Conygar Investment Company Reports Strong Interim Results, NAV Up Significantly After Rhosgoch Sale

Conygar interim results 2026: why the NAV jump looks real, but not entirely repeatable

Conygar has posted a much stronger first half, with net asset value (NAV) rising sharply to £54.3 million from £41.6 million at 30 September 2025. On a per share basis, NAV climbed to 91.6p from 70.2p. That is a big move, and the main reason is very clear – the sale of the group’s Rhosgoch landholding in Anglesey.

For retail investors, this is one of those results where the headline is genuinely encouraging, but the detail matters. The balance sheet is healthier, debt is lower, cash is higher, and management has bought more time on its main loan. But a large chunk of the profit came from a property sale, not from recurring operations.

Conygar key figures from the six months to 31 March 2026

Metric	31 Mar 2026	30 Sept 2025
Net asset value	£54.3 million	£41.6 million
NAV per share	91.6p	70.2p
Profit for the period	£12.8 million	Loss of £19.5 million for FY 2025
Cash deposits	£6.3 million	£3.2 million
Bank borrowings	£38.7 million	£48.0 million
ZDP shares liability	£2.8 million	£5.6 million
Basic EPS	21.39p	(32.78)p for FY 2025

Rhosgoch sale drives the numbers – and that is both good news and a warning label

The standout item was the £15.1 million profit from selling Rhosgoch. Gross proceeds were £18.5 million, with net cash proceeds of £18.4 million. That single disposal did the heavy lifting for the period.

That matters for two reasons. First, it proves Conygar can monetise assets and turn paper value into real cash. Second, it means investors should be careful not to treat this half-year profit as a clean run-rate for future earnings.

Without that sale, the picture would still have improved, but much less dramatically. The group did report £1.2 million of net income from operational assets and £0.6 million of fair value gains, but those were partly offset by £1.9 million of administrative costs, £1.7 million of finance costs and a £0.7 million tax charge.

My view: selling Rhosgoch was a smart and necessary move. It has strengthened the group’s hand at a time when debt, rates and property market nerves still matter a lot.

Debt reduction and Barclays loan extension improve breathing room at The Island Quarter

This is probably the most important part of the update after the Rhosgoch sale. Conygar used the cash to repay £3.9 million of the Barclays loan linked to Winfield Court and fully repay the £5.4 million ASK loan.

That means the group’s total bank borrowings fell by £9.4 million in the period, leaving £38.7 million outstanding at 31 March 2026. Including ZDP shares – zero dividend preference shares, a form of finance with a fixed capital entitlement rather than an income dividend – net borrowings were £41.5 million.

Just as important, Barclays agreed to restructure the loan and extend final repayment to 31 March 2027. The facility stays at £38.8 million, and the loan to value covenant, or LTV cap, is now 60%. LTV simply measures debt against asset value.

That extension buys time, which Conygar badly needed. But it does not remove the issue. The company says it will need to extend the facility again, refinance, raise fresh funding, bring in a joint venture, or sell assets to repay it. So yes, this is progress, but the refinancing clock is still ticking.

Winfield Court student accommodation: steady progress, but the student market is not easy

At Winfield Court in Nottingham, lettings for the 2026-2027 academic year are said to be progressing steadily. The benchmark to beat is the 81% occupancy achieved for the previous academic year.

Management is refreshingly honest about the market. Purpose-built student accommodation, or PBSA, is facing pressure from rising incentives, affordability issues and fewer overseas students. That is not ideal.

The positive angle is that supply seems constrained, particularly in Nottingham where construction costs are higher than investment values. In plain English, it is not especially attractive to build new competing schemes right now. That could help protect occupancy and values for established assets like Winfield Court.

My take: steady is fine here. Investors should not expect fireworks, but stabilisation is exactly what Conygar needs if it wants stronger refinancing options next year.

1 TIQ hospitality venue and Rhubarb partnership: sensible move, early days on the payoff

Conygar transferred operational management of 1 TIQ to Rhubarb from 1 October 2025 under an initial ten-year term. Rhubarb is being paid through a revenue-sharing arrangement, and management expects the change to be cost neutral in the short term.

For the six months, Conygar recognised a £0.1 million loss from 1 TIQ, mainly linked to transition costs. The company says any profit share for the current financial year will be clearer after the summer events season.

This looks like a pragmatic decision. Hospitality is under pressure from higher minimum wages, business rates and employer national insurance costs. Handing operations to a specialist operator with better buying power could improve margins over time, but the company is not claiming a near-term miracle.

There is also some upside potential from expansion plans, including a roof terrace and better events capacity. Promising, yes, but for now it is still more plan than profit.

The Island Quarter valuation held flat – prudent, sensible, and probably the right call

Conygar kept the fair value of The Island Quarter at £89.5 million, unchanged from the 30 September 2025 Knight Frank valuation. That includes £65.0 million for Winfield Court, £6.8 million for 1 TIQ and £17.7 million for land and buildings for future development.

No new planning permissions were granted in the period, no major development progress was reported, and cash outlays were minimal. Against that backdrop, holding the valuation steady feels cautious rather than optimistic.

That caution matters because last year’s numbers were hammered by valuation losses. This time, management has resisted the temptation to mark things up aggressively. For credibility, that is a plus.

What Conygar investors should like – and what should still make them cautious

• Positive: NAV rose strongly, cash increased to £6.3 million, debt fell, and the ASK loan has gone.
• Positive: The Barclays extension reduces immediate pressure and gives management time to stabilise Winfield Court.
• Positive: TIQ valuations were held steady rather than stretched higher.
• Negative: A big slice of the profit came from a one-off land sale.
• Negative: The Barclays facility still matures in March 2027, so refinancing risk remains very real.
• Negative: Student accommodation and hospitality are both operating in tougher markets than they were a couple of years ago.
• Neutral to negative: No dividend was declared.

My verdict on Conygar’s interim results: balance sheet recovery first, growth story later

This was a good set of interim results. Not flawless, not transformational, but definitely good. The company has used the Rhosgoch sale to strengthen the balance sheet, cut debt and buy itself time.

The key question now is whether Conygar can turn that extra breathing room into a more durable improvement at The Island Quarter. If Winfield Court lettings continue to firm up and 1 TIQ performs better under Rhubarb, the group may be in a stronger position when loan discussions come around again.

For retail investors, the simple read-across is this: Conygar is in a better place than it was six months ago, but it is not out of the woods. The NAV recovery is real, yet the next phase will depend less on asset sales and more on operational delivery and refinancing progress.