The latest Investing Matters Podcast with Jean Roche, Co-Manager of Schroder UK Mid Cap Investment Trust has just been released. Listen 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.
398'ish was previously a support and now looks to be resistance - once we push through and hold then I think it is onwards and upwards - now just under 5 weeks to the 7th Of course at these levels we are very suseptible to a bid ourselves - only time will tell whether we go on to be the acquiror or the acquired.
400 very soon
Edison report of 19 Jan when sp was 385 : http://www.edisoninvestmentresearch.com/research/report/paysafe-group75074/preview/ Edison Barclays EPS($0.0) PE EPS($0.0) 2016 41 11.5 40.3 2017 46 10.2 47.9 2018 51.6 9.1 54.8 Barclays' overweight stance and 610p target is driven by the expected ongoing above sector earnings growth. They also think an acquisition that dilutes exposure to china and /or gambling would be a catalyst for a multiple rerating. A 610p ($7.70) would provide for a 2017 PE of 16.7 and a 2017 PE of 14.9 none of which are very big stretches when compared to US peers trading in high 20's to low 30's on forward multiples. GLA
@ Technie - the only thing in life that are certain are birth, death and taxes - evertything else by default is uncertain. But probability is a factor in what seperates gambling from investing - because if probability is at best 50/50 then no matter what skill I have in being able to predict - it won't matter because I can't change the probability of the outcome - it will always be 50/50. @GS - are you talking trading or investing - it seems to me the former. Firstly I have held this stock since 2008 , so it owes me nothing at this stage - you see I am an investor, I spot value and invest and hold until the desired results and sp are delivered. And I have always held that view with pays. you seem to be talking about trading and introducing leverage - so I would agree you are to a degree gambling through your trading style relative to my investing style - your example suggests you are unable to withstand short term fluctuations in sp and are exposed due to lack of liquidity. This forces you to close possibly because you had a stop loss in place and it is at this point you crystalise losses that are nothing more than short term fluctuations. I on the other hand as an investor with zero leverage just sit there and watch the sp revert back to a higher level than before the short attack and release of the spotlight report - I have lost nothing and I wasn't taking a gamble. And in time the M&A will happen and the sp will rise further. I would also say my certainty of PAYS results never changed I saw the spotlight report for the piece of worthless rubbish it was designed to spook pi sheep. As for quoting me back a post - lets be balanced - you might note I called M&A on Income Access before it happened - in doing so I was just going by what management said they would do and they have since said there is bold M&A in the pipeline - so lets see come the 7th.
I wouldn't be surprised if this is a fake but this guy won the internet yesterday with his massive short Apple punt: https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/826554694340210688/pu/vid/344x180/FlYxiTAXaisoURj_.mp4
@ Wolf. Your level of confidence in PAYS full year results would not have been significantly different a few days before the short attack. Say you took out a Sept 17 buy contract at about 367-368p. Let's say you went in at £500 a point. Looked like the sp was recovering. It was. And then the shorts hit. When the sp was down over 100p from your entry and with you facing a margin call of over £50k - which you did not have in cash - you either baled or sold elsewhere to meet the call. Your certainty will probably be proved right (barring accounting errors - which happen BTW) but you still lost heavily. An extreme example, but anyone who says that they can predict with a high degree of certainty AND timing (which you imply) is riding for a fall. This is why the best fund managers (just look at Woodford and UTW or CPI) with better brains, information and tools than you or I, make huge mistakes. You, for example have been predicting with a high level of confidence that PAYS will do something in the M&A arena. I am sure they will one day, but so far you have been wrong. Here is another. I don't usually trawl back through posts, but I remembered roughly when it happened and I am on holiday and relaxing by the pool. These are your words on 6th October - when AEK's short had reached 3.01% "- hard to say what AEK logic is/was - clearly flawed though - losses are probably in the £10+mn mark - ouch !!!!. It does seem to have classic "double down" gambler traits - it looks to me that as sp continued to rise AEK increased the short to try and turn the tide - finger in the dyke stuff..denial as to making a mistake on initial trade." Ouch - "clearly flawed"?. The sp was about 450 then. GS
@wolfhound - We might have to agree to disagree. I'll have one more stab at articulating my point more clearly. Probability higher than 50/50 is still only probability. The outcome is still not certain even if it is more likely. I'm happy to accept that prediction of business results is possible. Business results don't pay us though. Movement of the share price in our favour is necessary for us to profit. There is never a 100% cast iron certainty of that when we enter a position. In a horse race backing the favourite each way theoretically improves the chance of a win. When a skilled individual who studies form does this is that no longer gambling?
