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.
When I suggested "value" in Sage (the company actually under discussion here) it was about the serendipitous nature of the buyback program. Comparing this to "incredible value" in housebuilders, which you were actually selling at the time, and now seem certain will "plummet" even further from an already undervalued position, seems an odd linkage. If comparisons of the uplifting Sage buyback program with your apparently negative leaning "value" of housebuilders was like apples and oranges, your more recent hindsight comparison with GGP is perhaps more like apples and casino chips. It seems you are now "not bovvered" about the buyback program any more, and have decided it is "almost meaningless". That's arguably slightly more relevant than your original comparison, yet it still doesn't seem to recognise, or properly evaluate, the actual value being discussed. As the Sage SP continues to show resilience in the face of COVID-19, the value of the program is arguably self evident.
Hi BBD
Not too bovvered what anyone thinks, seems to be only us two on this board now, but a great discussion.
I think incredible value in HB's now - some time ago I calcd tw was worth 260 (now 111), but that was before Covid-19 and fundamentally nothing has changed, we still need more houses. If a new lockdown (no houses Built) tw is worth nothing but its Assets. Obviously the Govt cannot let this happen, but I do think we are in for a very bad time.
A resurgence of Covid-19, Recession and Brexit with no Deal will make HB's Sp plummet but I'm not too worried about that.
What will kill off HB's is higher Interest Rates and Mortgage availability, which I think could be a result of the above.
Not really bovvered about Share Buybacks, the volatility in the economy makes it almost meaningless and I don't think it has benefitted bkg much, the Company or share holders.
Traditionally if high inflation (due to printing money) the price of Gold increases cos money loses value. Ggp just increased in value by 25% this week (now 215% profit after just over a year and 12 top ups), but price of gold has hardly increased.
Some daft numbers PER -199 (cos they have no income), MrktCap £755m, Cur assets 2.83m, Cur Liabs 0.63m - so rich.
But, the reason for the big increase in Sp was drilling results in Aus confirming a massive amount of Gold in the land they have rights to (£Bn's and a guaranteed buyer in NCM), and more results to be published soon from another development.
If price of gold doubles so will the value of ggp.
My best investment ever and cannot see any probs for at least a year, Fundamentals and prospects excellent.
BoL
Hi Nige_W
some people might question your coming to the Sage board to promote HBs at a time when you were actively selling them, you can see how that looks, and they might even be skeptical at your belated mention of GGP, but I think we should give you the benefit of the doubt and thank you for making full disclosure, if a little late.
If HBs are now well prepared for a slump, presumably because they are already so low, that's slightly different from seeing value in them. It's interesting that you do actually still disapprove of the Sage buy back program, and it seems that however low the price goes as a result of COVID-19 (they were around £6 when this thread started), you would still see it as too expensive and a bad way of using resources. Despite this, you see no specific reason for that high rating to change, which seems contradictory. If the share price is not likely to be derated lower in the future, then how can price be an objection to the value of the buy back program? If earnings increase, today's price might be seen as cheap with hindsight, and more earnings spread over the resulting fewer shares would lower the PER. In such a scenario the price is likely to go up again, at which point you would be put off by the still high PER. You would probably never invest.
I think we can agree that comparisons over PER are interesting, but can only be taken so far. Good luck with GGP, they've had a golden year so far!
Hi BBD
Think desperate times need desperate measures, hence pretty much dumping my PER method for now - will revert to it when (if?) things return to normal.
I think a buyback makes sense if Sage regards its Sp is undervalued by the Market, but with a PER of 28.9? Also you need the spare cash. Tw had a rights issue to raise cash to buy cheap land. Not sure if that was a good idea either.
Don't know how badly stocks will be affected by a resurgence of Covid-19, Brexit with No Deal, Recession and spiraling Unemployment, but think it will be far worse than people seem to expect - hence Gold refuge.
FWIW I still think HB's better prepared for a Slump than most other sectors and Sage also shouldn't be affected much.
BoL
Hi Nige_W,
that's quite a revelation that you actually saw real value in GGP, rather than your stated HBs, and for reasons other than PER.
Your argument against value in the Sage buy back program now seems to have shifted to the idea that the whole market is likely to decline. Wouldn't you agree that that is the most opportune time to have a buyback program in place?
