The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring Jeremy Skillington, CEO of Poolbeg Pharma 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.
times. Only have took at the graphs to see that its so blatant. Must be easy to trace, So much for London Stock Exchange's waffle about wanting a well regulated market, (well relegated to the cheating zone more like it). Therefore, I feel I am right about the manipulation of Man's SP by mm's illicitly shorting this again to accommodate a t/o. Especially as Man's funds performances are strong so someone like ______ _____ are trying to get their hands on them. but acquisitions are frustrating them. AMO.
Now 0.2 up on week not 0.2 down. Small movements but significant and more stabilised.
Man Group PLC (EMG:LSE): Last: 121.30, up 2 (+1.68%), High: 124.00, Low: 120.40, Volume: 4.56m BE Good rally yesterday, same again today. BE Reason's sort-of dull though. BE BE That's the NAV on AHL's Bermuda, Guernsey and Dublin lines, now above high water mark. PM ok... BE Panmure upgrades in response. BE  AHL funds are returning much better investment performances this year than has been the case for several years which have been distorted by quantitative easing. Assuming that markets are gradually normalising we anticipate higher performance fees. AHL funds are delivering double digit returns and are exceeding their high water marks. Man has also acquired another $15.7bn (pro-forma) AUM, principally in Numeric (completed in September), which is a significant addition to its quant offering. BE  We estimate performance fees for FY14 of $240m, implying $140m in the second half on top of the £101m in H1, versus $180m previously. Consensus currently is around $200m. On the back of this, we have revised our earnings estimates as follows: FY14 EPS 15.2c (from 14.0c) +9%, FY15 17.0c (from 14.5c) +17%, and FY16 18.0c (from 15c) +20%. We are now above the consensus EPS of 12c for FY14 and 15c for FY15. BE  The shares are trading on 10.9x FY15 December revised EPS and yield 4.6%.  We have lifted our price target to 145p from 125p previously to reflect the higher earnings and improved outlook for AHL. We have upgraded our recommendation to a Buy from Hold. They are due to report Q3 IMS on 16th October.
http://europe.aviatelive.com/man-group-stay-long/ For self-help and limited macro exposures vs. the broader market, we note Man Group has posted reasonable results in AHL of late, no doubt helped by strong currency trends and the convergence of yields in the fixed income markets.
AHL down 1.3 while GLG up 1.7 Wasn’t this the reason for the acquisitions, i.e. to stabilize. However, AHL was also up 0.3 on week at $1.3087. Good point made by wiejse on discussthemarket, is that AHL is a smalller contributer to Man Group now. So the improvement over the last few weeks from GLG is important, (roughly 1.9% last week). For anyone interested and mathematically indulgent, June 30th figures for calculation are on https://www.man.com/GB/presentations/ From page 33 I see earnings from performance (pf) fees :- 79% of AHL's FUM is eligible for pf of 18% to 20% and accounted for 21% of Man's total FUM up to June 30th, 45% GLG " "" 15% to 20% " "" 59% " " " " 20% FRM " "" 5% to 10% ! "" 29% " " " " So in my view, the contributing proportions are, (very roughly), AHL 15% GLG 30% FRM 5% of Man's pf. This means to me that Man's share price should be 48% of its price when AHL was last in the $1.30's. Man's price then ranged between £3 & £5. So my estimation is that Man's SP should be around 137p at least, based on the £3, & up to £2.40 based on the £5 , Since June 30th, AHL has improved hand over fidt and GLG has begun improvement., its plain to see that this would be a snip t/o at 140p to 150p. Hence the unfair activities, but I believe that the recent acquisitions will be frustrating any such t/o. So it will be interesting to see, as dduck, has said what Numeric & Pine Grocve can contribute. Not forgetting that Man are presently arranging fund raising in the form of bonds for another acquisition. Just my quick calculations & as ever DYOR & GL
hit the d instead of the c
I did say 'you appear to describe as acceptable'. .Thanks for the explanation.
I take you read my a statement that the system have dealings which " are wrong" is acceptability ? It is not, saying something is a fact is not acceptabilty .
Thanks for your mention. Contrary to what you say, 'Strong Buy' is an opinion and is based on that Man SP is a long way short of being a realistic representation of its current performance and further based on the premise from the London Stock Exchange, (LSEx ) Quote 'The Exchange's primary aim is to provide issuers, intermediaries and investors with attractive, efficient and well-regulated markets in which to raise capital and fulfil investment and trading requirements.' http://www.londonstockexchange.com/traders-and-brokers/rules-regulations/rules-regulations.htm Noting the LSEx's emphasis on ''well regulated''' my own requirement is not to be cheated due to LSEx's lack of such regulation.. Over recent years other financial institutions have learned that they had a duty of care to their clients. IMO the LSEx needs to act quickly to prevent its operations deteriorating further into, and to recover from, the situation you appear to describe as acceptable.
I imagine that AHL will breach 1.33 on yesterday's performance (we'll see at 1730), but I am guessing that GLG won't have performed that well in the last week - again, we'll see later on. be interesting to see how the two US acquisitions are performing when Man updates on Q3 on the 16th October.
i believe it's the entire management fees and a % of the performance fees . next divi. is April 2015 (somewhere around that date), unless a special divi. is announced, which I feel is unlikely.
With all due respect, that's like saying if my auntie had b***s she'd be my uncle. We have a system which is as it is, wrongly so( as you have repeated ) but that is a fact, so saying, I would offer a strong buy opinion, as a no brainier, if things were different, seems a bit strange, as things aren't different ( or as they should be) that's all I am trying to say. Sorry for starting a conversation.