@Phonexix - Lol - seems you have tarred yourself with the same brush - lets agree neither of us proof read our scripts - Touche all round :) @Technie = ah - I srtill disagree - a horerace;coin-toss; etc... all have one thing in common I have an equal probability of getting either outcome a ( win) or outcome b (loss) - because no matter how many times I perform the same operation I always start at exactly the same place a prbability of 50/50 in terms of win/lose. In an investment - I am able to predict with a high degree of certainty ( much more than the 50/50 of a coin toss) on what the outcome will be - as I have a history and 99% of the time we will have a pretty good idea through forcasting and due diligence what that result will be in the following year based off all the available and relevant information so I rest my hypothesis that gambling and investment are not the same - provided of course the person making the investment has the necessary skill - they should be able to turn a profit - anyone tossing a coin on the other hand will always have the same probability - 50/50 of getting heads.
What I mean by uncertainty is that we don't know when take on the initial risk whether we will win or lose. It doesn't matter if it is a coin toss, horse race, football match or a share. We can never know for certain..
@wolfhound - what makes something gambling is not the perceived level of risk but the uncertainty of the outcome.
Should read 'are not checking', not 'we checking' Preemptive text is a curse!!!!
Wolf....this is most definitely having a go at you. You have just become the conduit! I have been looking on forums for other shares tonight and on three of the five I have looked at, people are commonly using the word loosing, or loose, when they mean losing or lose!!!!! Either it s a bad drop in spelling standards, or pre-text is running wild and not enough we checking what they type. To lose is to be defeated, or not have something you once had. Loose means NOT TIGHT. Come on guys and gals, spelling errors are one thing but using completely the wrong word is another....
Sorry Technie - I fundamentaly disagree - just because both have risk does make them both gambling the risk profiles are fundamentally different Gambling - outcome is known with 100 certainty - i.e. either a head or a tail with each toss of a coin - 50/50 probability with 100% certainty Investing - uncertain outcome but highly predictble with high degree of certainty - i.e. I know with 99% certainty that PAYS will deliver 2016 revenues of close to $1bn and EBITDA of $300mn on 7th March Therein - lies the difference with investing I can predict the outcome with a high degree of certainty - in gambling I know I will have one of two outcomes - win or loose and there is equal probablity of getting either result every time I flip that coin.
It's all gambling wolfhound. Every time we buy a share we put money at risk. The outcome of each particular purchase is uncertain at the time it is made.
Value- spotting that a sp has been mis-priced long before the market adjusts - requires skill Anything else is a game of chance - and is therefore by default gambling. GLA
I agree. Just like horse racing. Value is entirely subjective because the market is what the current value is at any one time. Different from cards, or roulette, where the odds are fixed. But, of course, the more investors who believe a share is cheap (IE their perception is that it is 'value') the more buyers this should produce and thus, hopefully, exceed demand until the price rises.
What I find strange is how on such low volume the price can be walked down and then large after hour buys (sometimes hundreds of thousands) can be done at reasonable prices. If such large buys happened during trading hours thd price for the buy would be much higher sp!? Still got to be in it to win it so im holding for a probable rns before march TU. DYOR GLA...
Value - that word keeps cropping up on this thread (and others). It's a word that's often quoted, but little understood. My opinion (for what it's worth, so it could be value, or perhaps it isn't - you decide) is that value is your own opinion, not someone else's, not the "markets" value - but yours and yours alone. If you think that a company SP is "value" then you should be a buyer, full stop. What should stop you being a buyer in such circumstances is "market sentiment", and that is a black hole of unknown territory. I don't think that there is such a thing as "true value" as, if it exists, then it should be capable of being calculated. But, such is the constant flow of information, a calculation of "true value" would only be correct and representative of that immediate moment in time. In other words, by the time you have calculated true value, that value is already out of date. What you are left with is personal opinion and "market sentiment", and that is why we have a stockmarket with its ebbs and flows. At the end of the day, everyone wants to make money, turn a profit.
