Unsure how. Reducing the issued share capital of the company has it's considerable challenges.

The charges are the issue for me.

I think BB is correct, it is run for the family. Look where the charges go.

It is uninvestable. Is that a word?

But, although me crystal ball is being serviced, you don’t need one for this trust, as it scams off far too much in charges.

All very fair points, L.P.

I try to look at things clinically and objectively rather than a commentary on personal investing stye, preference or holding. RIT's performance over the last 10 years surely has not been good enough when you consider such a heavy weighting to risk on assets and in a long bull market too.

Whilst 10 years might not be a long time for the Rothschilds and their multi-generational timeframe, it's nigh on 25% of a working career during accumulation and 15% of an average adult lifetime.

Whilst the family drive the DeLorean at 88mph, retail investors appear to be paying for a Mercedes but find themselves driving a Trabant in the hope of a significant upgrade.

Two big questions:

(i) If there's a significant downturn and RIT's performance has been between CGT and LS40 for a decade, should investors fear the worst? Or will some magic come to the fore?

(ii) I'm interested in Mr GL's view on why it's such a core holding for him. Is it the discount? Or Is it a quality run trust simply going through bad times?

NAV's not been bad over 10 years, gone from about 1,400 to 2,500, plus dividends. A bit off their 10.5% long-term annual return – but it has meaningfully diversified a market-weighted portfolio. They tilt quite a bit to value and Asia opportunities – which are things that tend to play out over longer periods.

The problem with something like 10 year performance is you wind up chasing very narrow parts of the market. Recent market performance has been historically narrow. So the decision of whether to go all-in on what's done well, or go totally the other way, is a headache and a coin toss. So it would be a risk to follow that logic into the next thing. It's why the retail crowd tends to be chronically behind the curve.

I've had a small holding in RCP forever, and at a 30% discount, it should certainly be more attractive than it was a few years back, when Aminatidi wanted to buy it on a 10% premium. But costs are a factor. If the easy money's not there in private equity growth, and competition's tighter between hedge funds, those costs become a drag – 10 years of 2.3% fees compound to something like 30%. That's your discount eaten up. You are reliant on those funds delivering on their costs.

Over many decades we have seen massive swings in discounts/premiums as many investors use past performance.

Understanding why these swings occur can be very beneficial to us all as investors.

We have seen these swings recently happening with SMT,WPCT,EWI,RCP and CGT and many more.

IMO unless we see major M&A RCP could go the way of MNH,NSI,HANSA,OCN,CGI and many others. (large discounts)

I learnt many years ago that past performance, top down, macro/mini economics as well as pages of Reports etc. caused Investors to swing from undervalued to overvalued and back again.

With knowledge and skill I discovered how we could take advantage of these trends and was able to manage top performing Funds in many areas.....