The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring Jeremy Skillington, CEO of Poolbeg Pharma 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.
jbongo & cassandra29 - you both make a very good point about Woodford's main fund being open ended, as opposed to SMT (closed ended). I also agree Woodford had limited (if any) real experience of the VC sector and should have stuck to blue chip high yielders where - historically - he'd done well. Anyhow, that's all water under the bridge now. I think Andersen was a bit of a one-off visionary and am not totally convinced Slater & Burns share all his skills. You also have to wonder if the timing of Andersen's retirement had anything to do with him sensing the smelly brown stuff about to hit the fan! Only he knows that I guess. I still think SMT stands a reasonable chance of being a good long term hold. But it's going to be volatile and it's important not to fall in love with this - or any other fund, as some never recover their glory years. For me, the jury's still out on Slater & Burns. We also don't know if they'd change tack slightly, should market conditions in SMT's main sectors continue to worsen. I'm not trying to de-ramp by the way, as I remain heavily invested here (though am trading a small portion of my holding more than I used to). Just looking to give a bit of balance, as it's never a racing certainty what's gone before will come again.
The article seems an unnecessary hatchet job on BG and James. Guessing someone at bloomberg fell out with James at some point... It's easy to use/make up quotes from 'employees/acquaintances who can't be named and who may or may not have their own grudges'. Give me a break.
Loadsoflolly:
"The proportion of unquoted holdings is also a potential issue. Look what happened to Neil Woodford's funds when he strayed away from bread & butter income shares into unquoteds. But the difference is SMT's management does at least have some experience & track record) in investing early (often pre-IPO)"
Another, very important difference is that this is a closed ended fund, where NW's was open ended (and supposed to be investing in income stocks). 0% chance the same will happen to SMT.
To me it's nothing more than outright conjecture written with a sensationalist slant. A typical piece designed to float the financial markets by forcing selling (later buying) activity. There is nothing in the piece that undermines the fact that there are a great many companies more likely than not to make future profits within its portfolio.
We must not also forget the fact of the steady increase in value over the last few months suggesting investors now have a tactile grasp on the likelihood of eventual recovery, plus the knowledge that smt's holdings will consequently be viewed as far more worthy and profitable investments in the future than they are now. There is a faint glimmer at the end of the tunnel now, and even the BOEs view (which the media seem to be viewing as heavily pessimistic... which it isn't) of a return to 2% UK inflation within 2 to 3 years time gives me some confidence.
I note the Nasdaq up today, similar trusts like ATT up today, but smt wallowing at near 2% loss, most probably down to this article..
That'll make a few quid in buying and selling activities for the financial institutions that deal in them for sure. Nice move :)
Having posted Bloomberg's lengthy article, here's my take on it. 1) Most of its comments (though valid) are largely backward-looking. The sectors SMT invests in (along with its unquoted holdings) were particularly badly affected in the general recent market shift from growth to value stocks. Part of this trend unwound recently, so it's anyone's guess which share group wins out over the next year or two. 2) SMT hasn't always been a "shoot the lights out" performer. It only started taking off big time after 2016 - and more spectacularly since Covid first struck. This was largely down to sectors like tech, healthcare & consumer cyclicals becoming all the rage during the pandemic. Again, no-one knows whether this was a flash in the pan. Though I doubt it, as the pandemic permanently changed how - and where - we work, what we want out of life and how to plan for future health/environmental emergencies. I guess whether the Bloomberg article worries you largely depends on how long you've held SMT. More recent investors may be more concerned. Others who've held 30 months or more, less so. My main concern would be if BG felt it had the Midas touch and could do no wrong. As the article hints, this could lead to a break down in exhaustive research, due diligence & risk management. The proportion of unquoted holdings is also a potential issue. Look what happened to Neil Woodford's funds when he strayed away from bread & butter income shares into unquoteds. But the difference is SMT's management does at least have some experience & track record) in investing early (often pre-IPO), working with businesses to gain their respect & trust so they're not unduly diluted out, then - if all goes to plan - eventually reaping the rewards. It's not JUST luck that led to SMT investing early on in companies like Tesla & Amazon. Though of course a degree of luck is always involved. Whenever a fund loses its lead manager, investors should be monitoring things more closely. In a way, losing Anderson might be a good thing for SMT longer term, ushering in a slightly more cautious approach. So in conclusion, I won't be cashing in on SMT just yet, though I have re-sold some of my 2022 trading buys already. For now, the jury's still out......
Part 5 (final): "The firm says any similarities between portfolios are unintentional and that each team does its own research. All the same, the 170-person client services team has been reemphasizing the investment philosophy Anderson helped to build. Their line: This, too, shall pass — and Baillie Gifford will go on to greater heights as its bets pay off over coming decades. In webinars, letters and phone calls, the team has urged investors not to panic. The partnership keeps looking ahead. It plans to hire more people and move to a new glass-paneled, seven-story headquarters being built in a new development in Edinburgh’s West End. At a recent company-wide meeting, two senior partners said Baillie Gifford would stick to its guns. It was, they said, business as usual."
