We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey 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.
Yes TRX focus on here
It's all guess work and opinions...but if you can sell 8.
8m in one trade I would not class these as difficult to sell.
The dearth of TR1s is understandable for those companies in the "WG 20", because of the exclusivity agreement which runs out at the end of this week. We don't know whether TRX is one of those, but I don't see why it wouldn't qualify.
The WG deal may well never happen (especially judging by some of the quoted comments in the article below) but in the meantime Link might by now have other offers waiting in the wings. So either way, things _might_ start happening after the end of this week.
(As an aside, regarding the definition of "illiquid", note that WG says "It plans to open a new investment fund, with the Woodford holdings at its core, but marketed as a long term, illiquid, investment suitable for high net worth investors." The WG 20 include Arix, for example, which is surely more liquid than TRX, having 10x mcap.)
https://www.tradingandinvestmentnews.co.uk/boutique-bank-moves-to-acquire-woodford-fund-biotech-portfolio/
Portfolio B includes "unlisted and certain highly illiquid listed assets" :
https://equityincome.linkfundsolutions.co.uk/investor-communications/friday-13th-december-2019-investor-letter-regarding-the-winding-up-of-the-lf-equity-income-fund/
My guess is that the definition of "illiquid" will be the pragmatic one suggested by TruthSearcher, i.e. difficult to sell what they've got, so would likely include TRX.
Most important comment on that story is that they would not comment on the Non-Quoted stocks. Those must be the illiquid share holdings not AIM stocks or TRX.
Chester.
https://portfolio-adviser.com/link-update-reveals-80-of-liquid-woodford-stocks-have-been-sold/
Woodford have reduced and declared. Its the shares transferred to the liquidators Link that appear to have no TR1s and yet should have by all accounts have been sold.
Check PFG, I vaguely remember Woody reducing there as I bought a load at 396 and then binned them at 450. I bought them as I knew he was offloading. I'm being too lazy to check.
Is it possible that the shares held by Link are broken down into the individual client holdings rather than one large holder because of the liquidation? As such, the relative holdings of each client, when sold individually or part of an aggregate sale, would not necessitate a TR1 as no significant threshold is crossed. Just thinking outside the box here and it could be utter b******s.
https://www.ii.co.uk/analysis-commentary/woodford-aim-shares-patient-investors-should-monitor-ii509564
Been through most of the listed companies can not find any TR1 relating to Link selling. Wonder if Woodford fund holders are aware that in fact there appears to have been no sell off of assets?...APPEARS!!
@ Parkez - I am not aware of any exceptions - if you are I would be keen to learn as that would be another AIM travesty which would be worth knowing for the future. t also depends on what they meant by the definition of illiquid - I believed Bill Clinton when he said he did not have sexual relations with Monica Lewinksy, then it transpired he was using the very narrow Arkansas legal definition which was plain bonkers to folk with common sense. Illiquid might mean to them "can't sell the 234m at a reasonable price". I guess we will find out at some point. If a RNS is not issued by Friday 31/01 saying production has been resumed I would be seriously worried.
TS i understand your point . However you are still suggesting that because there has not been a notification from any of the other Woodford/link shares that none of these have been sold...even though Blackrock were tasked to do so.
My understanding is Blackrock were engaged to sell Portfolio A ...Portfolio A consisted of LSE listed companies. You are suggesting that in fact they have not even started to sell these due to a lack of a TR1.
NO TR1 from any of the Link companies.
According to reports the liquid assets have been sold...Blackrock have completed the task they were given. Parkhill still have the illiquid assets to sell. Your reasoning would only make sense if you considered AIM shares to be Illiquid?
Thanks.
Do you not think its more likely there are exemptions to the notification rules?
@Parkez - I am saying that Link have not sold any material volume of their TRX shares as of last week as no TR1 issued - I will be happy to report them if they have sold and failed to issue a TR1 - If they had 234m shares, the 8m shares is of no consequence. If they haven't sold it could be because they can't find enough buyers for the 234m of they might see no value selling at 1-1.5p and might be holding on in the hope of a higher price later - which is a risky game given the reduction in value since Woodford invested. Either way we can assume they haven't sold any material volume - unless you believe they have failed to file, but there is no reason for them not to file. People who say that Link have sold a large part of their 234m shares are either dreaming or believe they have sold but have not issued a TR1 - neither of which is logical !
I agree we can't know for sure but I would be very surprised :
A) if there were another holder of shares that would take that size of hit to dump 8.8m shares. The price was nowhere near a penny at the time of that trade so they sold at the best price the MMs were prepared to give.
B) TRX has been massively liquid so why would Link have not taken advantage. They could very easily move 200m shares over the last few weeks.
C) if Link still have a sizeable holding, say 100m shares, then why ?
Do the new managers of the fund think the shares going to be worth more next week.
No matter how you stack it up the only thing that makes us question if they are still in or not is the lack of a TR1.
To be honest I'll be happier when we actually know what Link still hold or do not hold and the funding has been dealt with.
I'm calling my share holding the
'Patient Capital Five Year Chester Income Bond'.......lol
good point Woodford would have to have declared a sale or many if they have disposed of 298m shares or part . only thought I have is maybe they are not bothered about reporting as they are hardly going to get a fine and issuing a Tr1 every time they dump some wouldn't help them
get shot of the shares as it would play hell withnthe SharePrice just a thought !
Link have holdings in a variety of companies, as yet i have not seen a TR-1 relating to any of them. Are you suggesting TruthSearcher that Link are in fact not selling any of the shares that they have been tasked with doing?
I understood Woodford had 19.98 % of TRX which went to Link - which is 234m shares - up till last week Link had not sold any material volume as there has been no TR1 - so the sale of 8m shares, whether it was Link or not - is two parts of nothing. Given when the sell came, just after the RNS, it was most likely a stop loss. People need to stop having wishful thoughts which aren’t backed up by facts - otherwise pain will follow of you defy facts and logic - imho and glad those still holding !
I'd love to think it was Link, but I don't know.
Guess we'll find out Friday at the latest if you guys are right about it being the last Link in the chain.
agree Chester the 8m sell would explain things on the volumes over the last 48 hours !
looks like im still on for my weekly prediction
when this gets going it'll be as profitable as Weinstein's lawyer .
That 8.8 million sell was a large trade but the hit they took on the price was huge. That must have been a big chunk of what was left in Links hands.
I was amazed that the price came down so fast yesterday and know we know why....
Chester.
8:8 million sell 10minutes after cyber attack RNS, coincidence?, this share will recover pretty quick and some.
GLA
Misleading article in Investors Chronicle as says 74% of Woodford fund value back to investors, but 74% of what ?.
The saga is coming to an end anyhow.
I bought a few more Trx today. I am outside my comfort level but happy with decision.
Good evening all.
Investors Chronicle article today, saying investors in Woodford Fund receiving 74% of investment back.
Delayed from yesterday
8mil sell could this be the end of link ;-)