We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
My drivel probably holds little value, but, steph, there is often a point when fortunes are reversed. GROW is not like a penny mining stock nor a Phase 1 pharmaceutical developer. Grow, as we know invests in businesses that are in very early stage. Yes, they have an idea, a plan, probably sales and an enthusiastic workforce. They have al the potential for rapid growth or a cash haemorrhage only to limp onwards.
We as investors HAVE to trust the managers that decide whether to invest in the myriad of opportunities that are presented. After all, we probably all know a Kevin or a Paul that has aptitude for something and just lacks the cash to take on a new Molly to run the books, Tim to help on the floor or Amy to bill the customers and take payments - we none of us begrudge lending anything from £50 to £500 to help them buy the piece of equipment or the missing link to expand.
We are not dealing with these micro enterprises - this is the stage where not only have they exhausted parents, relatives, friends etc, but now they need the start of the big bucks. The costs to bridge the gap between a tiny business of 3-5 persons to a business that supports 20-50 people. It is the organic growth where insufficient cashflow and capitalisation will kill the entrepreneur that does not have deep pockets.
I know what the entrepreneur goes through - in the past I failed 5 times for 2 different reasons (1 was through embezzlement and 4 through lack of cash) but on the 6th, success resulted and business is in its 15th year of trading. I've not quite reached the salary of a Country let alone a City mouse, but a pretty good one for a Peasant one. Had I known about GROW or that ilk 50 or so years ago, I would certainly have made approach.
Sentiment changes. The valuation for GROW assumes most of the holdings are worthless. This cannot be correct and patience is needed.
With a merger of broad and strong equals, I foresee a re-weighting of assets are a small reduction in costs
The additional link seems to imply that GROW had invested around $30m. Anyway, brilliant spot and thank you for bringing it to our attention.
My holding remains underwater. The only consolation is the 4 figure dividend received over the course of a year. Price remain static and 3 years will have me at break even.
This is mo cause for celebration. I invest for capital growth.
Do you mean that you have rattled some bones, swirled the dregs of a cuppa and examined the entrails to determine that the share price will continue to rise?
Wherever I can, I try and be balanced in my commentary. my decision to sell was not just to lock in the profits from previous purchase points but also that I neither like Ryanair as a company or the managers of that company - aggressive and slippery to the extent that I do not trust the company. Partnership with OTB therefore does not fit well as far as I am concerned.
I do own shares in EZJ which is very much aligned to short haul. I have been tempted to buy shares in Jet2 but have resisted as the fleet mainly comprises Boeing 737's and Boeing has a terrible reputation at the moment and seems to be getting worse by the week. My caution to shareholders now is not with OTD (as I think it is a fine company) but with Ryanair and its reliance on Boeing. I can see an awful summer if Boeing is grounded and has a knock on effect on small carriers that cannot replace their aging fleet.
Sorry if this smacks of de-ramping. It is this most recent decision which I find troubling. Oh, and I placed the proceeds on GROW and RFX
A few more added today. Time will determine the wisdom or folly of decision
I've trickled a little more into this today - have no real concerns on this trust.
First, this refers to something that hapenned 5 or more years ago, second markets are pretty flat accross Europe in advance of the jobless figures due to be released in USA. Third, a 1.5% change in share price is not out of the ordinary or unusual. Really not sure what point you are trying to make.
If you listened to the State of the Union address, you would have heard Mr Biden comment on the importance of NATO. I am not convinced that Mr Biden will be returned and investors need to be prepared for the return of Mr Trump. In the event of Trump re-elected, NATO is in a very perilous place. The UK has a big problem now with numbers of trained forces at worrying level, ships that are being mothballed and a defence budget that needs to be boosted substantially.
Realistic levels of funding for NATO currently should be in the region of 2% GDP. If US is removed, then this will have to increase to at least 2.4%. This level of funding maintains things as they are and does not address the decline in combat readiness. Increase the spend to 2.7% and it begins to nibble back to have a defence that is more appropriate to todays geopolitical climate and at 2.8% it will start to provide some future proofing.
Seems to me very sensible to strengthen portfolio holdings that are doing well adding when there are down days.
I've added another tranche of shares to a SIPP today. Time will determine the wisdom or folly.
Consultation on the ISA has started. This is quite a good run down for the professional pick
https://citywire.com/investment-trust-insider/news/how-the-world-s-best-fund-managers-would-invest-a-british-isa/a2437727
AgentB, the Daily Mail has a reputation of whipping up emotion for those whose political opinion seems to be slightly right of Attila with its sniping comments that have some truth but conveniently omit facts that provide a complete picture. Modern warfare as we have seen in every battle and war since the end of WW2 has been with conventional weaponry.
During this time there has been much standardisation, particularly where callibres are concerned. NATO has the supply chain that is not reliant on one manufacturer or country but accross many countries and defence suppliers. Whether we like it or not, NATO is not completely dependent on the USA nor is it completely capable of providing defence without USA. Rheinmetal, BAE Systems, Babc0ck, Thales, Lockheed, Qinetiq, Boeing and many others spring to mind.
Canada, Italy, UK, Australia, Finland, Sweden, Norway and the Netherlands supply the US with some of their defence needs - there is a global reliance on each other, and that has helped preserve peaceful times for the vast majority of the developed world for decades.
The consultation document can be accessed here
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/65e734d62f2b3bd5107cd8c5/UK_ISA_Consultation.pdf
And a few more today. Will need to have a look down the back of the sofa
More information will be released in time. A consultation is expected to begin this afternoon
In common with you, oldbutnowisa, LGEN features in the ISA for my wife and has been so since 2008. I've chucked a few shares into a SIPP for elder son as it is a business that is unlikely to go bust and is a reliable dividend generator.
While the UK market is performing poorly, those in America are going great guns. Thus far in 2024 the S & P is up 7% whereas the FTSE is still in negative territory.
The real test today will be the City reaction to Mr Hunt. FWIW, I believe that the UK are ready to kick this Government out - I am sure that the market will have a very positive reaction to Rachel Reeves in a new Government
Good to note that gold is at an all time high today.
Shareholders seem to be in a bit of a "Goldilocks" situation where the share price is rising steadily and without any staccato movement. For me, this is just the way I like things, but at some point things will probably flatten off. We know that the company cannot fall into foreign hands from the Government's golden share and we also know that the primary role of Government is sovereign security.
My reading of the prospects for BAE are to see the shares continue to climb in reflection of the support that is being provided to Ukraine through the replacement of arms used and the requirement for sufficient munitions should the UK need to defend our territories or assist NATO members.
I am also mindful that should Mr Trump return to office, NATO will need to step up spending on defence not just on weapons and infrastructure but more importantly in basic combat trained personnel. Broker opinion seems locked on having BAE on their buy lists where most analyst target price seems to have been reached already.
The share chart for the last 5 years seem to betray that momentum is with us and 1400p is not out of the question over the next few months to align with the research from JP Morgan Cazanove. I cannot pretend for a moment to have a target price that will induce me to sell and I remain happy to buy at current prices.
Does not appear to be a rival bidder but at least the managers are ready to sell
An interesting read from a Solicitor, presumably with a connection to IP rights.
FWIW, I have no problem if Graphcore were spun out on the Nasdaq. Aside from attracting possibly a better price, might have additional benefit from a regulatory perspective