Our latest Investing Matters Podcast episode with QuotedData's Edward Marten has just been released. Listen here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
"forgotten wot the first one ment now"
I think you were having a laff, what was you finking.
Can you please stop using BIG words. Spent all night looking em up forgotten wot the first one ment now.
And one criticism I have of your posts (and I have several :) is that we can all see who the poster is by their online handle published to the left of their very post
- yet you insist in every single post of signing your ID name - yet again. Unnecessary duplication. Alright once or twice - but permanently? Really?
What if everyone did as you do? What would you think after seeing Velo up there to the left, if I signed off every single post with -
Velo
Velo
In a word - NO . As in no it wouldn't be better. That word is barred from my house. Hate it.
You'll never find me using it - ever!
It's clumsy and 'orrible.
AND not fit for purpose, in this instance
However, the reason it won't do is because it's inaccurate for this occasion. It's definition means it allows for the possibility that something said might eventually be later proven to be true.”
Regarding the word - Apocryphal -I don’t agree with the Oxford dictionary’s interprétation. Maybe there’re other interpretations of the word from alternative sources.
My interpretation of it is whatever it refers to is merely myth. Connotations are - misinformation - deviously misleading and damn right lies. I use it in this context anyway.
Apocryphalness is a favored method of third world kleptocracies - widespread in Orwellian societies - they know that by repeating a lie often enough makes it true.
One criticism I have about your posts is that they’re overtly verbose. Follow Orwell’s advice - don’t use three or four adjectives when one will suffice.
Simplicity is an art form
Less is more
Describing something in the fewest words possible makes it more accessible to the respondent
Toff
Velo did you know that BT’s pension is protected by the state ! , it was written in blood when bt went public .
Tsk! Wanted to review the price action and I find its notes and queries time. First up:
------------------------------------
" Velo
'it becomes accepted as an urban myth-like truism'
Apocryphal would have been a better word.
Toff "
-----------------
In a word - NO . As in no it wouldn't be better. That word is barred from my house. Hate it.
You'll never find me using it - ever!
It's clumsy and 'orrible.
AND not fit for purpose, in this instance
However, the reason it won't do is because it's inaccurate for this occasion. It's definition means it allows for the possibility that something said might eventually be later proven to be true.
I'm talking about intentional lies perpetrated for villainous reasons, not things that could be regarded as true and authentic - if only the right or lost evidence ever turned up to support the assertion.
Too many of 'might', 'doubtful veracity' etc., I want definitions for a deliberate lie proffered as the truth. There's no ambiguity, no doubt, so it can't be apocryphal.
PS. Just checked this minute - Oxford dictionary - of doubtful authenticity. Doubtful is not the same as proven beyond all reasonable doubt. So, thank you but no thanks, offer declined.
=============
UncleBucks57 @ " Velo we are all entitled to an opinion. I read and respect what others say and you should too! "
-----------
No, you can't 'make' someone respect Mein Kampf.
You can't make someone respect a death cult that masquerades as an international religion.
I don't abuse those above, but I withhold my respect.
Your post showed a good grasp of BT's history, so I don't accept the windy explanation that you didn't mean no profit generated. Why not say you meant if BT doesn't return to increasing profits each year as in previous years?
BT has never produced a loss.
If you didn't know and were just assuming so because of general negativity in analyst reports in the media I would readily accept you saying "I didn't know".
Far too many of us would rather invent than admit 'I don't know - I don't know the answer but I will find out and come back to you' - and would gain my full and enduring respect - because it would have been earned - and not given on demand.
PS. Read my post again and I'm sure you'll find a line where I admit there is much of what you say that bears consideration - I'm with you on the quality of the mediocre BOD. Disagree on your pension deficit views. Do you actually know there is a decade long plan that eradicates the pension deficit as a concern indefinitely, once it matures by 2030?
I wonder if you truly do; even many journos miss it
At this level the sp can only travel north from a quid lol , what on earth are all these threads actually trying to do convince investors that bt is worthless after being £5 a share a few years back lol , has the market for telecoms changed since then ? .... no , has BT’s customer base shrunk since then ? .... has BT’s pension debt got worse ? .... no lol , come on guys I know you have to play the game bears and bulls but honestly lol , but is worth a hell of a lot more than a quid considering we actually almost solely own the country’s telecom network lol , the glass and coppers worth more than a quid ! .
Are you sure you’re okay Uncle Buck...
“However until BT shows that it can generate a profit the SP is going nowhere.”
“I did not mean that BT does not generate a profit.”
Just what did you mean? because to anyone who understands English you meant BT doesn’t make a profit.
I know you must be under a lot of stress with the shareprice tanking like it is, but your comment was erroneous so you should expect to be questioned about it.
Toff
Velo, I did not mean that BT does not generate a profit. What I meant was that unless BT is given a level playing field, the government shackles are removed and Ofcom is bought to heel then the future will remain more difficult than it needs to be. 36 years of regulation should be enough to allow competition to thrive. Bt needs to be allowed to set fairer prices for it's products that reflect the amount of money it is investing in the network.
UncleBuck........ "A bit of respect for other posters goes a long way."
Respect others, as how you would like to be respected. I was always told as a kid that manners cost nothing. So true.
Velo we are all entitled to an opinion. I read and respect what others say and you should too! If everything is going to be fine in a couple of years then I will be happy as I have no need to sell. But just look at what has happened to the share price between October 2015 when it was nearly £5 and now. No Covid in 2015. I am not new to BT shares and have held them for many years. A bit of respect for other posters goes a long way.
