Member Info for Couerdelion

While not denying there will be speculative gains to be made, it looks like you're exaggerating the case. Even if you can suppose that the peaks and troughs are identifiable, you may also be quoting peak ask and trough bid prices.

And yet I thought that the case for the previous decline was the impending ASX listing. Why would that be a "news"

They just sent me an offer of a chance to win a £25 gift card. It would be ironic if this were the best deal of the two.

I thought they were expecting to send the offer yesterday. I still haven't received anything.

It's the sizeable political risk that we are all potentially mispricing. I too am banking on the expectation that Labour policy will be tempered by reality and/or that the market will catch up.

But I may have missed a third possibility. That the market maintains its valuation but that the dividend continues for some years. Even viewed as an annuity, a 17%+ dividend yield is something I could accept.

Well there is also the debt ratio to worry about. Personally I would prefer capital gains to dividends so would be relaxed if SQZ spent the dividend cash on buybacks or reinvestment. Of course, an 18% dividend yield is clearly unsustainable - by which I mean that either the share price rises or the dividend has to be cut.

I'm not sure why anyone would sell at this price unless they knew they could pick them up again cheaper.

So I take it from the conversation that the share purchases are now seen as bad news. Either the company is being run by people trading on inside information or there is no material positive news in the pipeline.

But I was under the impression that FY results were on the way and am surprised that the shares are not in a closed period until they release these. Is this just part and parcel of the wild west world of AIM?

If the CEO can help get the share price close to £4, I certainly won't be begrudging him his £4m payday,

Agreed. Around half the share price is covered by the projected YE cash position so add in other assets and the healthy margins they are maintaining, there's plenty of upside here.

Those warrants attaching to the short-term financing that CTL recently sorted out are starting to look great value for the noteholders. There's some dilution in the stock for us but for CTL it's looking like a virtually assured source of finance.

If I'm not mistaken, dividend reinvestment is quite often an automated trade. The money will arrive in most accounts tomorrow but many platforms will leave a clear day so that the trades will take place on Friday.

It's still a sizeable heap of money so I can see the logic of jumping in early.

Jet2 seem to be suffering more than any of them at the moment. Is this related to other news (eg aftershocks from the systems crash on Friday)?

It doesn't look like a massive show of confidence. I would have expected a much more substantial holding from a CFO.

One of the main reasons we are here. But what's the next news we are waiting for to keep moving the price up? I'm guessing that the Oz listing.

Not that Jet2 ought to have been overly affected after the recent trading update. Though I recall that getting a mixed reception

I'm guessing most people will accept this "negative dividend". Any reason why not too?

This feels like it's sufficiently positive to give the shares a bit of a lift. Who knows what news the market is already pricing in.

Thanks. After a couple more forays, I have started to make a bit of progress digging into the figures. Not that I have read through the whole accounts but there are a few sections which were particularly useful in explaining the presentation in terms of Consolidated, Burford-only and Group.

Whether it is accurate to claim that they could sell some assets at more than NAV, that's open to debate as they have revalued some of the claims to align with recent sale prices. Of course that's not to say they can't do better themselves or sell at higher prices but that's more about confidence in the business which for me is still a learning experience. But I'd imagine that a significant component of the compensation scheme is linked to published results so I have to retain some element of cynicism that some level of overconfidence might creep into the determination of fair value.

Whether I believe the "valuation" argument, I don't doubt that the business model is strong. And I like this stock for other reasons, not least as being good for diversification. I figured if my other stocks are going to suffer from litigation, I'll get something back here.

It does look a bit odd, I'll admit, that they reference noises or suspicions in the market. After all, what purpose does it serve to publicly tell someone that they know what everyone else knows when it appears self-evident.

Maybe someone leaked or maybe not. My guess is that this is more company politics.

Jt, do you mean the reference in the opening paragraphs? That's just saying that what they're telling us was inside information but is now public.