Charles Jillings, CEO of Utilico, energized by strong economic momentum across Latin America. 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.
I've seen the 3p report and think that while some of it is correct, it's overdone.
While I agree, finding funding without Woodford's hanouts won't be as easy, some stocks have been written down as zeros, purely because they will need funding.
You can't view a lot of the top 10% of the PF as purely fundamental plays and lots of funding is sometimes necessary.
Is this the right time to expect to get funding? is another question.
But I'd put this around the 20-25p mark, myself.
And might take a few in that area.
@bestintown " but do have a belief in the integrity of independent valuers."
Integrity does not equal competence
Go back to what happened with IH.
It was uprated a year ago, with zero news from IH before or since, by 3.5x.
Then it was downrated, from memory by half, again with zero news from IH before or since.
Buying it involves a belief that pretty much everything we know about modern physics aint so. Not just a few bits but pretty much all of it because if IH worked as said then a whole lot of stuff that we know works, wouldnt.
And bear in mind, IH essentially was started up on the back of the word of a twice convicted fraudster who wont let anyone closely examine his work or devices, and which if it worked would be out there now pulling in money like nobodies business since you could just use it to produce essentially free electricity. Why isn't it out there just doing that?
So, given the "people of integrity" fell for that like a cheap magic trick, what about all the other startups, what did they promise and why do you think those valuers are competent again, (I dont question their integrity but their competence) to judge those?
Results aka company failures have shown they werent very good at choosing many of the biotech startups and even one that undeniably works, Proton or whatever its called, now may not actually make money.
IT, certainly I don't have inside knowledge of the valuations but do have a belief in the integrity of independent valuers. Of course, they must align to market valuation as determined by fund raising rounds and quoted prices which themselves are subjective. But that is the nature of financial markets.
@bestintown "I have (qualified) faith in the independent valuation process "
If IH is still valued at **anything at all**, then you should have zero faith in all other valuations. If i told you the painting by numbers my 9 year old did was actually a Rembrandt, would you believe me when i said I also had a genuine Picasso?
Secretly we all hoped that Woodford would walk away ... so relief at last that "The Board is in advanced discussions in relation to the ongoing management of the Company's portfolio and expects to be in a position to announce details of the new management arrangements shortly."
There may be kitchen sinking but some write downs have already been taken and I have (qualified) faith in the independent valuation process applied (the valuers have had plenty of notice that a crunch is coming.....)
Who might take over WPCT now that Woodford has thrown in the towel? They certainly won;t be taking in this hassle for no fee.
Admin costs and kitchen sinking will no doubt reduce the value here.
Just noticed the RNS posted on the London Stocke Exchange
https://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/news/market-news/market-news-detail/WPCT/14267276.html
Is there a lot of cross holdings with the fund so people think the NAV will be suppressed by forced selling?
@mrcautious "The share price should have gone up knowing Woodford may be going"
Why? A pile of poo is still a pile of poo even after the person who bought the pile of poo has run off.
Is this fund still going to be run by Neil Woodford going forwards??
he may well have to go in hiding, people do not like losing money to a crook, that's what's transpiring with worthless stocks.
If there's anything left here it will be the banks and they cannot be impressed with the WPCT BOD's to manage any further.
The share price should have gone up knowing Woodford may be going. Whatever happens though - Woodford will never be crying into his beer -- he will remain a multi-millionaire with his Oxfordshire pile still intact -- there is no risk/reward for these people..
I found them. here's a summary as I'm not retyping it all.
-Income zero
-Expenditure > zero
-Assets - 6 PC's, 2 HP deskjets (and some spare ink cartridges), and the CEOs Tesla
HTH
Why does it HAVE to be valued at more than the current share price?
As an example, Just before they went dark on constituents, IH was roughly valued at about 8p a WPCT share.
IH is however, quite clearly literally, worthless.
So, how many other companies held by WPCT are like that? All the biotechs and others needing capital injection from a company thats run out of capital, to stay alive may be in that position, nt because they are base don fraud like IH but because if that capital injection doesn't come, they also will become worthless.
