Yes, those fees are definitely off-putting. They are from the KID so unfortunately there’s not a breakdown of how it’s made up (other than 2.65% for management and 2.98% for performance) . I think it does include underlying fees paid to other companies but I’m not entirely sure. Not sure how the fees it pays to the asset managers it owns are accounted for however. Mind-bending stuff these cost figures sometimes!

But eek, 5.66% effective fees — and I presume (haven’t looked at the accounts) that this does not include the extra fees on the 50% of NAV it is running with other companies. (Sometimes you see fee waivers but I’d be surprised to see it here. :))

Let’s generously call those 1.5%, and we could be looking at 7% fees here.

I think that discount makes sense! Perhaps it also makes the investment worth a punt at this price, but I can’t see why it would close, except in a wind-up or acquisition, which isn’t beyond the realms of possibility I suppose.

I wasn’t aware BTEM was a major holder – interesting information!

I am a recent buyer of TFGS (3% of portfolio) and did so not blind to the downsides you rightly highlight but on a (hopefully) balanced view of the investment case. For me the case for buying, in a diversified portfolio, is as follows:

– Substantial insider ownership
– Share tenders and buybacks
– Quarterly dividend and yield allowing income to be reinvested at 47% discount to NAV
– Substantial holding by BTEM (which I also hold) 5.4% of its portfolio
– Strong NAV returns over 3, 5 and 10 years