Vneshekonombank). As of the begin ning if 2006, the value of the pension savings invested by the government asset manager amounted to 176.5 bn roubles, while the total volume of pension savings administered by private asset managers (PAM) was 5.6 bn roubles (3%). Another bn roubles (1%) were transferred by citizens to the Non Government Pension Fund (NGPF).
Simultaneously, yet another 91.7 bn roubles was constituted by the insurance contributions to the funded component of labor pension collected by the Pension Fund of the Russian Federation (PFR) but not yet transferred into the trusteeship management of asset managers or the PFR. Out of this sum, more than 80 bn rou bles was invested by the PFR in government securities. During the first half of 2006, another 40.7 bn roubles was received by the PFR as part of the funded component of labor pension. The share of funds invested by the PFR in government securities did not undergo any important changes59.
By late 2006, the value of the pension savings invested by the government as set manager (Vneshekonombank) had exceeded 267 bn roubles, having increased during that year by 90.8 bn roubles (51%). Most of it was represented by the funds transferred during the year from the PFR (83.5 bn roubles). The rate of return on investments declared by Vneshekonombank amounted in 2006 to 6% (against 12% by the results of the year 2005)60.
The reports published in the autumn of 2006 by the Federal Service for Finan cial Markets (FSFM) concerning the investment of pension savings in 2005 made it possible, for the first time, to observe the directions along which pension savings were being invested by private asset managers and the NGPF, and not only by the government asset manager61. The structure of investments of the Vneshekonom bank and the aggregate investment portfolio of all private asset managers62 as of the end of 2004 and 2005, as well as of the end of Q Ш 2006, is shown in Fig. 25.
Federal Law “On the budget of the Pension Fund of the Russian Federation for the year 2007”, Vestnik [Herald] of the PFR No 3 for 2006.
The data concerning asset managers and the NGPF have not been published yet. In the Federal Law “On the budget of the Pension Fund of the Russian Federation for the year 2007”, the PFR made a preliminary estimation of the amount of pension savings as of the end of 2006 as being equal to 345.3 bn roubles, which constitutes slightly more than 1% of GDP. As of 1 January 2006, the corre sponding index was 255.9 bn roubles.
For the data for the first three quarters of 2006, see the PFR’s website: http://pfrf.ru.
For purposes of analysis, the data published by the Federal Service for Financial Markets in re spect of each of asset managers, in disputable cases were checked with other sources of informa tion, and then aggregated. The source of data for 2006 is the PFR’s website: http://pfrf.ru RUSSIAN ECONOMY IN trends and outlooks Fig. 19. The structure of the investment portfolio of the government asset manager (Vneshekonombank), as of end of Fig. 20. The structure of the investment portfolio of the government asset manager (Vneshekonombank), as of end of Section Monetary and budgetary spheres Fig. 21. The structure of the investment portfolio of the government asset manager (Vneshekonombank), as of end of Q III Fig. 22. The structure of the investment portfolio of the government asset manager (Vneshekonombank), as of end of RUSSIAN ECONOMY IN trends and outlooks Fig. 23. The structure of the aggregate investment portfolio of private asset managers as of end of Fig. 24. The structure of the aggregate investment portfolio of private asset managers as of end of Section Monetary and budgetary spheres Source: calculated on the basis of information published by the Federal Service for Financial mar kets, the Pension Fund of the Russian Federation, Vneshekonombank.
Fig. 25. The structure of the aggregate investment portfolio of private asset managers as of end of Q III As was found, the share of government securities of the Russian Federation in the investment portfolios of private asset managers varied between 0 and 96%, as of the end of 2004, and between 0 до 73% as of the end of 2005 constituting 17% in the aggregate portfolio in 2004, and 15% – in 2005. However, there were only two asset managers whose share of RF government securities as of the end of 2005 was more than 50% (“Dvortsovaia ploshchiad” and “KIT”), while 29 invest ment portfolios63 contained no such securities. As of the end of Q Ш 2006, the highest share of RF government securities in the portfolios of PAMs decreased to 54%, while 28 investment portfolios contained no such securities, and their aver age share was 12.4%.
Thus, during one year and 9 months the share of federal government bonds decreased from 17% to 12%, which, no doubt, reflected the trend of diminishing rate of return on this instrument. At the same time, such an explanation can hardly be accepted as exhaustive, because the decrease of the rate of return was small, while the dynamics of the rate of return on subfederal and corporate bonds was displaying a similar trend. However, the share of these instruments in the aggre gate investment portfolio of PAMs was growing, thus reflecting the diversification of the investments being made by asset managers, and in the case of corporate bonds – also the dynamic development of the market.
