Member Info for casapinos

Historically and consistently, the UK accounts for a medium single-digit percentage of Diageo's total revenue, around 5-8%, based on its ~24% share of sales in Europe, and Great Britain's relative size. So if today's fall is based on this news, it seems (as almost always) a tad overdone. I have taken the opportunity to add a few, bringing my average down to just below 1700. At current prices, DGE's P/E is around 20, based on last year's revenues, and it may rise if this year's figures are, as I suspect, no better. Nevertheless, I am (fairly)confident that disposals at reasonable prices, slashing costs, retreat from less profitable geographies, and tighter debt cost management will ensure a turnaround; it may take 1-2 years, but I'm patient.

Friday's volume in OCDO was significantly higher than the daily average(14 million cf a normal day of < 4million); it is therefore quite probable that some market makers became short of stock, while others had stock to spare. The solution to that is a heavy Uncross, where both circumstances were remedied. It has no obvious significance to the subsequent direction of travel.

Just added a few at 639, happy to wait for the (highly) probable recovery. Incidentally, the FCA CAN prosecute for malfeasance of foreign nationals working for UK companies, BUT I'd be interested to see how this investigation pans out. SMWH appear to have acted promptly and correctly in their review, and the Trumpster might not look favourably on the UK prosecuting US citizens.

The situation is now quite complex and may well take some time to unravel, but I'm a patient investor and would (have) put money on the SP returning to well above current levels in the not-too-distant future. I'm not one for Guesstimates of SP's, but as it 's Xmas , here's a gues for you to ridicule over the next few months/years

2028

SMWH sales£3bn

Net income £500m

Market cap >£2bn

SP >£10

My profit >50%

Merry Xmas, all......

Https://www.londonstockexchange.com/news-article/SMWH/preliminary-results-announcement/17381620

It's a long and complex doc, which I have speed read. I will have missed some things, but broadly.

The income misstatement fiasco looks as if it may have been criminal; there is a suggestion of recovering bonuses from N America execs. But the good news is that it looks like it is not significantly worse than previously described.

Elsewhere, it is apparent that N America is a bit of a chaotic shambles, too many non-functioning entities, too much dispersal of effort. That said, I still believe that the North American air travel-based business has the opportunity to be significantly positive.

As ever, the SP reaction is likely to be sharply negative today, the bots all running for the hills. If that is true, I will add. As a long-term investor, I see a sound business in a significant growth area. I may have to wait a year or two to see my profits, but I'm fine with that.

I may post again later today, having digested the RNS more thoroughly

If they also hold stock long, then as the SP rises, the amount of their cash at risk grows, so they increase the short as downside protection. It's a fairly common way to protect high-volatility, high-risk stocks.

An interesting appointment, somewhat controversial, she is NOT a popular figure in Oz (I was in Perth for a few weeks last year). She did for a while, position herself as a "greenie", but most reckon that was gesture politics. The good news for BP is that she is likely to back off the greening of BP and get back to what they do best, ie extract oil and gas and sell it profitably. I held here for a few months this year, buying at an average of 375 and selling when it hit 450. I have been watching for a re-entry point, and if, as I suspect, this news is greeted cautiously, I may well re-enter.

I'm sure the incoming CEO will have approved, indeed probably initiated, this as the first stage of a restructure of DGE , retreating from less profitable geographies. I suggested as much in my post of 12 Nov.I expect it to be the first of several such rationalisations, and it's likely, IMV, that the cash will go to reducing DGE's $10bn+ of debt. The benefit of that is, of course, that it positively impacts profits almost immediately.

Hi Corradus, I don't know where you get your figure from, BUT allowing for divis and capital appreciation, I think you have underestimated significantly. I accept that inflation has eroded the value of the return, and on a scale, it is insignificant. However, assuming a complete divestment in the not-too-distant future, BAE will have received a well over $100 million return on its initial investment.

See

https://www.londonstockexchange.com/news-article/BA./results-of-placing-of-gdrs-of-air-astana/17377257

Here is some background...

BAE Systems acquired its initial stake in Air Astana in 2001, when the airline was founded as a joint venture between BAE Systems (49%) and the Government of Kazakhstan's sovereign wealth fund Samruk-Kazyna (51%). This investment, reportedly less than $10 million (or around £6.5 million in some accounts), was made to help fund the airline's launch, partly as a sweetener while BAE Systems was bidding on a radar system contract for Kazakhstan (which ultimately did not materialise).

So, not a bad deal, and I would guess that the rest of the holding (subject currently to a 90-day lock-in) will be disposed of as soon as possible, net profit ~ $100 million.

Richmond, fair point though, for a holder it's a bit of a double-edged sword, you make a small percentage on the borrowing fee, from an entity you KNOW is seeking to drive the SP (and hence your holding) down. Logic suggests that you are willing to bear a short-term fall in your major holding in the knowledge or expectation of long-term, larger profits.

Seaking , it's not just the number of shares in issue, but also the fact that a very high proportion of them are tightly held, the top ten shareholders own almost 60% of the stock. See this

https://www.investing.com/equities/ocado-group-ownership

That is the prime reason for the SP volatility; the small amount of "floating stock" means that ALL SP moves are magnified. That said, it also illustrates that a fair number of well-informed investors have largeish stakes in the company, an obvious positive.

