Member Info for CloudyMountain

@poorinvester

“Jedclampit, you could lose (looose) all your money or you could do a few bags. High risk, high reward share.”

Even after being told, he doesn’t know when to write “lose” and when to write “loose”. Or “looose”! His English is atrocious yet he thinks he’s a financial guru.

This comment hints at the extent of his financial analysis - in effect “It’s gone down a lot so this could be a multibagger”. That's it! That’s his analysis. No wonder he’s massively down.

@shazabo

“...just know that there's a lot who don't give a sh*t what you abd others have to say and won't be acting on anything u say either so keep going”

Phew! That’s a relief.

@shazabo “Get a life and go elsewhere where you are invested in a share and leave whoever is left to deal with their holding.”

What often happens is something like this:

People who are not invested look at a share, possibly with a view to buying in. They are allowed to.

They do their research and (sometimes)decide not to buy in. They are allowed to.

On reading comments which they disagree with, they are concerned that others may buy in so they state their disagreement and explain why. They are allowed to.

The person being challenged sometimes doesn’t like it. It’s not uncommon to get a reaction like this (this one is from @poorinvester. It’s such a common reaction that I don’t even need to go to another thread to find an example):

“Hahahaha, this is very entertaining, thank you for your concern titt83, at least AimMasterbater, has someone to toss over now”.

All this does is throw the gloves off and encourage people to criticise people like poorinvester’s comments further, and without diplomacy this time. They are allowed to.

People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.

We are all trying to make money and we will all be wrong from time to time so we should welcome disagreement and not make personal insults. Childish personal insults like those above are particularly unwise as it just reveals that the person making them is immature.

Regarding @shazabo’s comment: “...Getting everyone last one on here to sell by grinding them down these low life's for their own amusement or gain”: we aren’t. Stay invested. Buy more if you want - I don’t mind. In fact, I’d rather you didn’t sell. I comment for the benefit of newbies considering buying in. I am allowed to.

I’ve said here (link below) that @poorinvester’s research appears to be, well, poor, and seems to be “it went down before and it recovered so it’ll recover again”. That seems to be the full extent of his research.

This is one post I wrote, where I quote three things he said:

(Quote #1) @poorinvester: “... but (Cineworld) sure has a monopoly over the cinema business, with no small players allowed to compete...”

It doesn’t have a monopoly! You think you’re investing in a monopoly when you’re not!

(Quote #2) “...Profit and loss accounts were worse 2 years ago, cine was shut for 6 months”.

This is worrying as you keep on making this same point, over and over again in various comments - in effect “it was worse 2 years ago and it recovered so it will recover now“. That assumes everything else is the same now as it was then. It isn’t.

Here’s you saying the same thing again:

(Quote #3) “...well it was worse two years ago, but they didn’t fold. Do your financial analysis was proven wrong two years ago, what makes you think it will be proven right now?” (sic).

There doesn’t seem to be much “OR” in “DYOR”.

It’s your money - do as you wish. But I feel I should point out the flaws in your arguments for the sake of anyone else reading them, tempted to buy in.

https://www.lse.co.uk/ShareChat.asp?ShareTicker=CINE&share=Cineworld&thread=F0C3E64A-E796-4100-A53C-82A5C80AFE1F

@poorinvester, clearly I trod on a nerve!

It doesn’t surprise me - your English is abysmal so your maths is likely to be the same. I am under the firm impression from reading your comments that there’s very little OR in your DYOR, and that explains your personal insults - it’s a common reaction when someone treads on the truth.

The extent of your OR seems to be “It’s gone down AND this happened before AND it recovered”. That’s it! That’s your apparent research!

As I said, it’s your money, do what you like with it - but people are allowed to point out flaws in what you and others say. Hence why it’s called a discussion board and not a pulpit. There’s nothing I’d like more than for the SP to recover for the sake of retail investors.

That reminds me - “investors”. You’re the first person I’ve met who can’t even spell his own name. Wow!

“suspended”, not “suspected”.

@Poorinvester. You said:

Wed 24/8/22 12:29
“Jtan, AimMaster stop’s with the suspension narrative and you start back on it.
When exactly do you think this will get suspended?
Today? Tomorrow? Next week? Next month?”

I’ve seen this comment many times so I’ll respond:
Your question is a red herring. What’s naming the exact date when it’ll be suspected got to do with it? The shares are likely to be suspended - on which day is irrelevant. Of course no one can predict accurately when that is likely to be.

It’s like asking a doctor on which day a terminally ill relative will die, and when that day passes, saying: “You were wrong! And that’s evidence that he’s going to recover!”

@poorinvester: “... but (Cineworld) sure has a monopoly over the cinema business, with no small players allowed to compete...”

It doesn’t have a monopoly! You think you’re investing in a monopoly when you’re not!

“...Profit and loss accounts were worse 2 years ago, cine was shut for 6 months”.

This is worrying as you keep on making this same point, over and over again in various comments - in effect “it was worse 2 years ago and it recovered so it will recover now“. That assumes everything else is the same now as it was then. It isn’t.

