Member Info for Chatmandu

@Sotolo

I don't think a higher dividend will necessarily lead to a higher share price. The total market cap includes the money in the bank. If that money is distributed to share holders, the share price *should* fall to take account of the fact that money has gone.

That being said, higher dividends could drive demand for the share from income seekers which would see the share price rise. It could also result in lower confidence in the company's long term financial situation.
___________________

I don't hold THS. I only popped onto this board due to a comment on the SLP board regarding a potential 'hedge fund short seller' that some people seem fearful of.

I read that comment and I can believe it. Let's face it, paying somebody £8.50 an hour to post on social media and bulletin boards is small fry for some of these funds, but I'm not sure what good it would actually do. I can't see it driving enough people into a buy or sell position to impact the share price for a fairly liquid share like SLP. There were 6 million shares traded on Wednesday.

How many regular readers/posters are there on this board - twenty? Let's say they spook two or three people into selling, it's hardly going to tank the share price, is it? Once they've sold up, there will be even less people to try and influence next time, so it's diminishing returns.

There seems to be a bit of paranoia about hedge funds IMHO.

Very cheap. I may buy more if my cash transfer happens before the price rises again.

I've just had an afternoon nap.

What's the P/E when cash reserves are stripped out?

@camdenlad

"Hi Chat--beware--someone told me hedge fund shorters have landed on the slp and ths bb's--you agree don't you?"

I don't understand your question. What do you mean by 'the slp and ths bb's'?

According to the FT, short selling activity is 'low'. I don't know how often that is updated or what percentage of short selling is classified as low, medium, high. I'm afraid I can't agree or disagree with your statement/question because I don't understand it.

I don't really know enough about the details of running a business like SLP to comment on the size of the cash reserves. Perhaps they are saving for rainy day, such as a crash in PGM prices?

It does seem that the share price increase has been purely linked to the increase in PGM prices as opposed to business expansion. Is that sustainable? Should (can?) the business expand into other metals with prices that are counterpoints to PGM? I know that RDSB and BP have a business model that is supposed to be profitable throughout the oil price cycle - e.g. high prices and they pump like mad, but lower prices and their refinery business keeps them afloat.

I doubt the board are soliciting suggestions on a postcard, so we'll probably just have to wait and see. Are their any estimates regarding the lifespan of their current operations?

I wouldn't want the board to feel that they *have* to spend the money. That could lead to poorly thought out, poor quality or poor value investments. Many companies have fallen into the expansion trap (e.g. RPC, which I previously held) and I wouldn't want to see SLP follow in their footsteps.

Thanks Scoville. I just wanted to dispel any doubts regarding me having ulterior motives. It seems to be a habit on this board for people to dismiss legitimate discussion or concerns with insults and claims that the poster must be trying to impact the share price.

Perhaps other readers should take *those* opinions with a pinch of salt?

Mark has all but admitted he would only ever post something that would ramp the share price (as if any of us here are important or influential enough to move the share price of a £300 million company) and doesn't believe that any owner would ever post anything that is not 100% positive. If that is his outlook, can we trust him or any of the other people that do the same?

I'd just like to discuss the share:
- Upcoming results.
- Target and range prices.
- Potential problems and flies in our beautiful ointment.
- Possible expansion opportunities and fall-back plans.
- Current events and their potential impact.

Just for the record, because I think it is important that Mark and his fellow travellers, that accuse anybody that isn't 100% ramping SLP of having malicious intent, lose all credibility, here is a screenshot of my dealing account.

I appreciate my SLP holding may be small by some people's standards, but I think I have enough skin in the game to warrant an opinion.

https://i.postimg.cc/QxBcLTsf/Untitled.jpg

Wow.

No-one, hear me loud and clear, But No-One who has owned a share for 21 months will ever question why said share has suffered a fall in its share price.

I can't argue with that impeccable 'logic'... (You do see how ridiculous that statement is, don't you?)

Clearly I should be shouting down all other voices because that's my 'responsibility' as a share holder. One of us. One of us. One of us...

You seem to be stressed. Perhaps share ownership isn't for you?

I agree, which is why I increased my position on Wednesday. It was only a small top-up because a cash transfer into my dealing account has been delayed, but it was a top-up nonetheless.

OK. So who exactly is the troll? You with your constant ramping of the share of me with a more balanced outlook?

https://www.engineeringnews.co.za/article/criminal-raids-on-gold-mines-pose-new-threat-to-south-african-industry-2020-03-13

I'm not saying there will be raids, but there is always a security risk when dealing with something worth $20k per ounce.

I've held since September 2019 and I don't currently plan to sell. The sums seem great, but the current price isn't reflecting that. I just hope it's not due to an open secret amongst the big boys.

I think all this talk of 'derampers' shows a complete lack of self-awareness. Talking up the share is, apparently, completely fine and isn't in any way market manipulation! But any talk of problems and you're a troll, hedge fund rentboy or a deramper... I guess some people just need that comfort blanket during periods of SP weakness.

It's absolutely bonkers, but there we go.

And for anybody that bought the share six weeks ago and is down 30%?

That's not me, by the way, but your comment is rather dismissive of people's potential losses.

I guess the flip side of that outlook would be that SLP's operations are in sparsely populated regions and there's 'nothing' sitting between the unrest and the assets - rumours of warehouses full of precious metals could spread somewhat quickly.

I'm not saying you're wrong, just that there are two sides to every story. The market currently considers SLP to be much riskier than it was six weeks ago. The market could be wrong or it could be right.

Underestimating the potential for losses is a well known human flaw.

https://hbr.org/2014/07/3-reasons-you-underestimate-risk

Are we (the people riding out the turbulence) guilty of this? Would we have been better to sell at the first sign of trouble and then buy back in at a better price point? Is it too late to do that now?

I think this forum suffers from a bit of group think and self-reinforcing optimism/refusal to countenance downside risk. That's understandable, because it is a self-selecting group of people that own the stock and want it to do well, but it's also a risk in itself.

It seems this site is full of people that only want to hear things that they want to be true - e.g. tea leaf graphs that promise (!) that the share price is about to soar, until it suddenly crashes three days later.

The only thing that matters long term is the company's fundamentals. The only thing that matters in the short term is market sentiment. For reasons unknown (or for reasons people on this site can't agree upon) market sentiment is currently somewhat against SLP.

Nobody seems to like my suggestions regarding the reasons, so I'll leave you all to ponder why this is happening. All I know, is that pretty patterns on a screen don't count for anything - otherwise we'd all be filthy rich.

I'm still holding and I made a minor top-up on Wednesday.

Subdued volumes today - 500k according to data at the top of the page.

Phony War or past the worst?

I appreciate the market makers sit in the middle but, as far as I'm aware, only total volumes are declared on a daily basis. The live buy/sell data is often inaccurate and I've seen my own transactions mislabeled.

Every market maker transaction still involves a buyer and a seller. The classification of the transaction appears to be automated based upon the transaction price Vs the bid/offer spread and I think it is basically worthless data due to the inaccuracy.

Mark - I'm not the one who said there was a discrepancy in buy and sell volumes. I pointed out they must be equal?

Ever buy must have a corresponding sell and every sell must have a corresponding buy. You can't have one without the other.

If there is a difference in the data, it must be due to the trades being misclassified.

The buy and sell volumes must be equal. How else can you buy or sell?