At the same time, in contrast to the government asset manager, private asset managers do not invest in RF government securities denominated in foreign cur rencies. As seen in Fig. 19–22, Vneshekonombank increased the share of Euro The number of asset managers engaged in the trust management of pension savings is not com patible with the number of investment portfolios listed under their management, because several asset managers have formed more than one investment portfolio.
RUSSIAN ECONOMY IN trends and outlooks bonds in its portfolio to 10% by the end of 2005, and afterwards it was fluctuating within the range of 7–10 %.
On the whole, fixed income securities (federal, subfederal, municipal, corpo rate bonds) amounted, in the aggregate investment portfolio of private asset man agers, as of the end of 2004, to 54 %, as of the end of 2005 – to 64%, and as of the end of Q Ш 2006 – 62%.
The percentage of shares in the aggregate investment portfolio of PAMs was fluctuating around 20%, while at the same time 11 asset managers had no shares in their investment portfolios as of the end of 2005 (Table 38). In 2004, there were such asset managers, and as of the end of Q Ш 2006 – only 5. The actual average percentage of shares in the aggregate investment portfolio of private asset man agers is much lower than the maximum indices permissible for this type of assets in accordance with Decree of the RF Government No. 37964.
Table Private Asset Managers with no Shares in their Investment Portfolios as of the End of 2004 – Q Ш Asset manager (investment portfolio) End of 2004 End of 2005. End of Q III 1 VIKA + + 2 Dvortsovaia ploshchiad + + Natsionalnaia upravliaushchiaia kompania [Na 3 + + tional Asset Manager] 4 UNIVER Management + + TRINFIKO (for conservative preservation of 5 + + + capital) 6 PIOGLOBAL Asset Management + 7 PROMYSHLENNYE TRADITSII + 8 REGION Asset Management + 9 RN trust + + 10 Rostov Trust Company + 11 YAMAL + 12 Alfa Capital + + 13 Alians ROSNO (conservative) + 14 INTERFINANS + 15 Metropol + 16 Analytical Center + 17 FINAM MANAGEMENT + 18 NVKUK + Note: + means absence of shares in investment portfolio as of corresponding date.
At the same time, it were shares that generated the highest rate of return dur ing the period under study. In 2005–2006, the RTS index grew by 3.1 times (in USD denomination) and, no doubt, such a dynamics of the prices of shares was a factor of the high rate of return achieved by PAMs in 2005–2006. By the results of 2005, the highest rate of return on investments demonstrated by PAMs amounted to 52% (Troika Dialog), in 2006 to 39% (UNIVER Management).
The margin for 2004 was 40%, for 2005 – 45 %, and for 2006 – 55 %.
Section Monetary and budgetary spheres In Table 39, the structure of the investment portfolio of asset managers with the highest rate of return by the results of the first three quarters of 2006 is shown.
It appears that judging by that structure, one cannot come to the conclusion that it was the investments in shares, which provided the highest rates of return on in vestment portfolios. Only RTK INVEST had an investment portfolio where shares constituted approximately one half of all assets. Three asset managers with the rate of return of 26–29% had a rather similar percentage of shares (25–26 %) and a high percentage of subfederal bonds (31–36 %). As for the leader of 2006 – UNI VER Management – its investment portfolio is negligible in absolute terms (its market value was only 2,3 mln roubles as of the end of Q Ш 2006), which, evidently, was the reason for the deformity of its structure (more than a half of assets was accu mulated at credit institutions in the form of residuals on the asset manager’s ac counts or the monies transferred to the professional participants of the securities market, which has nothing to do with instruments with high rates of return).
Table Structure of the Investment Portfolio of Asset Managers with the Highest Rate of Return, by Results of the First Three Quarters of UNIVER AKKORD As RTK URALSIB ASSET Manage set Manage URALSIB INVEST MANAGEMENT ment ment 1 2 3 4 5 Rate of return, % PER ANNUM 44.4 29.8 29 28.5 25.Market value of portfolio, mln rou 2.3 20.1 34.1 15.9 533.bles.
Материалы этого сайта размещены для ознакомления, все права принадлежат их авторам.
Если Вы не согласны с тем, что Ваш материал размещён на этом сайте, пожалуйста, напишите нам, мы в течении 1-2 рабочих дней удалим его.