Member Info for casapinos

fleccy You say "The only thing currently stopping BT from spinning off Openreach, is the pension scheme in my opinion." But as I reported in a post on 5 Dec 21
" in ref to fleccys's "and the pension bought out by the trustees", it is worth noting that the long term element of current pension fixing plan is secured against the revenue stream of EE and shares in "EE limited " are offered as security."
So for whatever reason(?) BT set this provision up some time ago, its existence would IMV allow a break up where the component parts could be split with "EE limited" being burdened with the pension issue, that's not to say it WILL happen but that's how it is at the mo.

LTI re your 11.20 the latest AR shows that an "Absolute total shareholder return", (which includes both divi and buybacks) of between 8% and 16 % constitutes 30% of the target for the "Executive group" share vesting criteria, so little surprise that the board seek to maximise those criteria!!

Edward....there are a variety of ways of shorting, using spread bets , CFD's or options BUT the method relevant to the short positions shown on short tracker or this site is as follows.
A company (usually a hedge fund or private equity or sometimes an investment fund )will " borrow" for a fee (of maybe 2/3%) shares from a major holder, for example,s sake we'll say at the then market price of £1 each, with a commitment to return them at some future point, maybe 1 month or 3 months hence, they will then Sell them into the market at or about that same £1 price so if they borrowed, to keep it simple 10000 shares, they pay out £10K and collect £10k from the market, so far so unclear. BUT if subsequently the share price drops to 50p , they can buy back the stock for £5k and return them to the lender, netting a £5k profit(less borrowing fee). If the stock becomes worthless , they DO NOT HAVE TO RETURN ANY STOCK, so they keep the £10k , the brokers lose no money as they have merely facilitated two transactions for which collect their fee. The original stock owner is the loser as they get either the stock back worth less than when they "lent " it or in an extreme case nothing.
Why do stock owners lend to shorters? , because they get a fee for the loan and in most cases will get the stock back at or near the original price. In the cine case what will probably happen is the shorters make 70-100% profit and the investment company loses out on that particular loan - but of course, they may have millions of pounds in lots of stocks out on loan, most of which will be paying a nice 2/3% per quarter thus bumping up their returns.
Hope that is clear and resolves your obvious misconceptions.

Edward ...your 14.13 post is entirely wrong , the shorts were betting on cine SP falling and hence they make millions not lose them, read up on shorts , you have entirely misunderstood shorting.If you Still don't understand post again and I will run you through the outcomes for shorters.

Guys for info, "simply wall st" is essentially a BOT -driven site , there is very little, if any human input, the bot merely takes currently available figures and projects them forwards, it is useless as a tool for analysis, all the pretty graphics have little value in the real world.

Hi clued , I just got round to reading your responses and the points you make are valid, yes it will be for the plaintiffs to make a case but to a degree the FDA action has started that process, the pills do in certain conditions (apparently storage at above a given temperature) contain traces of NDMA and high exposure (of the sort possible for a long-term user?)MAY increase the risk of cancer. The plaintiffs will force GSK/Pfizer to defend in court a process that will be time-consuming, cost significant legal fees cast something of a pall over the companies for possibly several years even if they eventually win. In such a war of attrition, they may decide like Bayer or J and J that to capitulate and buy their way out is the lesser evil.
I spoke to a couple of guys better informed than me over the weekend and the gossip (and it is just gossip) is that the ULVR bid may have been conditional on an indemnity against this eventuality and that when it came up in discussion it was a surprise to some of GSK's board! It was also suggested that once GSk had appreciated the implications of it they tried to deposit the problem on Haleon, an entity which has never sold Zantac. The writing is definitely on the wall for the GSK boardand IMV a SP recovery is , in part, dependent upon major changes there. I do not expect a strong SP recovery in the short to medium term.
I sympathise with the last sentence of your 13.56 post but in The USA the concept of financial redress even for a self-inflicted problem is widely held , see Bayer, J and J and the fentanyl story.

