Gordon Stein, CFO of CleanTech Lithium, explains why CTL acquired the 23 Laguna Verde licenses. Watch the video 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.
Just looked at the us fund and looks like it’s invested in the stocks I wanted but never bought early enough!
Largest holdings %
1 Microsoft 7.48
2 Apple 6.16
3 Nvidia 3.54
4 Amazon 3.03
5 Alphabet 1.86
6 Tesla 1.75
7 Alphabet 1.68
8 Coca-Cola 1.67
9 Trane Technolgies 1.30
10 Eli Lilly 1.29
Guessing the 40% us is the reason my pension pot rocketed recently
40% of my pension is in Standard life sustainable index US equity pension fund
8% is in the same fund but European
Then 7% in same fund but Uk.
Rest is spread across world
Any thoughts ?
I have shares in Aviva barc lgen nwg. I’m up on all of them and I reinvested all my divis. Going forward I won’t reinvest divis as they have risen.
I had Sainsbury’s at 170p and sold at 265p
I had RR at 115p and sold at 288p , wish I’d held, but I put the money in phnx at 475p
I am in the red on ids vod and Bt.
Santander have done rather well in the last year. Especially since our blokes departure. Hope its a testimony to his legacy and not the joy of him leaving.
Have you considered RR? They have risen around 200% in the past year or so and are predicted to rise some 49% in the next three months.
Zac, thanks for your reply.
Would it be safe and appropriate to post which profile / fund im in with my provider
AbjectPerformer - without knowing specifically which fund(s) your pension provider invests in I can't say.
However, whilst I do hold a number of funds, I have been migrating over many years to simple global equity tracker funds. I hold Legal & General International Index Trust as a core holding. I've just checked and my inital purchase was made on 2nd July 2019 at £1.54 per unit. Today it's worth £2.62 per unit. A 70% return!
To put that into context had I purchased LGEN on the same date, and reinvested the dividends annually, my holding today would have returned 33%.
That's a massive difference over time.
I’m assuming these funds you’re directly invested in are some of the same my pension provider invests in.
My pension pot has rocketed in the last few months, it has almost doubled since Covid low.
Granted, monthly contributions from myself too though.
Zac, I agree with you, I have been increasing on my funds in the last 6 months even added another 3, and my portfolio is looking better than it's ever done, currently have 9 funds 7 have growth around 70-80% over the last 5 years the lgen global technology i think was around 195% and i have 1 UK based fund HL select UK growth, it probably comes as no surprise to anyone that the UK one only grew by 37%, still have a bit of tidying up to do with my shares, managed to sell off 20% of my Lloyds shares at a bit of profit as they have been under performing for years, just a bit more trimming down to do with a few others hopefully ending up with about 70% funds and 30% dividend shares, got fed up of looking at individual shares going into the red all the time
. . . another sluggish year for my dividend payers!
Here we are at the end of q1 and overall year to date my portfolio has returned +7.4%. That's made up of a total return from my non-dividend paying holdings of +9.2%, whilst my dividend payers are about flat at -0.3%.
Thankfully my dividend payers only account for around 18% of my portfolio by value. The plan is to further reduce this to around 15%.
Buybacks will tend to reduce the share price. It doesn’t seem to be the case with IMB and Bats.
Since the buybacks have commenced the relevant share prices have increased.
Just a lot of assumptions at the moment, have they ever mentioned buybacks, but with a new ceo this is a bit of a journey into the unknown, that's one of the reasons I would like to reduce a bit here
Spot on with that assessment Tich...If i was thirty then yes long term growth if is great unfortunately I'm nearly sixty so would prefer the cash/dividend....
@ToS1963
I think you're missing the fact that after the buyback the company's assets are down by the amount they spent on the shares. That will tend to reduce the share price, and may cancel out the benefit of the increased EPS. I think that's why zac0_4 said that a buyback is a neutral transaction.
However, from my point of view, as a long term investor, the potential benefit of a buyback is not that it could increase the share price in the short term, but that it could increase the long term returns, as measured by long term dividend paying potential. If the shares are being bought back at a price below fair value (fair in terms of long term dividend paying potential), then the buyback is "accretive", meaning that it increases the fair value of the shares. However, even then I wouldn't expect it to increase the market price of the shares in the short term, since Mr Market thinks that the current price is the fair value, so he doesn't agree that the buyback is accretive.
Even if the buyback is accretive, there's a case for saying that the company should instead pay out the same money as an extra dividend, and let shareholders decide for themselves whether to reinvest the dividend by buying more shares in the company. (One counter-argument is that the buyback may be more tax-efficient for shareholders, though that won't be relevant to those of us with our shares in an ISA or SIPP.)
Zaco.... I think the theory is that buybacks increase the SP, as long as the shares are cancelled. If I own a company worth a million quid, with 10 shares each worth £100k, buy back and cancel 5 of the shares, the remaining 5 shares are now worth £200k each, as the market cap is unchanged. It also reduces the cost of dividend payments by 50%, and increases EPS by the same. That’s the theory, although I agree with you, it never seems to work like that in practice. I’d rather see excess cash returned via special divs.
Berkshire Hathaway have an even bigger pile of cash, and recently implemented a buyback
programme. I think your find that the U.K. is unloved. To my mind Lgen should be buying back
stock, why because most of the mergers and acquisitions are overpriced and afterwards the
company buying the other company doesn’t see the rewards in the share price, just the
increased debt to service.
Aviva seem to be supporting an increased share value since the buyback program, so why
wouldn’t it work here.
Something to think about.
"The company simply buys shares on the open market and cancels them. Your shareholding remains as-is. In theory it shouldn't affect the share price at all as it's a neutral transaction. "
==============================================================
If one cancels shares then presumably the P/E ratio increases - although they are probably just cancelling shares that they then re-issue to give to employee bonus schemes. Increased P/E can make a share appear better value and I suppose might impact the dividend paid.
But generally I agree. They are could also the sign of a leadership that don't have any idea on how to invest for growth and use it as a means to hit their milestone targets and guarantee their bonuses.
Reddukeclothing
No rationale.....just they felt they want to capture a pullback or something.
Longer term thinking like us normal folk will hold and accumulate and bag the divi.
B-w-f " . . . How does a buyback work? Is it a percentage of everybody’s holding? And how does it impact share price? . . . "
The company simply buys shares on the open market and cancels them. Your shareholding remains as-is. In theory it shouldn't affect the share price at all as it's a neutral transaction.
From my experience buy backs are a waste of time.
Excuse my ignorance, relatively new to shares. How does a buyback work? Is it a percentage of everybody’s holding? And how does it impact share price?
Think it’s odds on now that if they sell Cala there will be a buyback. Given their solvency 2 position is 224%, what else are they gonna do with the money. If Cala goes for £750 million I’d guess a £500 million buy back would be announced. Maybe that would get the share price moving.
Tambo - what’s the rationale, could you share the update
Brokers are a waste of time & space.
Exane BNP cuts Legal & General to 'neutral' ('outperform') - target 270 (280) pence