Here’s you saying the same thing again:

“...well it was worse two years ago, but they didn’t fold. Do your financial analysis was proven wrong two years ago, what makes you think it will be proven right now?” (sic).

There doesn’t seem to be much “OR” in “DYOR”.

It’s your money - do as you wish. But I feel I should point out the flaws in your arguments for the sake of anyone else reading them, tempted to buy in.

Fromage, I realise that I didn’t phrase my comment at all well - sorry. I didn’t mean that averaging down is a bad idea - of course it isn’t. I was talking about averaging down in companies where they seem destined to fail (or where it is highly likely that shareholders may be wiped out in a debt for equity swap). Thomas Cook is one example - I was tempted to invest, researched it and didn’t see how it could survive.

I would be delighted if the Cineworld share price recovers. It is far too high a risk for me.

Tjay09

I’m not invested in Cineworld and never have been but I watch companies that are failing and their share discussions to learn from them, especially to see why people continue to hold plummeting shares and even average down. The way they justify it to themselves on discussion boards reveals a lot about how our minds work and the psychology of investing.
I have just seen this comment,, posted this afternoon on the Cineworld discussion. This is the entire comment:

“I am thinking why anyone would want to invest at the minute! Shares are all over the place! It's a mine field out there across most shares!”

Do you want to tell him or shall I?

https://www.lse.co.uk/ShareChat.asp?ShareTicker=CINE&share=Cineworld&thread=0C377BE4-9A41-4D54-B118-1939FB41C328&page=2

I really feel for them though. It’s terrible. But they’ll learn from it and it’ll help them in the future.

Tjay09, it’s good to hear from you.

If you want to slowly average into other stocks, you could do that using your dividends only, so your holding remains untouched. That’s something unusual about this share as the dividends are so large.

It’s good to see you back (though I thought you had never left).

Bounces are common in shares that go under. They can be massive - even 100%. Sadly they suck people in, believing that it’s the start of a recovery rather than the throes of death.

Having said that, it’s their money. And losing money teaches you valuable lessons - there is a silver lining.

“My math's are based on the credentials of the companies!”

That’s two mistakes in one sentence. Good luck with the maths.

Cineworld may continue - I hope it does - but with the shareholders wiped out such as in a debt for equity swap.

Re “ @ Chrisev1 if Debenhams and Thomas Cook went bust with you in them at the end then it may be a lucky charm that you are not invested here :D”

It’s much more likely that he learned his lesson the hard way, as many other CINE shareholders are about to do.

Considering how fiercely people deny the writing on the wall with CINE right here, right now, they are not going to learn until they’ve lost their money. It may actually help them to do well on other stocks in the future, separating the wheat from the chaff - they genuinely may benefit indirectly.

I myself was tempted by Thomas Cook and researched it. I realised that it had to go under. I avoided it like the plague but read the discussions to educate myself on why people buy and hold dying shares. You can see it again now in these discussions.

Re: “I think it is way over sold and deal will be done and we see 10p ++++ topped up all the way dowm” (sic - which is how he’s going to feel soon).

That’s quite a remarkable statement.

Other great posts by @newtothis2021 include these three yesterday:

1. “ The drama over and a good rise tomorrow”

How’s that looking today? That was his entire post, incidentally.

2. “BOOOOOOOM”

That’s it - that’s his full financial analysis of CINE, alongside a recommendation of “strong buy”.

3. This wonderful one which at least tries to say something rather than merely be the equivalent of cheering his horse on along the final furlong:

“We have money in the bank
this is forward thinking and a good game plan to mabe spin of the us side of the business and trim down and come again
It was the us side that cost us dear in the first place
Up like a rocket
This was 21p the other day i would exspect a rocket right up
Wild west for the first 30 mins and then settles about 8p-10p
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 BLAST OFF”

...which seems to be a long way of saying “Buy because it’s gone down!” Again,, that’s his full financial analysis of CINE and apparently his sole reason for buying.

I’m still trying to work out how “It was the us side cost the U.S. dear in the first place”.

He sounds as if he’s newtothis. It’s a shame really but, like his money, there we go.

@Tjay09, I remember your name and assumed you’d held throughout.

I remember reading the following comment by you on 5/9/21 when the SP was 319.50: “ Guys if we get 10% rises next week or the dizzy heights of £10 a share at some point I propose a meet up in a pub and I’m buying the first round !!!!”

We all make mistakes so don’t be hard on yourself. Good luck for the future.

“Closing credit” should be “claiming credit”.

NOFEAR (what an immature name!) is touting his own share (Capita) hard, like a desperate salesman. The problem is that his posts make it clear that he doesn’t know what he is talking about - I call him NOFIDEA for good reason.

He’s now closing credit for predicting that this share would fall from 4p as if that’s something to be proud of - that’s got all the foresight of predicting that it’ll be cold in winter.

He’s shamelessly flogging Capita.

@Meton, may I ask what caused you to look on here again (since it was £2.70) and prompt you to post? I am just wondering.
L