Hi BBD
I still think HB's are far better value than Sage, but obviously the Market doesn't. Regardless how you calc your own PER's and so level of Under/Over valued amount, the Market determines the Sp and as Brexit with No Deal, Covid-19 and Recession are looming, I expect the Sp's to drop even more. Regardless of PER (and my calc of justifiable Sp), I'm not going buy into Companies where I expect the prices to fall even more.
No intention of investing again in HB's until Summer next year.
I am hoping Sage continues to grow successfully (not anticipating any disaster).
I started moving from HB's to ggp last year and completed that process in July, very happy with that cos ggp have done so well.
Don't see any conflict here - I suppose what I am saying is the Market has got it all wrong (presenting opportunities) and while PER and Prospects vital in any valuation, investment strategy must be based on how you see the market moving.
BoL
Hi Nige-W,
in July you suggested that builders offered better value than Sage because of their relatively low PERs.
Over the two months since then Sage has proved more valuable, and now you no longer see value in builders, despite their continuing low PERs, and think they will go down. So it seems your own actions are not really driven by PERs, but by some other factor which has changed in the last two months?
You still downplay Sage based on PER however, with a separate point claiming that their high PER is a market hangover from when they used to be a more dynamic company. That is arguably an outdated viewpoint itself, ignoring the turnaround of the company in recent years, it's improved performance, and it's brighter prospects. For the PER to change significantly would require a dramatic change in the market's perception of this, and you seem to be forecasting such a change imminently? If so, when do think this is likely to occur (roughly) and why?
My actual point was that this particularly volatile period is a great time to have a huge buy back program in place.
It is now less clear whether you agree or still disagree, but perhaps you are wavering a bit with your abandonment of the relative PER argument in favour of the "too high" PER one.
Hi BBD
All things being equal all companies should have about the same PER. This means the variation of PER's is dependent on how the Market regards the prospects of the company, or if good prospects higher PER, if poor prospects lower PER.
From this point of view Sp doesn't matter, all about EPS. Companies in different sectors will be affected in different ways by the disasters we are living thru (or to come), but I think fundamentally Builders are (and have been) undervalued for years.
Resilient to Recession (as proven by austerity), sales bounce back (after lock down) and Brexit with no Deal will affect LSE builders much more Nationals.
Due to the fact that Sage is not a high growth company any more, I don't think it justifies such a high PER, and due to the resilience of Builders I think their prospects are better than the Market thinks, so justify a higher PER.
Incidentally one of the best builders, bkg (Berkely Group) have been buying back shares for ages - not sure if it has benefitted them or their share holders. Just on Watchlist cos LSE.
A comparison of SP, EPS historically (since 2010) would be interesting, if the market is right decrease in Sp should anticipate decrease in EPS by about the same %age.
I anticipate low point for Builders early next year, so mainly out now, replaced with Gold (via ggp). Volatility means Opportunity, but I'm not a day trader, just happy to be sat on Gold now.
BoL
Regarding comparison with Barratt, it's not strictly relevant, as value in Sage is neither coupled with, nor mutually exclusive with, value in Barratt (or other builders). Yet since you have repeatedly suggested it, it may be useful to explore that. Their SP performance is more or less equal over the period since my comment, but it should be noted that at that date (18th March) Barratt had suffered a spectacular collapse, losing more than half their value, so they were starting from a relatively low base. Or from another point of view, they also offered good value! However, since the time of your comment (10th July), Sage have outperformed Barratt substantially.
There are still a few months of the buy back program to run of course, but they look like being volatile months, even by current standards, with both the US election, Brexit compromise, and possibly COVID-19 vaccines. The program continues to offer a hedge against that volatility, which arguably equates to superior comparative value over the period.
Hi Nige_W,
It seems that you still disagree that the share buy back program offers value here? Not value as compared to builders, which is an interesting but slightly eccentric angle, but inherent value over the buy-back period, like a hidden asset on the balance sheet. The money could have been used in a different way, but you don't seem to be advocating more R&D spending judging by your surprisingly negative comments about "adoption of new tech". Perhaps you would have preferred a special dividend? That certainly would have lifted the share price in the short term! The buy back program should have the long-term effect of gradually reducing the PER by steadily reducing the number of shares in issue, so perhaps it offers the best value as measured by your builder-centric assessment criteria?
