Member Info for Couerdelion

Red rag to a bull, zorba.

Try this to see how much the values change

https://goodcalculators.com/black-scholes-calculator/

Risk free rate is one of the parameters in the Black-Scholes calculation. There's a technical explanation if you want to under B-S, but it's probably easier to say that it will have minimal impact on the 1p options we're talking about. The proxy valuation of SP - 1p will be close enough in this case.

Quite by chance, I have calculated the value of share options granted so have a little knowledge. The valuations are used to derive a P&L entry for the cost of the options which is why they will use parameters at the exercise date rather than the YE position.

Of course the strike price of a 1p option effectively makes them a proxy for a share as there value is SP less 1p.

My guess is that JLP will have a general shareholder approval for issuing share capital, warrants and options, up to 10% of the issued share capital. If am I write the Board will already have the power to grant these options under previous resolutions. I can't be sure because I have never had visibility of the Board resolutions made in previous years.

I can see from Note 20 (p142) to the Accounts that the new options granted have an expected life of 10 years so I don't think they could be traded. It isn't clear if the holders are allowed to trade them but maybe this is academic is no-one will buy a 10-yr option.

I thought it was up on rumour, down on news?

Aha, my mistake. All the branding I've seen appeared to suggest LUCY was targeting the B2C market rather than B2B. Presumably the B2B products would need specific AI functionality that applied to the the difference work environments

This is perhaps another way of looking at this if you also follow TEK. The display of independence may be viewed positively by the market.

I'd see this more as SALT simply not wanting to release information until they judge it to be necessary - ie material to the share price. In this case, if we are talking about a big deal they will want to wait till the agreement is signed for fear of disrupting the negotiations.

Maybe also a hint of trying to assert their independence and say that they are running the company, not Cliff.

It was a bit of a sales pitch and there were some odd claims he made

"Innovative Eyewear are the first glasses that can be used while wearing gloves" - I'm struggling to see which market this is targeting.

"Highest return on capital of any UK start up investment company" - Dr Gross might want to reflect on the current share price and explain why market doesn't agree with him.

I don't think the SII reforms were game changes, more a bit of tinkering, though I expect there will have been some capital released which will now be in the figures. From a valuation perspective all this does is release a little capital from reserves so there might be a small uptick but it's only about the timing, not the magnitude, of the cash generation capacity.

It's all shrouded in technical jargon and, at heart, I don't think the PRA are going to let companies take a windfall profit at the expense of policyholder security as they will be able to add-on capital requirements if they think companies are running too close to the wind. So regardless of the complicated mathematical calculations, it still comes back to the same thing and value here is really all about Own Funds (a SII measure of the excess of assets over best-estimate liabilities) plus the capacity of the company to write profitable business (IMO, the market places minimal value on this for insurers)

There's got to be something behind this share price move.

This is almost getting quite interesting....

It's covered in the Remuneration Committee report and my take on this is that it is part of the salary - better for shareholders because our interests are aligned. Easy enough to work out what they are would have been worth at the time of the award.

Do we know what similar companies pay their CEO as this will be the proper benchmark?

As the budget approaches, I'm not too far off closing out my position here. It's been a nice ride but I'm not the biggest fan of bank shares and find them tricky to place any sort of fair value on them. But a 33% return in 6-months will help towards the pension and who knows if I might find a little space in my ISA for them sometime in the future.

That's allowing for the dividend, we're effectively back to the price we were before it went ex-dividend so there was only a 2-week window for the patternologists to make perhaps as much as 3% gain by trading.

It doesn't seem to be a particularly lucrative strategy and certainly not one that I would find particularly appealing from a risk-reward perspective.

Panama, you're just digging a bigger hole here. It looks clear that people are asking to a certain level of respect between posters in this board which I think you both stepped beyond.

The rest of us feel like we've walked into a domestic argument and will report matters if they get out of hand.

He sounded quite annoyed at the beginning too. When it comes to investing in a management or a team, TEK is never going to be top of my list.

I don't object to paying tax but CGT is one-directional: I take the risks but the government take a share of any profits. I know there is offsetting but that's imperfect so the investment decisions are also distorted. My current portfolio reflects the current tax regime and isn't one I would hold under different conceivable Budget outcomes.

At 20%, the decisions are more margin. At 45%, they would materially affect my investment decisions, including the levels of exposures I would want to retain in individual stocks.

If the SP can wait a few weeks that would suit me fine as I took some gains recently that I have to wait for the B&B time limit to expire before buying back.