ICL
COVID-19 should be boosting broadband usage. COVID-19 ending should reduce it.
Revenues were down over the last six months because of Covid - to say broadband use should be boosting usage is simply asinine. All those Corporate offices are closed for business so that impacts on revenue. Revenue will increase post-Covid.
‘I would say dividend is the major factor.’
Cancelling the dividend isn’t a major factor - it’s only for a couple of years and the market should see it as a positive because they’re retaining cash for more important expenditure.
Infrastructure has to be upgraded and maintained constantly. Your comments allude to it being upgraded once and lasting a lifetime.
“Buy it for £3, break it up for £5”
It’s all well and good snatching imaginary figures out the air and posting them - but I can tell you now there’s no substance or foundation behind those fantasy numbers.
And one last piece of advice - don’t give up your day job. Gordon Gekko was a fictional figure - if you’re feeling luck play the lottery.
Toff
COVID-19 should be boosting broadband usage. COVID-19 ending should reduce it.
BREXIT means more e-commerce internationally, but I don't see a significant impact on BT.
I would say dividend is the major factor.
Pension as a liability on the balance sheet is next.
This is a shrinking factor, as retired recipients pass away, and the new hire pension regime become more dominant.
Barring fiascos like the Italian scandal, my expectation is the infrastructure upgrade will mean a much more reliable network, requiring less maintainance. The redundancies actually reduces the pension liability further.
Freshly revamped infrastructure, low overheads, cash generating.
If the valuation stays low, somebody will make a hostile takeover.
Buy it for £3, break it up for £5.
Velo
“it becomes accepted as an urban myth-like truisim”
Apocryphal would have been a better word.
Toff
I can say with 100% certainty, that BT's share price will be much higher in a couple of years, than it is today assuming that BT's accounts are accurate. There's no reason to think that BT's accounts are inaccurate as they are an established blue chip company and not a new start up on shaky foundations.
Two imminent events that'll enable BT's stock price to climb are:
1) Covid 19 Vaccine stopping the virus in its tracks.
It's pretty clear that Vaccines will be distributed before the end of this year, irrespective of the naysayers, who broadcast it will take years.
2) Brexit completed, one way or the other.
One way, or another, Brexit will be done and dusted by the end of this year. Even if we go onto WTO life will go on. Since BT doesn't export/import anything, it isn't really affected anyway, except from a currency perspective. The market's used Brexit as an excuse to beat down UK stocks for years. Once Brexit's completed, the market will forget about it, especially when they see that it isn't the end of the world.
Those two things ending will push up BT's stock price, so a bit of patience is required to see normality return.
" BT has shown it can generate a profit. Decent profits year after year. Instead of taking the Neanderthal route and blaming the BOD focus on the real issues"
-------------
At last! Thanks. Too busy to expand my post on the now obvious pattern of brand new posters who've only signed up 30 days ago, some only days old, or a few months, and all start the same; namely boldy stating with complete authority that BT has yet to make a profit.
- One would swear it's not an oversight but some sort of concerted fascist Big Brother attempt to constantly repeat a propaganda lie until Big Brother-like, it becomes accepted as an urban myth-like truisim.
'BT generates no profit' is popping up just a bit too regular now. Coincidence? Other than that he brings up some worthy considestions. But ruins it all, by basing the whole piece from the outset on a deliberate lie (IMO).
Uncle Buck
‘However until BT shows that it can generate a profit the SP is going nowhere.’
BT has shown it can generate a profit. Decent profits year after year. Instead of taking the Neanderthal route and blaming the BOD focus on the real issues.
Shares are socially Structured realities and BT is trading on an extremely low valuation because of negative market sentiment. The BOD can’t do anything to change that.
I know you must be hurting because you bought in much higher - then the dividend disappeared overnight.
But remember - trading stocks is a blood sport.
Toff
You can look at as many charts as you like. However until BT shows that it can generate a profit the SP is going nowhere. It is no good saying that cash available will be increased in the future by cutting staff and economies created by less repair work being needed on FTTP. Also if you think that the government or Ofcom via the government are going to allow BT to increase it's prices and make a fair return on it's FTTP investments then you are mistaken, why change what's worked well to help every other telecoms provider survive and make a profit for the last 36 years. Also the BOD is so weak that they must be getting a backhander from the government and Ofcom for being so accomodating. Just look at the Huwai scandel. Government says reduce Huwai involvement BOD says "by how much". 35% says the government, yes we can do that it will cost £500million. Government now says oh remove it all by 2027 when BT had already said it would probably take until 2030 and delay 5G roll out. What's the new cost asks the government. Oh that's exactly the same as it was to reduce it to 35% says BT. Thank's very much says the government now get on with it. Unless the government changes it's tune and Ofcom are forced to regulate fairly so that BT can show clearly that it is in a position to make fair profits going forward then the share is a dead duck. Oh I forgot to mention they need to stop hammering the shareholders by cancelling the dividends which are then used to fund FTTP. As for directors buying shares it does not prove that they think the company is any good. All it proves is that they know what to do to trouser their own pockets. Free shares can go straight into an ISA tax free and any other shares purchased are because it is more tax effective to have shares than cash. I would not count on the dividend returning either. Remember the latest dividends were cancelled at the last minute, how many people saw that coming?