Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Quote  |  Bullboard  |  News  |  Opinion  |  Profile  |  Peers  |  Filings  |  Financials  |  Options  |  Price History  |  Ratios  |  Ownership  |  Insiders  |  Valuation

Sir Royalty Income Fund T.SRV.UN

Alternate Symbol(s):  SIRZF

SIR Royalty Income Fund (the Fund) holds investment in SIR Corp (SIR). The Funds' investment, SIR is engaged in the business of owning and operating full-service restaurants in Canada. SIR has concept restaurant brands, including Jack Astor’s Bar and Grill, Scaddabush Italian Kitchen & Bar, and Canyon Creek Chop House, signature restaurant brands, such as Reds Wine Tavern, Reds Midtown Tavern, Reds Square One, and The Loose Moose, which are used by SIR under a license agreement with SIR Royalty Limited Partnership (the Partnership. The Fund receives distribution income from its investment in the Partnership and interest income from the SIR Loan. The Fund indirectly participates in the revenues generated under the License and Royalty Agreement through its Investment in the Partnership.


TSX:SRV.UN - Post by User

Comment by flamingogoldon Sep 27, 2021 9:50am
76 Views
Post# 33923301

RE:RE:$100M market cap

RE:RE:$100M market capYou can include me in that small crowd of "unforgiven". I want to echo what was said about the "paper gain" that the non-SRV holders have made. It is only a paper gain, so to crystalize those gains the share price needs to stay healthy which is good news for the street shareholder. Of course, there is a negative to having just a few holding major control but imo that period has already been played out.

Robsopinion wrote:

I think had Fowler offered $5.00 a unit he may have taken it. And he would still be laughing right now! But he really tried to lowball, and used his press releases to try and depress the stock and the sentiment of investors. That to me borders on criminal. I was the only one to speak up at the AGM and one of my questions was " how badly does he think his actions have created animosity between the unit holders and the company, specifically him as the leader" really didn't get an answer on that one. With the stratospheric rise of the unit value, I think most have forgiven/forgotten. When I say most, I do not include myself. 

Mr. Janes, has done phenomenally well with his investment. BUT he put a lot of work into it, and had balls of steel, to say the least. I can't wait for the opportunity to thank this man in person. 

The problem he does have though, is although he has made a huge paper gain, if he were to ever try and sell his massive holdings into the market, with the float we have, the unit price would plummet. Luckily he can just sit back and collect the juicy distributions and make himself whole in 3 or 4 years, the rest (20mil in equity value?) is just gravy!



<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>