Member Info for Couerdelion

Thanks Gtx1.

Putting aside the calculation of NA per share for a moment, based on the total shares in issue, it suggests a net asset value of around $3.1bn but if I read the accounts, the $3.2bn figure there includes nearly $1bn of other interests and shareholder net assets are $2.3bn. So I'm not sure that I fully understand how the $14.06 figure has been arrived at.

From a little more digging these figures include YPF is valued at $2.1bn (consolidated) and $1.4bn (Burford) on some agreed accounting basis.

I should probably be clear that I don't believe this undermines the investment case - there's clearly future earnings there from new cases. I'd just like to have shot at working out how much of it is already priced in

If the share price goes up a little more, I'd happily sell it (preferably before it goes ex-div). I broke a long-held aversion to banking stocks when I picked these up earlier in the year and have clearly got a bit lucky here. But I don't really know if I can measure value in the banking world and have long held the suspicion that the business is more designed to make money for staff rather than shareholders.

I expect it won't be long before I decide also to trim my BARC holdings too.

This appears to be trading on a post-div/post-redemption 20% discount to NAV and 8%+ dividend yield. A nice little stock to tuck away in an ISA.

Perhaps to illustrate the uncertainty, the current SP run, is very similar to the one we saw at the end of April after the company announced it had acquired the licences. Later positive news on the quality of the Lithium concentrate nudge the price up a little more but (unfortunately for me) not enough for me to start paring back my holding.

From a May viewpoint, I'm not entirely sure much has changed. Operationally, we are now broadly where we thought we were going to be and the company has done what it said it was going to do. The tax relief was a nice little bonus so on balance I think the shares should be worth more than they were then.

Purely to manage my overall exposure, my first target here is 32p but I think I will be selling down quite grudgingly

I tried this a little while back and came away rather frustrated, both in trying to figure out what there accounts were showing and what sort of intrinsic value might be hidden in on-going cases. My gut feel is that traditional indicators here are very bad at valuing this stock.

But when I attempted to look into their figures, there seemed to be a bit of a disconnect between the figures they quoted for unresolved investments by year and net assets. The YPF case is clearly a bit of an outlier and very material to the SP, but it also throws up other problems in any coherent valuation methodology.

Anyone have any tips?

Looks like we're getting around 119p for each redeemed share - c7% of holding redeemed.

It's been moving up steadily all week. There could be something behind it but it might just be market sentiment

You can get an idea of the potential value in two of their sites but you'll need to make some assumptions for how much of that will come to CTL. But even quite prudent assumptions value the company at multiples of its current valuation. I'd guess the discount is as much down to operational and political risk as it is to the price of lithium.

But the market seems to think that the price was looking cheap and if they keep doing that, I'll be happy

It's back to putting together a nice little run here. Let's see if it can we get a repeat of March/April

Is there maybe some trading going on here with the company buying its own shares to be issued later to warrant holders from the bridging loan? Circa £4m shares IIRC

Dawning reality or the elephant in the room? I just don't think this is anything we didn't already know.

But the granting of new licences under Labour or of tax relies for investment will always be a political question. As investors we can only navigate the environment in which we are placed and, unless we have some leverage in higher political echelons, we can either sell out or hold in the expectation that other forces will play in our favour.

Either way these things play out, the price looks very cheap.

Is it common practice for these companies not to hedge their foreign currency exposures? I would have assumed that they would at least cover any fixed agreement costs rather than leave the company heavily exposed to the risk of a GBO fall.

Please tell me if you know any high dividend/high cash/solid balance sheet options too. But those are arguments for buying, not looking for alternatives.

If I were to speculate what the market is thinking, it is putting a heavy discount on shares like SQZ, largely driven by the new government's stated policy on oil companies. But unless you think this will lead to falling dividends (and yields of 15%+ usually presage a cut), you can take the dividend year-in-year-out without needing to worry much about any upgrades.

I was reading something in the Economist about falling battery prices but with very little impact on prices of electric vehicles. It appears that there are many variables within this supply chain that seem to want to defy the laws of supply and demand.

However this little jaunt turns out, it is a lot more exciting that owning many other stocks. It almost don't care what the rest of the market is doing.

As the Chairman, I was a bit surprised to see how little he owned. It's the level of exposure I would expect of a non-Exec Board member.

You'll have to elaborate. There's plenty of ways for the company to improve the business without needing to sell it off. I don't imagine Cevian bought their holding without some sort of plan to improve the margins.

While it is always nice to see prices go on a solid positive run, I'm intrigued to understand what is driving this particular upwards movement. Over 20% increase in the past month suggests there's something happening but there's little I can see in the way of company announcements that might explain it.

Anyone know what I'm missing?

With a massive dividend coming now at over 10% of the current share price. I'm guessing plenty will simply reinvest this in the stock. No point worrying about the Labour government because we have known their plans for months.

Maybe for context, these are all held in an ISA.

There should be a difference between income and growth stocks. All else being equal, those paying a lower dividend should be growing faster than those with higher dividends. At a company level this means more of the money needs to be reinvested to achieve the required growth. From the investor side, there is a similar trade off in foregoing a higher dividend as a trade off for higher expected growth in the stock price.

I would probably argue, in the case of Jet2, that the market has not yet bought into the company line that the business is going to grow. But that's fine, if it does then the profits will increase and the stock will rise (possibly with a PE upgrade). Dividends can rise later when the growth prospects are lower.

And if not, well then that's just me making a poor judgement call.

I don't think Jet2 are buying aircraft as a hobby. It's simply a matter of reinvestment and perfectly acceptable for the Board to take the view that the money is better spent this way rather than giving more back to shareholders. Sure you can take the view that this company should be prioritising dividends or debt repayment but all that says to me is that you don't buy into the strategy.

There's little chance of me selling up any time soon.