@ GS - not sure what you are saying below but IMHO - sp can and often does sit below its true value - if a deal is announced on the 7th and the terms of that deal are good for PAYS shareholders and it creates value then sp will rise as more investors buy the stock. If not then the flip will happen but i am quite sure JL et co will have taken good advice from the brokers in that regard and engineer a positive outcome - after all he has a lot of stock himslef. As for shorters - would not underestimate their motives nor can we say for sure what might/might not be their motivation for anything - not conspiracy that is just realistic and because they don't like disclosure they might just decide to play with the intention of the rules because they can.
There is a difference between the timing of takeovers and the behaviour of a share in price terms. Shares go up when demand exceeds supply and vice versa. Takeovers are completely different. And I am not a short conspiracy theorist. They have better things to do than close a position and pretend they have not. As for a deal being close - it has either reached a price sensitive (reasonable probability it will happen = RNS) or it has not. Clearly, so far it has not. GS
@GS - if history doesn't repeat itself then you might as well forget about looking at charts and any re-appearing patterns........ as for shorters- who is to say they are actually still short - I agrre they are smart and well resourced which is why I for one doubt the shorters didn't hedge their position when PAYS was sub 300p and took massive profits - what we see now could simply be what they want us to see- if is easily facilitted through a range of off-shore hedge fund vehicles that are considered "independent" of the shorting fund. From another BB I understand MS have said " a deal is close" and re-iterated their overweight 560p target - so not long to go till the 7th March
History usually does not repeat itself. Although it might, if as per the last results RNS the full year results are indeed to be released on 7th March 2016... More seriously, the shorters are probably brighter, certainly have better tools and are likely to be better informed than anyone on this bb. They have got it right so far and I think you bet against them at your peril. GS
@PC - and what if the deal is like Skrill - sp rockets by 50% - shorters have to pay that over in margin - og and by the way everyone wants their stock back to sell it - so you get an almighty short squeeze and it rises by another 50% ? There is IMHO an over infatuation with the shorters - for all we know they already hedged the shorts when the sp was sub 300p via other vehicles and now just giving the appearance of being short to keep their playbook secret and make sure the sheep ( pi's) perform in future as expected on some other stocks. I suggest you have a look at the sp prior to Skrill - then as now the sp was trading below the 200MAVG, co was delivering great results ( up 44% due to meritus acqn previous year, etc..) yet sp was languishing, acqn was announced on same day as full yr results were published - which is 7 March this yr - and sp rocketed 50%. DYOR - but don't be surpeised if we see history repeat itself on the 7th March - GLA
While I agree completely with recent posts over the positive side of the one, the overhang of another shorting attack still bothers me. But, having given it some further thought, I wonder what other regular posters and long term holders like me, think about the following? Obviously any outfit looking to short a company would want to do so with as much scope as possible for the SP to fall. Hence, if there is a possibility of M&A news with PAYS, bringing with it a hike in the SP, would it not make sense for any shorters to delay their attack until any possible news emerges? Through doing so they could then attack from a higher price position and thus have more to gain from a fall. Of course, through doing so they increase their risk because the SP then has more upside. But it seems to me that these professional shorting outfits are very much prepared to gamble and tend to really go for broke rather than be happy with medium to good gains. Now, if my idea here is correct, and it is only an if, does that, mean any possible further shorting attack is more likely to come close to results day, or news of a M&A, comes out? If it does, it would be good to see the SP here start to motor northwards on the rumour of an M&A. In that way, 'buy on the rumour and sell on the news' would be even more applicable! Naturally, this is all speculation on my part but, let's be fair, most of the chat forums on this site are about speculation of a SP move one way or the other. Personally, I am not convinced that is always healthy because it raises hopes and can lead to disappointment if there is no news but there you go...