Member Info for Clenchedcheeks

If only Cliff could patent hot air. He's full of it!
On a different note, I see the potential FDA approval for Belluscura has now been conveniently put back to the first half of 2020.
As for the musical glasses, sometimes you have to realise that there's no point in continuing to dig.

Steady set of results with more improvements yet to come.

What's not to like about a 5% yield and the potential for future growth

https://otp.tools.investis.com/clients/uk/empiric1/rns/regulatory-story.aspx?cid=918&newsid=1361596

https://otp.tools.investis.com/clients/uk/empiric1/rns/regulatory-story.aspx?cid=918&newsid=1361596

I recall Q3 2019 being followed by 2019 and here we are in 2020.
In the meantime the dilution of TEK's holding continues.

I'm underwhelmed by that conference call as I am by everything that Clifford Gross says.
Hope appears to be some way off

That's some volume of purchases today. I'm surprised they didn't drive the price further north.

I don't get it either. It's a profitable company making positive announcements and the share price is falling. If only one of its investments proves successful there's potential for significant gain imo.
There was more positivity when the share price was in the 40's and their investments were in the earlier stages.

I log on to purchase a significant quantity of shares, can't get an instant price, so reverse the entry purely as a test to see if I can sell a reasonable volume of my existing holding and can't get an instant price to sell either. That same position seems to be a constant with this share and is something I've never encountered previously. Any thoughts?

I don't understand the negativity regarding the share price. The new management team have turned things around within the past twelve months, a replacement finance facility was agreed with Scottish Widows at a lower rate last month, occupancy levels are high, management of units is now almost completely in house. All bodes well for lower costs and a greater percentage of the dividend being funded from income.

The only factor holding me back from buying more is the 18 percent spread between the purchase and sell cost. Appreciate others have to make money, but a lower charge would surely result in more trades?

There are several issues here, for example the collapse in the share price of a business which is operating in a relatively stable sector, it's under performance within its peer group and the significant fall in value following the change in FD. Far from seeking increases in rents, they need to focus on the completion of all units and achieving maximum occupancy in an increasingly competitive sector. Better to have an average rent than no rent in my opinion. The strengthening of the current board also has to be an immediate priority.

The larger investors have clearly lost faith in the current board judging by the large sells over the past few weeks. The share price has significantly under performed within its peer group in a reasonable market. Time to look for suitably skilled and experienced people to strengthen the board and for the existing directors to stand down IMO.

When they're borrowing the numbers they are and until occupancy levels of all properties are at the desired levels, it's likely that part of the dividend payment is from money borrowed. They've so many projects on the go, perhaps they should learn to walk before they run.

In my opinion, the company should focus on managing and letting those properties already purchased, before making further acquisitions. Steady, organic growth is better than a rush for growth funded by share issues and expensive borrowing. I agree with the comment made by Bev 88. Performance has been poor when compared to their peers.

I apologise, but that was a genuine mistake as the announcement is still showing on the Stock Exchange website. That's poor.

They appear to have entered into a CVA yesterday!

One has to wonder what the motive could be in making such a loose statement as was published today. With a £1bn value on the shares which aren't under Ashley's control, he can possibly take the company private, all for a fraction of the amount he's benefitted by selling shares to date.

Let's hope the fine isn't too great and the business can then move forwards. http://otp.investis.com/clients/uk/sweett_group/rns/regulatory-story.aspx?cid=801&newsid=617524

Thanks for the link. I genuinely don't understand how it can take so long for the SFO to establish what / if anything occured. Either a payment was made by Sweett Group, or it wasn't. Surely a forensic accountant would be able to spot such a payment relatively quickly by auditing Sweett's accounting and bank records, not seventeen months in. Until this cloud passes over, the shares will tread water.

A year to the day since the SFO launched their investigation. There should be a time limit whereby they must present their case, or call it a day.

It's now almost 12 months since the SFO launched their investigation, which is hanging like a dark cloud. There should be a time limit on such investigations as the only losers are the shareholders.