Member Info for BlahBlahDoh

Carrie Lam has finally withdrawn the kow-towing extradition bill which ignited the trouble in Hong Kong. Her supporters may claim this shows she is independent from the fake Marxists, but many people will conclude the exact opposite.

For the Pru share price it's good news for now as the tension eases, they are top riser in the FTSE100 this morning, but the withdrawn bill is now no longer the only issue, and protests are likely to continue. Carrie Lam looks weak and vulnerable, but replacing her throws up all sorts of potential problems. We should be wary of false dawns, the Prague spring etc., but enjoy the share price rollercoaster as it lurches upwards.

btw Superb timing by Spikeyj - up £1 in a week! Pretty spiky.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-30/prudential-blinded-by-green-eyed-monster-in-1-8-billion-suit

Probably a good sign that Pru are not even mentioned in this article:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49520047

Trading update on 22 Oct (for six months ending 30 September), half-year results 12 November: straddling the Brexit like a helicoptoring rock guitarist.

Jatw is spot on to highlight the long game and demographics, but although Pru operates in 14 Asian countries, I think it's reasonable to fixate on HK a little bit. Pru Asia is based there, as are it's regulators. As the first and biggest UK insurer there, it is particularly prone to political interference, and China blames the UK for the unrest. Perhaps we should be wary of the current UK prime minister, who is somewhat prone to making unwise remarks. What happens in HK probably has much more effect on the share price than anywhere else in Asia, barring the Chinese mainland, and obviously the two are linked.

There are some reasons for optimism though. As well as raising tariffs on selected American products, China has actually lowered them for other countries. They have been doing this since January, I believe.
https://www.piie.com/blogs/trade-and-investment-policy-watch/trump-has-gotten-china-lower-its-tariffs-just-toward
This suggests that they are finally serious about increasing imports and moving towards more balanced trade, it is not just words, as it was in the past. And perhaps it gives hope that Prudential might be treated differently from American competitors if restrictions come? Within China, Prudential operates as CITIC Prudential Life, in partnership with a Chinese firm, but it arguably plays the senior role since it has the knowledge and experience to manage the complex financial products needed by a growing middle class. That may be another reason for the Chinese to refrain from undue interference.

The author concludes that the journey may take longer than expected, but it's unclear whether he means the demerger process itself, or the benefits of it. If he thinks the demerger will be delayed, he doesn't give any evidence for it, so we have to assume he means the latter. Yet earlier on in the article, he seems to be querying why the price has moved in line with other UK insurers despite the planned demerger, as if the benefits should have happened BEFORE the demerger? So, for some unexplained reason, he seems to expect the benefits to occur either long before or long after after the demerger. It seems obvious to me that the benefits, in terms of more favourable valuation, will happen right at the time of the demerger, because that's when the market will have to decide what the two businesses are worth.

He gives several reasons why it's a bad time to demerge, but doesn't suggest when would be a good time. Brexit existed before the demerger was announced, and will exist after it is completed, it isn't really relevant to timing - the direct effect of it is anyway limited to M&G, who have prepared well for it, so Pru are arguably in a better position than other UK insurers whose whole businesses are fully exposed to it. In any case, a bad Brexit is partially priced in already - the demerger will release that stigma from Pru Asia altogether, and if Brexit is better than expected then M&G will feel the benefit.

Interest rate policy has flip-flopped along with Trump's trade war, and the resulting inflation worries, but up until recently the trend was upwards. Again, when would be a good time to demerge - last year when rises were expected? Next year when cuts are out of the way? I'd say now is as good a time as any, when Pru are at the top of their game, in a strong position to weather external pressures.

I'm not convinced that the 10% rise in Hong Kong sales during the troubles can legitimately employed as a springboard for pessimism, simply because it "does not make the company immune" from political meltdown. That risk is partially priced in, it's potential effects are unclear, and the author doesn't provide any reasoning to suggest that political meltdown is the most likely outcome. You could just as easily argue that any easing of the tension would give the shares a boost. The only thing we can say for certain is that vigorous sales during a time of serious crisis is a very positive indicator of the rude health of Pru Asia. Rather than a slow boat to China, Prudential seem to be already there, travelling first class on the Shanghai Express.