Upfront declaration - I DON'T hold , having sold in the aftermath of the Company's rejection of the ULVR bid, the fiasco that was the company presentation of the split and cards on the table , suggested that neither GSK nor HLN were IMV a buy/hold a few weeks ago. So I got lucky , but still interested and would like to share a few thoughts .
GSK/Pfizer have made it clear that there is no significant scientific evidence that Zantac is harmful, BUT that won't stop the cases going ahead.
Zantac has been withdrawn from sale , under instruction from the FDA see:
https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-requests-removal-all-ranitidine-products-zantac-market

There is an argument that this is due to an excesss of caution , but it distinctly weakens GSK/Pfizers defence and this para is IMV significant:
"NDMA is a probable human carcinogen (a substance that could cause cancer). In the summer of 2019, the FDA became aware of independent laboratory testing that found NDMA in ranitidine. Low levels of NDMA are commonly ingested in the diet, for example NDMA is present in foods and in water. These low levels would not be expected to lead to an increase in the risk of cancer. However, sustained higher levels of exposure may increase the risk of cancer in humans."
Court cases WILL almost certainly go ahead and at best GSK/Pfizer will need to spend tens of millions of dollars to defend their case and the threat of losing it will hang over the companies for most probably several years.
The other point is that the last similar case, Bayers legal challenges over Roundup cost them around $10 billion when they chose to bring cases to a conclusion, EVEN THOUGH Roundup is still on sale!!
Todays rebound from sharp falls may prove to be transient, my view remains that there are much better (and safer) investments elsewhere.

I'm not normally a conspiracy theorist but with the sharp fall here continuing today I wonder if news of a significant offload by Pfizer(at below market price) is imminent?

Fleccy glad your investments are working for you, there are many ways to invest wisely (though many more to invest badly!!)I wouldn't classify my strategy as "jumping in and out of stocks" - my average holding period is measurable in years not minutes, but the big moves in sentiment are IMV relatively easy to spot, in my investment career - and it is a career, it has been my primary source of income for almost 25 years, I have seen a number of large , long-duration market falls and equally significant rises , from the dotcom boom and bust to the GFC, to the astonishingly short-lived covid crash in early 2020 and, by buying steadily into the rises and taking profits when they are significant, I have done well.
I see slow gains in the Uk market in the medium term but am currently more heavily invested in the US where , IMV greater gains are to be made over a two/three-year timescale.
I absolutely endorse your last sentence , crypto , meme stocks NFT,s are tantamount to Ponzi schemes , as sadly are most of the aim stocks which attract hundreds of posts on these boards, I have learned that the fundamental way to invest successfully is not to lose money chasing big returns.
I will, at the risk of invoking your censure offer one final comment , your holdings of BT , VOD and LLOY are heavily dependent on the UK economy and offer no diversification , why not consider a global ETF as a counterweight?
Due to fly back from Dubai today so will not be able to respond for a while!

Remember Pfizer who hold 32% are committed to selling down their stake , this will be a drag on the SP here for months if not years. Also, when GSK threw HLN overboard they tossed them a concrete lifebelt in the form of £10 bill of debt!!
As you may guess I am a non-holder here and exited GSK shortly after they inexplicably turned down the ULVR offer.

Fleccy - just got back to my hotel and spotted your post of 18.13 last night.The question of fair value for BT is impossible to answer as it consists of the interplay of a myriad of often conflicting elements, BUT I'll have a go.
BT appears in my folio now and again as part of the defensive, divi earning element which includes other shares such as LGEN,NG,IMPS,MNG, PSN.....all of which I currently hold and have held off and on for years (As I have said I am a buy and hold man but that means to sell when they are over my value estimate and buy when they fall back in , as at some point they all do)
While I have no hard and fast rules, I judge them on divi, P/E , recent earnings momentum, recent SP momentum, my perception of the market generally and any obvious threats/Opportunities they may have.
OK that doesn't offer a formula but I don't believe one exists, a certain amount of logic, coupled with judgment has served me well. I have said elsewhere and maybe here that my strategy has been for many years now to aim for 10% over inflation per annum and have achieved that in all but 3 years of the last twenty odd.
To get back to BT I will watch and wait, for me the short -term momentum is downward, the Drahi thing gave the stock an impetus which seems to have dissipated, fibre rollout will weigh on profitability for some time and I suspect that until the shadow boxing between the other players is resolved by some sort of tie-up and the smoke clears the telecoms sector may tread water. If you want me to pick a number for the SP I really can't. It would clearly be below my sell average which was I the high 180's and below today's SP , would 140 tempt me back? possibly, depending on all the other criteria set out above, below that it would be back towards the territory of my last buys and would definitely appeal. If / when I buy back in I will declare so and may still offer my input here on occasion between now and then. If I miss a rise and you profit then you have my very best wishes!!
Now it's late afternoon in Dubai, the temp is 40+ and the cool, shady air-conditioned bar downstairs is calling me (despite the extortionate prices!!)
GL

SD According to my FT feed it's 1.677, but that does not invalidate my point, beta shows the volatility of an individual share relative to the FTSE, that volatility does NOT mean that it doesn't track , merely that it overreacts. The chart referenced in my 07.08 post shows a correlation between LGEN and FTSE going back 5 years which shows a correlation of remarkably close to 1 .