Part 4: "Stock picks are only one problem. During the bull years, Anderson and his team also became go-to financiers for a range of tech startups. Flush with investor dollars, they seeded young businesses in hopes of reaping outsize returns once the companies went public. Unlisted companies accounted for roughly a third of Scottish Mortgage’s holdings at the end of June, according to company documents. The fund got in on the bull-market rush over the fledgling air-taxi business, picking up stakes in Lilium NV and Joby Aviation Inc. It also bought into crypto financial-services company Blockchain.com and Northvolt AB, a Swedish battery developer. When or if many of those bets might pay off is anyone’s guess. One pick, biotech company Ginkgo Bioworks, went public last year, during the waning days of the craze over special purpose acquisition companies, or SPACs. Since then, the stock has fallen 53%. And while Anderson was the first to invest in private companies at Baillie Gifford, even more conservative investment trusts run by the firm have exposure to the asset class, albeit at much lower levels. Even Baillie Gifford insiders concede Anderson’s departure in April, telegraphed for more than a year, came at a particularly fraught moment. The firm created a success story around Anderson and his investment philosophy and used that rosy narrative to market itself. James Budden, global head of marketing, acknowledged — with some limits — Anderson’s long-standing role in shaping Baillie Gifford. “He was a strong influence, but this took 20 years to play out,” said Budden, the only person Baillie Gifford made available to speak on the record. “Scottish Mortgage didn’t immediately become what it is today. Yes, he did define a lot of the investment thinking.” For better and worse, Anderson appears to have left a lasting mark. University graduates who join the firm’s training program no longer get schooled in financial statements as meticulously as they used to, people familiar with the matter said. People who’ve left recently say risk management could be improved. Budden, the marketing chief, says trainees must still learn accounting but adds that success at Baillie Gifford takes vision, too. “We do have risk controls, though people think we don’t,” he said. “For us the biggest risk is finding the wrong companies and missing the big opportunities, but we also do proper risk analysis.” For now, Baillie Gifford seems hostage to the markets. An investment team called Global Alpha, created by former senior partner Charles Plowden in 2005 as a counterweight to Anderson’s go-big philosophy, has weathered the storm better than Scottish Mortgage by investing in more, less volatile stocks. Global Alpha today manages 39 billion pounds, more than any other group in the firm. Yet, all the same, it still holds a crop of Anderson’s tech darlings like Moderna and Tesla."
Part 3: "In an email, he dismissed the idea that his bull-market success and celebrity status came to define Baillie Gifford.
“The influence was mostly because the high growth worked so well for a prolonged period and therefore — as is the way in finance — it attracted more attention and even imitation,” Anderson said of his sway over Baillie Gifford. “Maybe this always bothered me more than people realized.” In addition to Amazon and Tesla, big-name scores included Covid-19 vaccine maker. But during a tenure spanning four decades, he shook off the firm’s staid reputation and fundamentally changed its DNA. At a time when low-cost index funds were upending the investment business, he pushed the partnership in the opposite direction: He challenged portfolio managers to set aside indexes and instead find companies that would solve big problems. In addition to Amazon and Tesla, big-name scores included Covid-19 vaccine maker Moderna Inc. When markets were going their way, Anderson and his acolytes could steamroll most doubters. Unabashedly contrarian and sometimes quick-tempered, he sniffed at what he viewed as groupthink by bean-counting CFAs. Let others worry about quarterly results and P/E ratios. Anderson wanted to spot the super trends that would shape the future. People who questioned him or issued a negative report on one of his stock picks often found themselves on the losing side a heated argument, current and former employees say. Others learned to keep their mouths shut. To avoid office distractions, Anderson eventually stopped sharing his own research in Baillie Gifford’s library. Before long, Anderson and his crew stopped attending weekly investment meetings, dismissing the gatherings as a venue of low-brow short-termism. Baillie Gifford later made the confabs optional before binning them altogether. A scruffy, sometimes rumpled character with a professorial air — one former colleague recalls Anderson wearing an ink-stained shirt one day, another remembers his poorly knotted ties — Anderson came to be seen as the mad genius of Baillie Gifford. (In a telephone interview, Anderson conceded that he could be hot-tempered due to the stresses of the job.) His star rising, he enthralled everyday investors, scouted Silicon Valley and hung out with Jeff Bezos in Sun Valley. Insiders say that with Anderson gone there’s more room for flexibility, but Baillie Gifford is in so deep it might be hard to go back. Wholly owned by its roughly 50 partners, the firm has staked its future on the belief that it can spot the next big thing. Then, the thinking goes, it can do what Anderson did: Get in early — and hold on for the ride. Before July’s bounce, the ride has mostly gone in one direction: down. Baillie Gifford is a top-three holder of Moderna (down 22% year to Aug. . 16); Shopify Inc. (down 68%); and Spotify Technology SA (down 41%). It’s also a major holder of Illumia Inc. (down 33%) and Peloton Interactive Inc. (down 58%), among others."