"Berenberg expected Planet Zoo to contribute £25m of revenue in 2020... However, having analysed player data and following discussions with management, the broker believes there is now a ‘strong possibility’ that the game will outperform its earlier forecast and deliver £35m to £50m revenue in the fiscal year ending 31 May 2020."

https://www.sharesmagazine.co.uk/news/shares/frontier-developments-gets-vote-of-confidence-for-latest-game-planet-zoo

Worth mocking Article. Artificial unintelligence. Thickbait.
nysenewsguild is a terrible coder - goes live with untested software. Garbage in, garbage out.

Like Bowie's Low, it's better than first perceived. No financial damage from tariffs, as results show - potential damage would only come from an, as yet hypothetical, Chinese retaliation in terms of restrictions on trade. Market seems to rate that risk remarkably high, pricing it in substantially. China has no argument with the Pru though, it might arguably target US companies only, with the knock on effect of giving Pru a relative boost in the region by handicapping the opposition! In reality, Pru's prospects would be damaged by restrictions but not destroyed, even by a complete ban, since they don't only operate in China. Share price drop seems like an overreaction, exacerbated by Brexit 4.0 (Boris edition) and the Rothesay brouhaha (surprising but largely irrelevant). Market is confused: demerger may concentrate minds.

“With the validation of production material nearing completion, the time to market will be significantly reduced when new commercial customers are identified and we continue our efforts in this area to identify new potential opportunities and to provide excellent service to the US customer.”

(ME, 31 July) https://www.prolificnorth.co.uk/news/technology-news/2019/07/nanoco-released-ps425m-repayment-us-customer

Roll up, roll up, getcha kwantum dots 'ere. Cadmium-free nanomaterials, lovely jubbly.

"China announced plans to impose a 10% tariff on $75bn worth of goods imported from the US.

The new taxes were themselves a response to Mr Trump's plans for a 10% levy on $300bn of Chinese imports.

Wall Street share markets dived after the president tweeted that he would respond to the new tax later on Friday."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49450245

From the Half yearly report:
"Our decision to establish manufacturing capability in Vietnam in 2012 and the subsequent capacity expansion which was completed in the first quarter of 2019 have proved to be extremely timely. Our Vietnam manufacturing plant allows us to offer our USA customers products which are not subject to the 25% Section 301 tariff imposed by the Trump administration on power converters manufactured in China. The majority of our competition have a predominantly Chinese manufacturing footprint. We have transferred the production of over 1,500 different products from China to Vietnam in the last 12 months. We are also announcing plans to transfer the manufacture of all our low power, high voltage DC-DC converters to Vietnam by mid-2020, which we expect will lead to significant cost savings."

So my comment about relief from tarrifs was wrong - XPP are already subject to existing tarrifs, and presumably would therefore be unaffected by the (delayed) new ones, which are (probably) for different products.

More from the half-year report:

"Outlook

We continue to see a robust performance from our Healthcare, Industrial and Technology businesses, however, a combination of continued softness in the Semiconductor Equipment Manufacturing sector and the task of recovering Section 301 tariffs present us with a continuing challenge as we enter the second half.

Our Vietnamese manufacturing capability puts us in a strong position to mitigate the impact of Section 301 tariffs. The transfer of production from China to Vietnam, and the qualification of product by our key customers once transferred, is key to restoring our margins to historical levels. Once this is achieved, our production footprint should give us a compelling cost advantage over the majority of our competitors who produce predominantly in China. Our margins in 2020 will also start to benefit from the closure of our Minden facility and the transfer of the Minden-built products to Vietnam.

Although we do not anticipate any meaningful upturn in the Semiconductor Equipment Manufacturing sector before 2020, once the recovery takes hold we expect the combination of our recent design wins and the cyclical recovery to produce significant growth in this sector."

