Member Info for AllAtSea

Still hold a few Banco Santander shares. I notice that the performance of Aviva is quite similar and wonder if the markets are more interested in shares that have Brexit immunity. e.g. the more Asia-looking Prudential or HSBA both of which probably face different risks and have done rather better since mid 2016. Obviously if you believe in Brexit this represents a buying opportunity.

Pessimism = realism; optimism = blind faith? The problem is too many have 'opinions' backed up by little or nothing. And too many claim to have 'seen the writing on the wall' when the wall has already fallen down and the information is useless! If I express an opinion I also try to provide the reason, e.g. by reading the Q3 statement. Patrick Vallance left voluntarily and thus forfeited severance pay; he has consistently said he left amicably and GSK have said the new appointee has different aptitudes. For a start, unlike the new appointee, Vallance appears to be more of a science man than a businessman; Walmsley said "the group needed to do better in drug development by adopting a sharper commercial focus." It makes sense and in turn, Vallance is likely to be entering an environment in which he is more at home. Certainly the change looks like "providing management and direction". If not, what does? GSK represents c.5% of my portfolio and my investment, prompted by 'experts' appears to have been a mistake the cause of which I am trying to uncover as a learning exercise. Sadly all that is available to support the reasons for the fall is supposition and the idea that the company is hiding something like a bid and/or a divi cut. I'd be eternally grateful if you demonstrated your own rationale based on sources with hard facts. Maybe I would then have the info I needed to cut my losses and head for warmer waters!

Have been a holder of Aviva for years. Long ago I was told if I wanted a growth stock to look elsewhere. I hold for the divi.

The approval was announced on 25 October in the Q3 statement that seems to have upset the market! The Mail article, altho' welcome and informative simply repeats the news whilst saying the drug should get European approval next month. I doubt if the article will affect the SP however, In my opinion the fall in GSK's SP has an underlying reason emanating from the USA (a dodgy arena for a British company at any time let alone today) that has nothing to do with commercial performance. GSK and Walmsley will weather the storm and the share is a decent investment IMO. DYOR!

why did he want to leave? 3rd time I have posted this information from Q3 results! "It was amicable and reported way back in November. He is to be replaced by Dr Barron. The CEO has said she wants more emphasis on the consumer side on which Dr Barron is more suited than Patrick Vallance. Also Dr Barron is reportedly more in tune with the important US market. " As Dinoken says it is a big step up for Vallance, nothing odd about that. If people have missed that then how can then have any idea of what is going on at GSK e,g, Where does this come from? "A bit of management and direction wouldn’t go amiss either. I hope I am wrong, but I see a long road ahead before a sustained rise in the sp."

why did he want to leave? This is the 3rd time I have posted this information from Q3 results! "It was amicable and reported way back in November. He is to be replaced by Dr Barron. The CEO has said she wants more emphasis on the consumer side on which Dr Barron is more suited than Patrick Vallance. Also Dr Barron is reportedly more in tune with the important US market. " As Dinoken says it is a big step up for Vallance, nothing odd about that. If people have missed that then how can then have any idea of what is going on at GSK e,g, "A bit of management and direction wouldn’t go amiss either. I hope I am wrong, but I see a long road ahead before a sustained rise in the sp."

When he becomes Chief Scientific Director to the Government (good luck with that, Patrick) I would guess a large shareholding in GSK might be a conflict of interest? The UK isn't the USA yet.

It was amicable and reported way back in November. He is to be replaced by Dr Barron. The CEO has said she wants more emphasis on the consumer side on which Dr Barron is more suited than Patrick Vallance. Also Dr Barron is reportedly more in tune with the important US market. Vallance: "I believe GSK has a very promising pipeline with great potential to positively build on the many medicines that GSK has successfully brought to patients in recent years. I wish Hal every success in leading the R&D organisation.”

GSK need only restore faith in the dividend and the sp will look very cheap indeed. From zero to hero for Emma!

I suspect a fair number of investors in GSK would buy fixed rate bonds if interest rates were better. Love the divi, hate the uncertainty.

Woodford's exit was in the first half of this year having for a long time been ineffectively critical of Witty's performance. When he judged that Walmsley would follow the same path it was the final straw. However, Walmsley has clearly said GSK will increase its R&D in the search for new 'blockbuster' drugs. She has also said acquisitions could play a part in improving GSK's pipeline. Both decisions could affect dividends but improve the company's long term prospects. Woodford's judgement is currently under scrutiny for the poor performance of is Patient Capital Trust fund, the performance of which has not improved despite dumping GSK. Certainly his decision to exit was right in the short term as he had no leeway; he was firefighting and had no choice.

Credit where credit's due, they returned my premium very promptly.

"Healthcare is another area where notions of China�s dynamism are upended. The industry is moving beyond copycat generic drugs into building pipelines and looking for the next blockbuster pharmaceutical �in keeping with Beijing�s ambition for a more innovative economy�, according to a Financial Times report dated 18 February 2017 into biotech funding." and " Chinese biotech groups are on target to raise about $10bn this year from venture capital funding, initial public offerings and licensing deals with overseas pharma companies, in what is partly a bet that Chinese-developed drugs can compete globally." https://www.ft.com/content/30226ba4-c9ef-11e7-ab18-7a9fb7d6163e 23 Nov 17 It's reported that the pipeline drugs are still years from the market. There are also very big opportunities for companies like GSK to offer partnership deals due to their current massive lead. Early days yet.

Very recently I was discussing with an operative why Saga had upped my premium very unexpectedly like 'Had they increased my risk profile?'. They'd insured me several years prior. They said they couldn't give a reason, underwriting decision, blah, blah. But then they said there might also be 'commercially sensitive reasons' for the uplift that they couldn't disclose. They said it with a certain emphasis that made me take notice. They also said they wouldn't blame me if I took my business elsewhere. I got the impression all was not well on board the good ship Saga.

Glaxo invests �40m in UK's life sciences sector http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42237317

"Insurer Aviva (AV) has completed its �heavy lifting�, according to Deutsche Bank, and there are increased payouts to come. Analyst Oliver Steel retained his �buy� recommendation and increased his target price from 585p to 600p. The shares edged 1.6p higher to 508.1p yesterday."

Worth reading this FT article concerning CHina: https://www.ft.com/content/4cdfb760-4529-11e7-8519-9f94ee97d996 Whilst it suggests there are risks that should be evaluated, the structure of the Chinese state capitalist economy suggests they are not the same as if the situation applied to the USA, for example.

" If you don't use it try Stocktwits for comments on the US ADR's some interesting points made." Thanks. There are.

"Let's be brutal, if gsk paid 2% divi few would be holding it. " To be fair, I thought that was part of Emma Walmsley's statement put another way. In other words GSK were resting on their laurels too much and needed to keep the pipeline flowing. It seems to have frightened the horses. I've a similarly modest stake in a 'minnow' that is all potential but doing promising research and paying out nothing. I'm ahead of the game on that one so maybe a big divi is not all it's cracked up to be after all. As for China, GSK still on the back foot from its misdeeds but may recover with the new CEO.

I take your point, certainly, but he had reasons for selling HSBA and his fears did not seem to be realised. Whilst I have no doubt Woodford has his ear much closer to the ground than most people, he still has to make informed guesses because no CEO tells the world their strategy in any more detail than they have to. As for selling, that horse has sailed and I have no wish to realise my losses if I don't have to.