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:
You will only have one login account. Registering with multiple accounts is not allowed. Any user found to have more than one account on this site will have all, and any future accounts suspended permanently.
Your email and password must only be used by you. If a post is made under your account, it will be considered that it was posted by yourself.
Your account nickname must not be the same, or contain, listed company names or board members' names.
While debating and discussion is fine, we will not tolerate; rudeness, swearing, insulting posts, personal attacks, or posts which are invasive of another's privacy.
You will not;
discuss illegal or criminal activities.
post any confidential or price sensitive information or that is not public knowledge.
post misleading or false statements regarding the share price and performance. Such posts are deemed as market abuse, and may be reported to the appropriate authorities.
post any private communication, or part thereof, from any other person, including from a member of the board of directors of a listed company. Such posts cannot be verified as true and could be deemed to be misleading.
post any personal details (e.g. email address or phone number).
post live price or level 2 updates.
publish content that is not your original work, or infringes the copyright or other rights of any third party.
post non-constructive, meaningless, one word (or short) non-sense posts.
post links to, or otherwise publish any content containing any form of advertising, promotion for goods and services, spam, or other unsolicited communication.
post any affiliate or referral links, or post anything asking for a referral.
post or otherwise publish any content unrelated to the board or the board's topic.
re-post premium share chat posts on regular share chat.
restrict or inhibit any other user from using the boards.
impersonate any person or entity, including any of our employees or representatives.
post or transmit any content that contains software viruses, files or code designed to interrupt, destroy or limit the functionality of this website or any computer software or equipment.
If you are going to post non-English, please also post an English translation of your post.
If you are going to post non-English, please also post an English translation of your post.
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 and Verified Members
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East and have access to Premium Chat. 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.
"Company updates are just one piece of the fundamentals jigsaw". Of course. But one must establish an earnings figure before one can establish a current PE, which you apparently do not accept. You must be wrong. There are other factors such as the strength of the sector and Sig's trading and profitability within the sector that will eventually feed through into the published fundamentals. There is a necessary lag. It is the individual investors ongoing correct assessment of that which may lead to capital gain. You said the fundamentals do not look good. I disagree. I see no reason to assume they have worsened. But you can make your own case.
In 5 years time I'm hopeful this will be a multi bagger. I maximise my returns by selling up and buying back in as I'm confident I can predict the general ups and downs of the stock market. Holding for the long term is a valid strategy.
I expect the price to start rising again October time then another serious correction next year. After that is out of the way I'll be holding for the next 4 years before selling up again when we have a major recession/depression in 2027.
After the David Willaims era the next management team screwed up after appointing consultants who closed down good branches fired good people it happens in lots of industries. Current team are shrewd with serious hard nose backers They've brought back good people who know the business. branches had good profitability in May & June scarcity of product is not great for the big volume guys suits the smaller players better overall. Depends where you've bought in here: if your in sub 40p its great sub 30 its fantastic and sub 20 its phenomenal I don't worry about the day to day week to week stuff I'm in around the 22p mark if it falls 20% I don't lose sleep. The dividend reinstatement is what I'm after fundamentals are good for next 3 -5 years
I raised a couple of issues with you, on which you chose to make the running. I asked for some proof of your assertion of a current PE of 173. You have not provided, now or earlier. You have given no information on fundamentals because nobody can until they are published, and without them you cannot calculate a current PE of any kind. Instead you fudge and prevaricate. Not much else you can do I suppose.
It depends on your understanding of fundamentals. If investors wish to rely on them, and you quote them as 'not looking good', there must be some objectivity involved. But you apparently wish others to vary them according to your view of matters other than published. Ie. Your version of fundamentals. That would scarcely be fundamental. You go on about a PE ratio. I have dealt with that. And although I believe the PE ratio itself is inapplicable when there are no earnings to put into it, please give the evidence that your PE ratio has worsened since you were invested, by mistake as you would have us believe, but even before that at a much higher price. You will need to know Sigs earnings as of today, or lack thereof, to set against the price - price to earnings ratio. The price of the shares has decreased of late, so on any calculation the price earnings ratio should have improved, unless Sigs negative earnings have increased. You must know they have and be able to prove that - I await your figures in support of your contention of a PE ration of 173. It will save me waiting until the fundamentals are published.
Raleigh, you say the price is the price for whatever reason. Could you try and be a bit more vague in future? Your statement is nonsense.
You say there is no confirmation yet of a change for the worse in the fundamentals which can only be known when we get an update from the company. Again you are talking nonsense. There are many things that can affect the fundamentals. We don't have to wait for company updates. Your claim is too daft for words. For example the P/E ratio has worsened and we haven't had to wait for a company update for this to happen. The share price has collapsed recently. Clearly something fundamental is going on.
Perhaps Mick will come back on that, his own detailed research, etc. Or maybe refer to some selected website. No matter. Plenty of time. Anyway, my thoughts.
The P/E ratio, in the context of Sig, without earnings to put into the equation, is irrational in my view. That is why many web references to it across loss making companies refer to it as not applicable, or something similar. The extent to which a company is loss making, turns up in its results. Everyone with any sense knows Sig is loss making. That was known at recapitalisation, and ever since. People have been investing or not ever since, 'bad' PE or not.
There are likely to be at least two sets of people posting on here. Those who say they are invested and optimistic, and those who say they are not. Some will go so far as to give advice, qualified to do so on their better understanding of world economic and company events. In the future, if all goes well, Sig will create earnings, and a PE ratio will come better into it's own. It is likely to be high. One side will say it is too high and the company is overvalued, the other side will say no, investors are pricing in future earnings growth.
In Mick's case, he says investors will not invest due to a high PE ratio which he got from somewhere, I suppose. He second guesses them. Historically badly, as his guess has not been the actual experience. It will, as before, be the level at which individuals see prospective value which will dictate that.
If I have him right, he sees Sig as a potential multi-bagger but not at this time. Contemporaneously he questions the company's survival, and says the company is at risk of 'bankruptcy' ( bad choice of words, that's for individuals, companies go into liquidation) I suggest that may have been the case historically, though there were other options apart from the recapitalisation, but there is really no need to be floating that again now, not if you see truth in the last update - "We do however continue to expect the second half to be both profitable and cash generative, and in light of the stronger than anticipated recent performance we now expect full year revenues to be slightly ahead of prior expectations, and profits also to be higher than previously expected."
Invested posters may also choose to find some confirmation bias from forward thinking in the creation of distributable reserves. The uninvested posters will look elsewhere to make their case, for whatever reason they feel the need to make one.
It might be your number one metric but it is inherently floored as clearly demonstrated here. Many other examples...tesla boohoo etc. That's why many would say it isnt particularly useful. The only useful metrics to traders are price and volume.
You miss my point completely. Not for the first time.
It's not up to me how I view the PE ratio. It's not up to you how the PE ratio should be looked at by investors. Given that it's the number one metric that most investors use when considering whether to invest in a company or not, when it's at 173 they are not going to be inclined to invest.
Im not sure that it is entirely appropriate to value a company using PE ratio when only just turned to profit. But use whatever you like. Its all very 'objective' but retrospective and hence meaningless. Pretty sure if you were that way inclined that you should be using projected earnings.