It took 15 years to recover from the last tech bubble

Investor’s Daily brought to you by Nickolai Hubble | June 5, 2026

---

In March 2000, the dot-com bubble popped.

The companies were real… the technology was real and the internet turned out to be every bit as transformative as the believers said it would be…

But the revenues were not real… and that was enough.

It took 15 years for the market to fully recover.

A generation of investors who planned to retire in the early 2000s didn’t. They watched their portfolios collapse and went back to work.

Here’s the question worth sitting with today.

What actually makes AI different?

The technology is impressive. The potential is genuine. But when you follow the money — when you ask where the actual commercial revenue is coming from — the answer looks uncomfortably similar to the dot com era.

Microsoft has invested billions into OpenAI. OpenAI uses that money to buy computing power from Microsoft’s Azure platform. Microsoft books that as AI revenue.

The money circles back. The same capital, moving between two companies, being reported as proof that the AI boom is real.

In 2000, investors learned that “users” and “eyeballs” were not the same thing as revenue. The market had built trillion-dollar valuations on top of that confusion.

Right up until March 2000, the people buying believed the story. Build it and they will come. The valuations would be justified.

It never happened.

My colleague Jim Rickards believes we are in the AI version of that moment right now… and that by 26 August the AI Bubble will pop.

The SNOWBALL has a comparison share VWRP, the comparison being, you buy VWRP and forget about it until you enter drawdown, with the intention of using the 4% rule to fund your retirement.

The SNOWBALL

I don’t update this very often has it has little relevance to the plan as your Snowball should be different to the SNOWBALL has it reflects the years you have before you enter drawdown.

(Note the spike on the graph is a software glitch.)

The comparisons

VWRP £168,027

The SNOWBALL £106,178. There is around 1k of xd dividends but it makes no difference to the outcome.

The comparison that matters.

VWRP using the 4% rule would provided income of £6,721

The SNOWBALL current income is £12k.

This gap will continue to grow, especially has VWRP has had a period of out performance that is unlikely to be replicated.

The third option is to invest in VWRP with the intention of buying an annuity.

You have to surrender your capital but currently it would provide income of

£11,671.

The two know unknowns are what will your capital be when you enter drawdown and the annuity rate it could be………….

Canada Life figures show the 65-year-old with a £100,000 pension pot could buy an annuity linked to the retail price index (RPI) that would generate a starting annual income of £3,896. That’s up from £2,195 in the New Year following a 77% spike in rates this year.
Oct 22.

One huge gamble.

VWRP used as the example but there are very many other options to invest in.

BSIF leaves after their agreed bid news.

Snapshot: ROC‑backed solar exposure

Vehicle	ROC solar exposure	How clear is it?	Key evidence
NESF – NextEnergy Solar Fund	High	Explicit	Named UK sites with ROC banding (e.g. Barnby 5 MW, 1.2 ROC)
FSFL – Foresight Solar Fund	High	Strong but indirect	Talks about UK “ROC‑backed solar portfolios” as valuation benchmarks; NAV sensitivity to ROC/FiT indexation
JLEN → FGEN – Foresight Environmental Infrastructure	High (mixed tech)	Explicit	Solar portfolio described as “older vintage assets with high value subsidy tariffs… Government‑backed incentives (ROC and FiT)”
TRIG – The Renewables Infrastructure Group	Moderate / assumed	Implied only	UK solar parks with long‑term contracted, inflation‑linked revenues; ROC not named but very likely part of the mix for older UK solar

NESF – NextEnergy Solar Fund

• Pure‑play solar, very ROC‑heavy.
• 2024 annual report explicitly labels assets with ROC banding, e.g. Barnby, Nottinghamshire – 5.0 MW, 1.2 ROC.
• Separate RNS on ROC/FiT indexation consultation confirms material exposure to both schemes.

Verdict: NESF is one of the cleanest ways to own a diversified book of UK ROC‑backed solar.

FSFL – Foresight Solar Fund

• Large UK‑tilted solar portfolio; reports repeatedly reference ROC/FiT inflation indexation as a NAV driver.
• 2023 results note that sales of large ROC‑backed UK solar portfolios are used as valuation benchmarks for FSFL’s own UK assets—strongly implying similar ROC‑backed characteristics.