Part 2: "It’s been quite a comedown. From its Edinburgh headquarters 3,200 miles from Wall Street, Baillie Gifford emerged in the 2000s and 2010s as one of the world’s top stock-pickers, marketing the Anderson mystique and attracting ordinary investors and major pension funds across the US and Britain. Anderson set aside conventional investment metrics and staked his clients’ money on a relatively small number of risky, high-growth stocks. With a go-big-or-go-home ethos, he pressed portfolio managers to focus on sweeping, global themes, rather than investing geographically.
And so, Baillie Gifford famously piled into Amazon, Tesla and others that would soon catch fire in the bull market. For years, the only investor who owned more of Tesla was Elon Musk. (Douglas Brodie, a partner and portfolio manager for another Baillie Gifford team, initially drove the Tesla investment in the early 2010s, but Anderson got most of the credit — and the media attention). The results were extraordinary. From 2005 to its peak last year, Scottish Mortgage returned 2,240%. But what goes up usually comes down — in this case, down hard. With high-orbit tech stocks hurtling back to earth, Scottish Mortgage has plummeted 32% this year as of Aug. 16, its assets dropping to 14 billion pounds. All Baillie Gifford funds tracked by Bloomberg have fallen from 1% to 40% this year. Overall assets under management stood at 231 billion pounds at the end of June, versus 336 billion pounds at the start of the year. From Menlo Park to Shenzhen, Big Tech to startups, a pullback has followed a decade of giddy exuberance. SoftBank Group Corp. reported a record 3.16 trillion yen ($23.4 billion) net loss on Aug. 8 after its Vision Fund, the world’s largest technology fund, got hammered. Given the shifting landscape, the question is when, or maybe whether, Baillie Gifford can regain its footing and help reinforce the business of stock picking that’s been undermined in recent years by the popularity of cheaper, index-tracking funds. Indeed, other big name investors came unstuck after stellar returns. Bill Miller, the manager whose unprecedented record of beating the Standards & Poor’s 500 Index made him an investing legend, couldn’t relive his past glories after a sharp turn in his fortunes. More dramatic was Neil Woodford’s fall from grace in the UK. The star money manager mesmerized investors for years with his performance. But following a poor run, clients started pulling their cash, leading to the suspension of his flagship fund in 2019. Baillie Gifford is far more than one fund and has other strategies that don’t pursue the kind of returns that made Anderson a magnet for retail clients, who would flock to hear him speak at investor forums. But, over the time, the firm tilted toward his investing philosophy. Anderson, now chairman of Swedish investment company Kinnevik AB, waves off his influence."
Don't worry. Here we go (part 1): "After 2,240% Run, Tesla Visionary Leaves UK Fund Bleeding Money
Some inside the company saw him as a mad genius. Now, Baillie Gifford is trying to adapt to life after James Anderson.
For years, he rode the likes of Amazon.com Inc. and Tesla Inc. to the moon, earning a reputation as the techno-visionary oracle of Edinburgh. Now, James Anderson, bull-market hero, has left behind a precarious legacy. It’s been three months since Anderson, 63, retired from Baillie Gifford, the century-old Scottish money manager he transformed into an unlikely power-investor in global technology. Awkward timing, to say the least. Before Cathie Wood and Ark Invest, before crypto and “stonks,” Anderson began transforming Baillie Gifford’s prosaically named Scottish Mortgage Investment Trust — founded in 1909 to finance rubber plantations and later Baillie Gifford’s flagship product — into one of the world’s top performing funds of its kind for a decade. But the tech stock meltdown has left the firm bleeding assets this year, losing a staggering 100 billion pounds ($122 billion) by the end of June. What was already a tall task for the next generation of the firm’s stock-pickers — convincing investors they can follow in Anderson's footsteps — has added a new hurdle: making the case that they should. The recent market rally will have helped, but changing course doesn’t appear to be an option. More than a dozen former and current employees and clients, most of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity in recent weeks, depict a firm that fell under the spell of Anderson’s success. A company partner who held no formal management position for years ended up driving Baillie Gifford’s entire approach to markets. What Anderson has left behind appears emblematic not only of this year’s market downturn but also of the excesses that inflated a pandemic bubble in just about everything. Portfolio managers have been deployed to try to calm angsty clients. The uneasy mood was evident in mid-June as Scottish Mortgage investors gathered in London to hear what Baillie Gifford had to say about the drastic reversal of fortune. The crowd sat solemnly beneath dim chandeliers in a rented ballroom as Anderson’s successors, Tom Slater and Laurence Burns, called for patience, confident picks would pay off in the long run — that is, in 10 or even 20 years. Baillie Gifford famously piled into Amazon, Tesla and others that would soon catch fire in the bull market. Some attendees wondered out loud if Slater and Burns could deliver by following their old boss’s playbook. One asked if it would take 20 more years to figure out if Anderson really was a genius stock-picker or merely someone who lucked out in a bull market. “We are not sitting, looking into a crystal ball trying to predict what’s going to happen,” Slater said. “Wealth doesn’t come from predicting stuff but from a small number of exceptional companies.”
Bard1 - any chance of posting full article for non-subscribers to Bloomberg?