Final post of the morning 'cos i've got stuff to do see this chart for my "FTSE tracker" comment

https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/quote/LGEN.L/chart/#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--

One other snippet this am supports my assertion that yesterdays cool market reaction was due to the fall in assets from the FT report on the results
"Elsewhere, L&G’s investment management arm enjoyed record first-half inflows of £65.6bn, but its assets under management fell in choppy markets to £1.29tn from £1.33tn, weighing on profits. "
Full article at
https://www.ft.com/content/97114ca5-ee35-4297-9935-7b5b7f6ca44d
for those with access.

OK my description of LGEN as a "FTSE tracker" hasn't gone down well, so let me explain in more detail what I mean.
The nature of Uk banks and insurers and the stringent solvency conditions they operate under since the GFC, mean that the need to hold very large quantities of assets to meet the strict solvency criteria put in place as a result, because those assets are required to be liquid , ie easily sold in an emergency , they consist primarily of equities and tradeable bonds. They are proscribed from investing in long -term high-value infrastructure projects and are expected to hold much of their portfolio in sterling - denominated assets, to eliminate FX risk. If you've read any of NW's oft quoted comments you will be aware that the current regime put in place largely by the EU, with UK support, and at a time of maximum anxiety post the GFC is seen by many as too restrictive. The Uk Gov has just published an exploratory paper see

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1071899/20220328_Review_of_Solvency_II_Consultation.pdf

Outlining some proposals to ease this regime, if you don't want to read the whole doc , paras 3.1 and 4.3 summarise the easements proposed which will allow a wider range of assets to be held as collateral, until that legislation is agreed upon and enacted Insurers and banks with huge quantities of liquid assets on their books will continue to respond disproportionately to sharp moves in the FTSE , hence my comment about being a FTSE tracker, indeed I should have said " a leveraged FTSE tracker ". Next time there is a sharp move in the FTSE have a look at the reaction of bank and insurance shares to prove my point.
Remeber I am a holder here! so my point was not a negative merely a reflection of reality.

Fleccy I am not a short term trader , I've been a succesful investor for 30 years and my general strategy is to buy and hold good companies with good prospects. That said, every investment decision implies that there are no better choices elsewhere. I bought Into BT in early 2020 (having held for a number of periods in the past) when the price, then a little over £1, seemed far too low for a company unlikely to go bust and with an income stream less likely than most to suffer from the impact of covid lockdowns and all that followed. My analysis was borne out by the steady recovery, which IMV has now stalled . As with most of my sales, I will keep a watching eye and may re-invest if/when I think the SP falls below my estimate of fair value.
I have read and learned a good deal from your posts for which I thank you, your knowledge of the company is impressive and certainly greater than mine, BUT I do note in your posts the tendency to assume that anyone with an alternative opinion to you either doesn't understand the company or has an ulterior motive. I can assure you that does not reflect my view, My judgements, I hope, are entirely based on the best deployment of my resources and for now that is not here. I wish you and all who remain invested here good fortune, I can only repeat that I think there are, at the moment, better places for my cash.

The trot.... I didn't say that the assets belong to the shareholders, my point was that the asset values had fallen due to the fall in equity and bond prices and thus the solvency cover will have diminished, without digging I don't know if it is near the limits imposed by the PRA , but clearly solvency rules might have an impact on the amount of new business the company can write.

The results in terms of LGENs performance are fine, targets hit, outlook good, the only reason for muted SP response is to be found in the "Assets portfolio " section of the report. By regulation, LGEN have to hold an enormous amount of liquid assets on the books and these assets are mainly equities and bonds, both of which have fallen in value in
recent months. It is no big deal, but holders here must accept that they are essentially investing in a FTSE tracker, albeit one with the ability to generate substantial revenue from its own activities.

As a display of confidence in the medium/long-term SP, the immediate sale by eight directors of "free" shares as a result of the investment plan (see both of yesterday's RNS's) does not look good. The rules covering when directors can sell do limit opportunities to those times when they are NOT in possession of "inside info" but clearly at all times, they have a pretty good idea of how the company's medium-term prospects look.
Expect a gentle negative reaction to the SP over the coming days.
I do not currently hold as I see better opportunities elsewhere and am left wondering whether the costs of Fibre rollout will hold the SP back for some time?

Your remaining holdings are worth the current price , your current profit/loss is 3000 X the current price -84.2p.
Your historic profit/ loss is 3.5k X your sale price - 84.2p.
Don't worry there are lots of regular posters here who don't understand the difference between historical profits/losses and current profit/loss.