Saba Capital’s proposals are “self-serving and destructive”, says the chair of one of seven London-listed investment trusts in the firing line of the New York hedge fund. Another is “appalled by Saba’s action and conduct”. A third says Saba is pursuing “a backdoor attempt to seize control of the trust”. A fourth thinks Saba is following an “unknown and unproven” strategy and, similarly, is trying to “take control of your company for its own economic benefit”.
When opinion is so uniform, it is tempting to take the opposite side and suspect a case of vested City interests feeling threatened. After all, the popular criticism of investment trusts – companies that invest in other companies – is that there are too many of them and that their boards are complacent even when share prices trade at frustratingly wide discounts to the value of the underlying assets.