I agree, does anyone have any idea when that is likely to be?
I believe they announced a couple of years ago that the EMG dividend will be AHL's total earnings. Apparently AHL is now in hwm territory - so what is the difference in fees? Surely the share price will move higher once the new dividend is announced.
in the circumstances that are allowed, that I do consider Man shares to be a strong buy, and I give my reasons. However, the qualifier is obvious my option is made on the premise that it is made, as was my investments, within the London Stock Market rules being operated properly, which they clearly are not.
We all make our choices, the point I haven't made very well is that I believe the share price should be higher, but just because AHL is performing better does not mean that the share price would rise proportionally. As far as the strong buy being a non brainwr, if you are so sure the mms are shorting this persistently why would you recommend a strong buy . I repeat, I am long ( like you) I beive in some market manipulation it IS WRONG ( like you ) but it is a FACT of life.
That has to be a joke. With AHL at $ 1.3249 this price should be well over 140p Now. Let's face, after marketmakers, together reduced Man's share price 4% drop for one days AHL fall of 0.9%, and then hold its price down despite the news that AHL had risen 1,5% on the next day. That to me is due to what I believe is just blatant fiddling, and cheating, and as such actions are blatantly against the rules and as such, the law of England & Wales, (LSEx rules). it is not just Man Group that I won't invest any more cash into this share but the London Stock Exchange, not just Man Group that I am not invest any more cash into, but the London Stock Exchange. The only way the LSEx will resemble a market is when they stamp out their regulators for enough to do their job properly. (I still have a few left but their b/e price is far off). However I believe a bet at the bookies would be much more regulated than the shambles at LSEx.
So I for one is finding it difficult to understand that anyone can argue that:- when the hauling down the price of a security from 125p to 113p , (not just a few pence), on the preempting of some bad figures coming out for that security and the fact that the price is held low even when that preempting turns out to be wrong is not wholly against the rule 1400 of ..........quote...........Member firms are also obliged under rule 1400 not to do any act or engage in any course of conduct which is likely to damage the fairness or integrity of the Exchange’s markets, or which might create a false or misleading impression as to the markets or price of a security'. end quote..............therefore, its plain to me that anything that is in such contrast to those rules is manipulating of such securities share price. Just because the regulators are not up to standard, (or gd forbid part of such an event), certainly does not make it right.
Typo, good dividend paying shares with room for growth. Many , my self probably included use the market manipulation card when the price moves in the opposite direction from what we want. Here's hoping we can consolidate around the 1.20 for now and reach £2.50 by the new year. ( I wish )
I agree that there will always be pre open market leaks, wether we like it or not, but I can't see many in this board selling for a gain or loss of a couple of pence. But it all depends on your strategy. I've posted a few times that many only become investors as they become tied in by successive buying and price dropping, and unless good dividend paint share with room for growth which I think this does, and they would rather trade for the quick buck.
I don't necessarily subscribe to market manipulation theories; the two scenarios are not mutually exclusive in any case. But the pre-empting of bad news is rather blatent and has recent precedent in this company.
We can't have it both ways, price drops due to market manipulation when AHL doing well AND price drops as the secret few are privy to leaked information, prior to open market being informed. Let's not forget that emg has had a 50% in a relatively short time. This breather and slight retrace could just be consolidation, and a new trading band 115- 120 area, rather than the 82-88 area of last year. Fingers crossed
Yep. Thought so. A 0.9% drop in AHL yesterday and before us mere mortals are given the information, those in the know have already reacted. I know there is wider concern over market manipulation, but this company clearly need to tighten up news leaking out regarding the performance of its major fund, something that should be easier to isolate and resolve...
has not been taken into account . For instance Berenburg (late on the scene) have not increased the 90p that they issued on June 2 when AHL was $1.163. Since then AHL has moved right up into the hwm earnings to $1.3164. So why does the likes of Berenburg not include the vast AHL improvement, (notforgetting the acquisitions)? Is a possible answer that they are under the cosh to short Man. If so, by whom, Goldman Sachs would be my guess. What prompts my guess is, could Berenburg be in debt to GS as is another blatant shorter is, i.e. Espirito ? Or maybe just part of a shorting conspiracy. Whichever way their reasoning is highly suspect. To my mind this is a clear example of what LSEx Regulators should be looking into and eliminate if not proper. If they want t a 'clean house' that is.
Someone on the board should have, and as they didn't, should quickly refer to the http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-10-01/hedge-funds-hit-with-right-hook-on-fannie-freddie-ruling case and inform as to how much, if any, involvement they have. However, because of their investments all over the world that case should not have been used as a blatant opportunity to recover their losses made elsewhare. (by their I mean those who have irresponsibly hauled down the price over the past two weeks from 125p to 113p). I don't believe profit taking was the reason for yesterday's fall as the buyers outnumbered the sellers by 3 to 2. The problem is the lack of control over those who have the capacity to purchase a vast number of shares after conspiring to drastically reduce the price of a security, (* usually unjustified as they will not take risks on dubious securities). They are then in a position to sell when normal investors are buying, along with dubious media articles and co-operation from market makers. This kind of operation requires the sort of conspiracy, that is completely illegal. Hence their success depends on the laxity of the regulators. Just normal regulation controls would reverse this trend of the LSEx becoming the 'Londenofiniquity'x'., IMO