The markets have become predictably unpredictable. III is/was a £ 40 billion company only a few days ago. Some moderately disappointing data sent the SP and thus the market cap down by £10 BILLION.........That is not the reaction of a rational market; it is, as I have said several times before, the reaction of a market where most of the trading is done automatically by software, all programmed to react in the same way.

Unsurprisingly and increasingly predictably, the share, like others, is now staging a significant recovery. Down at the worst, almost 25%, now back up by 10% from the short-term low.

It's a valid argument that the stock had got way ahead of itself by mid-October at a price of £43and it retraced one year's worth of SP appreciation in one day! I bought on that day and have added a few more at prices which leave my average just a smidge above £30.

As a relatively cautious investor of thirty years' experience(and, I am happy to report, a very significant portfolio growth in that time), I find that sort of market reaction slightly unnerving, BUT, equally, I see the opportunity for a rational and considered response to an almost out-of-control market.

I am now back in profit, if only slightly, and happy to hold for a further recovery. I don't foresee £40 again for a while, but I do think the steady progress in the value of the ACTION holding is relatively undamaged.

I don't make specific SP predictions, but I do see some sharp upside still from here in the short term and longer term, I expect the SP to continue its steady upward trajectory. I'm happy to have bought into a stock I have watched for some time, thinking it was overvalued and to have done so at something below its true value.

See this RNS today

https://www.londonstockexchange.com/news-article/OCDO/update-on-kroger-partnership/17359746

Key points seem to be

$350m payment to OCDO in January

5 live CFC's performance improving

No explicit info about any further changes to the deal

While predicting SP reaction is impossible, my guess would be that the market will take this positively. We'll see.

Not going to breach copyright, but here's a summary. The article is about III infrastructure, of which III holds 29%. III infrastructure does what it says on the tin , holds significant shares, normally 8-10% or more in boring businesses which provide services for the oil, chemicals and comms industries, they aim to produce returns of 8-10% pa. Recent figures show annual returns of 12.5%. It pays a dividend of 3.7%, lower than similar infrastructure investments, but the argument is that cash is better invested in growing asset values than paying holders. As a LTI, I am happy with that.

Glen is my current mining stock, having sold Anglo following the sharp bounce created by the first BHP bid.Today's Investor call summarised below, has created a sharp SP rise. Here's why.

Cost cutting.

"Glencore has eliminated about 1000 roles as part of streamlining its industrial operating structure."

The focus on the metal of the moment, copper .

GLEN said 2026 copper output would fall to 810000 to 870000 tonnes, about 10% below its previous target, and guided to lower volumes for zinc, met coal and nickel next year.BUT it reiterated its plan to lift copper production back to about 1 million tonnes by 2030, with potential to exceed 2 million tonnes in the mid-2030s through projects including El Pachon, Collahuasi expansion and Agua Rica.

I suspect the SP might drift back from today's high, 6% up on a £40billion+ company is pretty rich, so a fall back is probable, BUT the overall picture is VERY positive. I don't do SP predictions, but I firmly believe that there is some significant upside from here over the next year or two.

III have held a significant share of Actionstock since 2011, I see no reason, given the rapid growth of Action's store empire, why III should sell in the near future. You are correct that the SP, even at current levels, is at a premium to NAV, but that is not uncommon; the premium is an assumption of future growth.

I'm also adding and we are not the only ones, since the latest results came out on 13/11, which drove the Sp down, directors have bought several million pounds worth of shares. SEE recent RNSs. Now the only plausible explanations are collective lunacy from the board, OR they are confident that the business and its SP are seriously undervalued at these levels. Analysts or directors with their own money at stake? I'm backing the directors.....

And again.........here is why.

BAE Systems' full-year guidance (upgraded in November 2025) anticipates sales growth of 8-10%, underlying EBIT growth of 9-11%, and underlying EPS growth of 8-10% (from 2024 baselines of £28.3 billion in sales, £3.0 billion in underlying EBIT, and 68.5 pence in EPS). This supports the consensus net income estimate, as net profit typically tracks closely with underlying earnings after adjustments for taxes.(No changes in the budget that I could spot)

My projections assume continued momentum from geopolitical tensions, as previously described, boosting defence budgets (e.g., UK to 2.6% of GDP by 2027, EU rearmament, and US/European orders). Free cash flow is expected to exceed £5.5 billion cumulatively over 2025-2027.

Consensus of brokers' EPS forecasts 68.5p(actually BAEs estimate), 0.80p in 2026, 0.89p in 2027, ie at least 10% per annum for the foreseeable future

Yet again, IMV the market is taking a very short-term view, I beg to differ........

Just added substantially at 1608, if I have to wait some time to profit, I will. Despite the optimism around a Ukraine solution, the die is cast, and defence spending is trending upwards.

It's just another example of governments imposing a tax and causing people to find ways to avoid it. It explains why "fly tipping" has risen dramatically recently. Governments of all parties don't get that people minimise taxation both legally and illegally.

In theory, recyclable waste is cheaper to dispose of, Non-recyclable more expensive, building waste is mainly rocks and soil , but may have polutants in it and nobody wants it.