Their shares, lets say 'Acme Biotech' might be valued at say 50p each but if they dont get the capital, they go to zero, not say 20p or 30p. They go bust.
I'd also say the value of Benevolent is also severely overrated even after the downgrade. Its not a company with an entrenched based like say Microsoft or Adobe or Apple, its a company whose worth is based on having an AI edge. It only takes one startup, or one big boy like IBM (Watson) or Google, to leapfrog it, and they go to zero almost overnight. So, a massive risk in there that i dont think is understood or baked into the share price.
I understand soemone else worked out this was worth 3p a share. Maybe thats the basis of their estimation? Or of course maybe they are a shorter with an axe to grind, i dont know.
I feel your pain having got out at 55p to a large loss. Surely there has to be some value in this, as the saying goes, it's always darkest before dawn. IF THIS TRUST WERE LIQUIDATED IN THE MOST EXTREME FIRE SALE IT'S GOT TO BE WORTH MORE THAN THE CURRENT SHARE PRICE. ARGUMENTS TO THE CONTRARY MUCH APPRECIATED. Seriously I do wish any holders the very best of luck.
There is serious risk that this is worthless now and this site appears to be in denial.
The NAV will continue to decline as re evaluations/prices materialise and there's the likely result that the WPCT lenders will take this over.
There's an investment analysis that the true NAV is 3p only! DYOR.
Is it worth bringing a WPCT Investor group legal action against WIM for frigging the WPCT NAV's last year - if there's anything left to claim!?
I bet Woody is glad he bailed out at 56p
IH accounts still overdue.
Looks like big news from the Woodford equity fund that has been closed - shutting up shop entirely. So what will be the new name for us in WPCT. That W is going for sure, and maybe we could adjust the Patient to Peeved? Trust to ?
Not far down the line we even see some litigation against Woodford and forced stock sales to repay the rising debt - there is no upside here. I wonder what the Regulator is sitting on that no doubt will emerge in the years to come with all financial scams.
“Why can the MMs not state if it is a buy or sale”
The point is that the MMs would rather not disclose whether they are buying or selling as it tells the market whether they are long or short and thus is disadvantageous for them. The authorities have clearly agreed to allow them this ambiguity in the interests of making the activity of ‘market making’ easier. For all the bad press the MMs get it is essential that they can make a profit or they simply wouldn’t do it and the markets would have no liquidity.
Notwithstanding that your (O’Donnell) post was simply to cross reference a different stock on this board - you do it all the time and it’s irritating.
You are more or less correct, but if our memories serve us correctly this is not any better than when we began trading well over 54 years ago. In fact we feel we knew if a trade was a buy or sell then, BUT as with the weather which was much better 65 years ago with long hot summers, memories play tricks.
As is pointed out in other posts, in this age of big brother who knows every move we make, why can the MMs not state if it is a buy or sale.
We now only invest in I.Ts with the odd exception when a sector is well down as we fear there is more shenanigan's than there use to be.
As for this trust it looks really tempting and we are 50-50 as to whether to put this months investment money in to this or FFWD plus IIT and BGS are investments we would also like to add to for the long term.
FFWD has proven NAV of 80% above the SP while WPCT has a dubious NAV. But with a large % of our total investments in FFWD we think we will add to WPCT very soon.
It’s clearly not a case of being “unable” to accurately report the buy/sell indicator. There are two parties to every trade - ie every trade is in fact both a buy and a sell. The stock exchange have made the decision not to require the mms to indicate which side they are on when they report the trade. This is probably to make it easier for the MMs to balance their books.
When third party platforms report the trades it’s a guess based on the bid/offer at the time. It is often wrong for a variety of reasons but it’s not difficult to work it out.
This subject is much discussed on almost all share boards - it beggars belief that in the age of technology we are in now this cant be reliably reported after all if you sell your car you havent bought it otherwise you would notice !
We omitted to say they base whether it is a sale or buy by the mid price at the time. So if it is below the mid price they call it a sale and above they call it a buy. So with a mid price of 35.3 trades of 35 and 35.259 are usually listed as sales as the 35.259 is below the mid price but it is in fact usually a purchase.