Stefan Bernstein explains how the EU/Greenland critical raw materials partnership benefits GreenRoc. Watch the full 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.
I think Woodfords investment strategy is like pinning the tail on the Donkey frankly. He is spoke to be the expert. I am an expert in rebuilding small engines but I am supposedly not the investment expert Woodford was supposed to be.
Quite right the FCA are a gummy Tiger they wouldnt do anything if a company started hacking into peoples bank accounts. For instance -- they knew London & Capital Finance were running a dodgy and unsustainable business 2 years before they collapsed wiping out thousands of peoples holdings and all they seem to say is "these were unregulated investments" so thats them of the hook even though they approved the company operating in general.
Dont expect the FCA to do anything re questionable NAV figures. They can barely hold a crayon. You may as well try to explain NAV to a bored five year old.
Maybe a US style class action to pursue directors could result in payback for anyone investing after 21.9.18
Agreed. IH was the red flag. Woodford was apparently suckered into buying into IH and then he revalued his holding by +350 % in Sept 2018.
No evidence of any research facilities, research results etc for IH to justify that revaluation or any subsequent valuation put on IH.
Those responsible for that RNS of 21.9.18 should be held to account as the increase in NAV lured investors with the apparent bargain SP discount to NAV
The exit sign was about 4 years ago, not 1.
When they bought IH it was obvious they could be conned into buying anything.
And the second exit sign was a year ago when IH was uprated 3.5x at that point it was clear something beyond dodgy was going on since that was a company with a literally impossible product.
PB at least was just a company that did *something* and it was open to debate if it would be disruptive.
The only disruption possible from IH was to the credibility of the analysts within WPCT / WIM which brought into question what else they were buying.
How many of you posters follow Tom Winnifrith and his colleagues on *************? If you had, you could have exited WPCT a year or more ago, without loss, as I did. Obviously, I knew when investing that Neil Woodford was investing in Biotech start-ups and he admitted some would fail, but others, he argued would succeed spectacularly and make the losses insignificant. Woodford 'balanced' the illiquid stocks with listed stocks and what did it for me, prompted by Tom, was looking at one of these, Purplebricks. Woodford believed this estate agency had a business model that would 'disrupt' the market and he bought in big, at up to 27% of the equity at one point. Well, I'm older than Neil and found I could not believe this spiel and thus agreed with Tom that Purplebricks was itself far too speculative to balance anything and sure enough, it fell like a stone, as the 'disruption' failed to materialise. I had bought in to WPCT at around 91p and got out showing a tiny gain, but am I glad I did. Thank you, Tom and you deserve many many more readers and no detractors,because what you do is a public service to investors. Panorama, next Monday, I believe..