Verdict: High probability that a big chunk of the UK book is ROC‑backed, even if each site’s banding isn’t spelled out in the headline text.

JLEN (now FGEN – Foresight Environmental Infrastructure)

• FGEN’s solar page is very clear:
  • “Solar portfolio includes older vintage assets with high value subsidy tariffs.”
  • “Government‑backed incentives (ROC and FiT).”
• Named projects (Amber, Branden, CSGH, Monksham, etc.) include explicit ROC accreditation levels (e.g. 2 ROCs, 1.6 ROCs, 1.4 ROCs).

Verdict: JLEN/FGEN absolutely owns ROC‑backed UK solar—though it’s a smaller sleeve within a broader environmental infra mix.

TRIG – The Renewables Infrastructure Group

• TRIG runs a big, diversified portfolio (wind, solar, batteries) with ground‑mounted UK solar and “high proportion of contracted, inflation‑linked revenues.”
• Given commissioning vintages and UK focus, it’s very likely that some UK solar parks are ROC‑backed, but public materials don’t explicitly label ROC banding the way NESF/FGEN do.

Verdict: Treat TRIG as ROC‑adjacent rather than a clean ROC solar play—great for diversified infra, less precise if you’re targeting ROC cashflows.

The deal that woke up the solar sector

For all the latest breaking mid- and small-cap news.

 www.proactiveinvestors.co.uk

And finally, the agreed £548 million takeover of Bluefield Solar Income Fund by Drax Group has done something the sector has been waiting years for.

It has put a credible private market price tag on a listed renewable energy fund at a moment when the whole sector has been languishing at bargain-basement valuations.

The bid landed as funds like NextEnergy Solar and Foresight Solar were sitting at yawning discounts to net asset value, the legacy of rising interest rates since 2022 eroding the relative appeal of yield-generating infrastructure.

Both rose on the news, with Cavendish arguing the two funds, whose portfolios most closely resemble Bluefield’s in their concentration of ROC-backed UK solar assets, stood to benefit most from the valuation signal the deal provides.

Octopus Renewables Infrastructure Trust, Greencoat UK Wind and The Renewables Infrastructure Group also caught a lift, though all remain at substantial discounts, illustrating how much ground still needs to be recovered.

Perhaps the most encouraging element is Drax’s stated rationale: up to £2 billion of planned renewable investment by 2031, suggesting well-capitalised energy companies are willing to pay private market prices for assets the public market has persistently undervalued.

As you will note below, building a position here paid off, bought for the yield not for the price, if not, had the price risen, you could sell, book the profit and move on.

To understand the journey, you need to know the price history, the NAV, the dividend history and the latest price, easiest to follow in a chart.

The easiest ten percent to earn is the first ten percent and it’s also the easiest to lose.

The average buying price was 63p, the dividend 4.55p = 7.2%

The current expected dividends 6.2p current price, current price 65p = 9.6%

Discount to NAV 31%, so a strong hold, with the intention of taking any profits if they arrive.

Current profit £1,063, which you will see mainly from dividends earned and already has been re-invested, earning more dividends. If bad news hits the share the price could fall and take away all the profit and the dividends. Remember if you trade you will buy a clunker, how you deal with clunkers will determine how sucessful your are.

I’ve sold a further 397 shares in ORIT for a profit of £250.00

pik168 tastytreatskc.comx dunlapdanielle262@gmail.com 194.233.70.142

I really love your website.. Pleasant colors & theme.Did you develop this amazing site yourself? Please reply back as I’m trying to create my own site and would love to know where you got this from or what the theme is named. Thank you!

The blog is WordPress, thru FastHosts, it’s easy to set up. There is a small monthly charge but there is also a free introductory period. GL

You watched the market fall and you decided to buy CMPI as if your timing was wrong you could still bank the dividend and hold until the market turned up, which could be many years.

Your analysis was correct and you bought after the first positive candle, now you could sell some shares and keep your invested capital in the Trust, to collect the recent announced dividend. If the price continues to rise, you could sell some more, now even though dealing costs have gone down, there is a cost to selling but it’s not your money, it’s the markets. If the price falls you could buy back the shares sold, if you think there is another buying opportunity.