To my mind, the upside prospects for this stock seem much more plausible than any downside over the next couple of years. Trump somehow manufactured a dispute with Denmark, but surely he will continue to avoid Vietnam?

To be fair, the judge accepted the regulators technical assessment of capital, his concerns seemed more about the policyholders being shortchanged in terms of the comparative quality and security of the company they were being transferred to. In a way, it was a compliment?:

"The High Court judge blocked the Prudential-Rothesay transfer on the grounds that Rothesay did not have the characteristics that policyholders were drawn to in selecting Prudential as their annuity provider.

The judge said Rothesay was a “relatively new entrant without an established reputation in the business” and although it had solvency ratios at least equal to Prudential’s, “it does not have the same capital management policies or the backing of a large group with the resources and a reputational imperative to support a company that carries its business name if the need were to arise over the lifetime of the annuity policies”."

https://www.ipe.com/countries/uk/high-court-blocks-12bn-prudential-rothesay-annuities-transfer/10032863.article

It's good that someone is standing up for policyholders, but I suspect this judgement may eventually be overturned on appeal. If not, I guess all these annuities will have to be retained under the spun-off M&G business, or would the judge object to that too, on the same grounds? Retention would involve expense and bother, since Rothesay are already engaged, and a different shape to the company going forward. The split goes ahead anyway, let's hope there are no more unpleasant surprises.

Dear Auntie Crow, Mike starts relationships well but he can't sustain. A secret sugar daddy gave him money and a shiny factory, but then discarded him, just like all the rest. He has lovely IP, and a brand new empty facility just waiting to get busy, but no-one will partner him. It's agony. Please help.

Worried of BlahBlahLand.

"what does the shareholder base want to own? Prudential, M&G or both?"

Markets seem to be worrying now about worldwide collateral damage from Trump's incoherent disruptions. Pru's results are remarkable in the circumstances, and they seem to be well positioned to go ahead with major change when others are possibly cowed. M&G seem to have been sculpted into a much more interesting company than perhaps expected, and a distinctively different proposition to Pru Asia. Both companies now seem capable of generating a kinetic buzz: hopefully both shareholder bases will expand on launch.

Intriguing. I wonder if this is something to do with cyber security?
https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/02/quantum-computing-blockchain-technology-threat/

Interim results were not bad, market seemed to be expecting worse - slightly lower margins, but manageable. Trumps flip-flopping on tarrifs on China currently delays them until December, which is useful for XPP while they transfer production to Vietnam.

CEO interview on Bloomberg: https://www.bloomberg.com/quote/PRU:LN

He says (at 00:40) that the split will complete in "the fourth quarter next year", but it's actually this year, according to the Pru website. https://www.prudential.co.uk/news/news-releases/2019/14-08-2019a and many other sources.
I'd guess December, coinciding with the new date for Trump's postponed tarrifs on China, doh! (@:

This is what the company itself says: "flagged up risks of the unrest in Hong Kong, as well as the US-China trade war and Brexit in the UK." Can't imagine why they are panicking and worrying about everything.

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/business/uk-world/prudential-to-complete-demerger-by-end-of-2019-38403083.html

I agree the company is undervalued, but the price has remained depressed compared to earnings for as long as I can remember. Operating profit of £2 bn in 6 months seems good for a company whose total market cap is only £37 bn. I think the logic of the split is to repackage the businesses as two more focused entities which might be more attractive to a wider range of investors. It should be fascinating to see how the market values Pru Asia and M&G compared to the existing valuation. Good luck with your expanded stake James, if the split achieves its aim you could see an early upturn by the end of the year, with a bit of luck.

James, get a grip, the Pru's main growth market is Asia. Hong Kong are their future regulators. We cannot sensibly exclude them from the discussion. They are things for Pru holders to validly worry about, as the share price demonstrates, and this board isn't titled "don't mention the Pru". Handing out inane advice about fantasy trading is a feeble response, imo, you can do better. So: how about that split, eh?