My original "value" claim was in response to RK11's comment noting how hard Sage were hit by COVID-19, and I was highlighting the serendipity of a massive share buying programme coinciding with a period of potentially very low share prices. In fact the share price has, as usual, not behaved as expected! Whether the underlying business justifies this remains to be seen, as many Sage SME clients will be struggling. We remain in the grip of extreme uncertainty, about the disease, the economy, and life in general, so thanks very much for the luck, I'll need it, and good luck to you too.
Hi BBD
Thanks for the reply and I apologies for his late response.
From 1996 to 2001 Sage was my biggest single investment cos I was invested in Tec companys. Basically I stopped investing in 2001 during DotCom bust and lots of great coys taken over by foreign competition when they were cheap.
Started investing again in 2013 hence my start date. Sge is a great Company but very different from what it was in the 90's. It is now a worldwide brand, and growth (thru acquisition) has slowed, while I'm also not too impressed by their adoption of new Tech (like the cloud). So not sure they deserve a Per of 26.
Builders were cyclical when Govt controlled interest rates. An increase would cause a recession and builders would slump, but that has not happened this century. Banking crisis, Austerity,, Brexit (or lack of), Covid19 and Recession cause last / next slumps. It is very noticeable that Austerity had almost no affect on Builders. This could be cos so many jobs lost in the industry (and lack of apprenticeships) that means after 12 years supply has not caught up with demand and probably won't for years.
I am not going to compare Sage to Barratt (the best Imho), you can do that if you like, but once we are over those hurdles, I am sure Builders will thrive again.
BoL
Hi Nige-W
My comment about value in Sage was made on 18 March this year, and referred specifically to the period up to January next year, i.e. the length of the buy-back program. Comparing over a different time period is shifting the ground, an intelligent military strategy if you can get away with it.
The fact that there was value in Sage, due to the fortunate availability of large funds when the SP was relatively low, didn't imply that there is necessarily more value than elsewhere, but AFAIK the builders do not have such an extensive buyback program in place? I didn't claim that builders ARE cyclical, only that the market seems to value them as if they are, and hence the perpetually low PERS. Perhaps you are suggesting that that is changing, and therefore you expect builders PERs to rise over time purely due to a change in perceptions? If so, why, and why now?
It is true that Sage have historically been relatively slow growing, and for much longer than your selective comparison period, but they also haven't suffered massive contractions like builders have, which your period seems to accidentally avoid. Those contractions are the reason their PERs stay low of course, because no-one knows when the next one will come, but arguably COVID-19, Brexit and government anti-corruption initiatives make one more likely. Sage have a radically altered business model, strategy and new management over your chosen time period, so that past performance is probably a poor guide to future value, but in the period between March 18th this year and January next year, their share buyback program has, and will, buoy up the share price and is the equivalent of a hidden dividend.
Hi BTB
Sp sge 04/01/13 337, 17/07/20 680 = 102 % increase
Av of 5 Builders Sp (bdev, bwy, psn, rdw and tw)
04/01/13 471, 17/07/20 1486 = 216 % increase
I argue that Builders are not cyclical any more, and growing at twice the rate of Sge.
BoL
Hi Nige_W, it's a shame you missed the rise here, but hopefully you found even better value elsewhere.
PER is one way of measuring value, but the market seems to weight stocks differently, especially with what are deemed to be "cyclical" stocks - housebuilders seem to be permanently at tempting PERs, for example, in good times and bad, so they always look cheap, and their relative value by that measurement needs to be taken with a large pinch of salt. Similarly, growth shares like Sage tend to have persistently high PERs. The value I suggested was the sustained power of share buybacks over a long period, starting at relatively depressed prices (by Sage's historical standards) due to the lockdown, and continuing right through to January next year. So far, so good.
Hi BBD
I don't hold sage anymore, cos Per 26.8. House Builders vary from about 6.0 to 7.0 - say av 6.5.
So if they had sage's Per they would be about 4 * current price. That looks to me like good value - not Sage.
Having said that I'm mainly out of Builders now cos expecting prices to drop even more.
BoL
haaa good joke :D Sage would never
Jesus, they cut 53% of their workforce.
Actually Sage are nicely positioned to take advantage of the crash with a perfectly timed massive buyback programme as a result of the sale of Sagepay. A silver lining par excellence, with the buying scheduled to continue until January next year. Long term value here, surely?
Looks like Sage has been hit hard by Covid 19 hopefully make a full recovery