Member Info for Couerdelion

But nothing disappointing about the current momentum. I may even feel obliged to take a small slice of profits from my last little buy if reaches the heady heights of a 50% discount to NAV.

Solid momentum and a little promotion from the IC article today who see this heading to 450p in the next six months, by which time I will have taken my little "dividend" from the most recent top-up.

Tbh, I'd be happy if it were sitting north of £4 as I will still be sitting on my longer term holding. We can talk about £6 or £7 when it gets to £5.

Even with a hefty "TEK" discount, you'd still be looking at a valuation of 2-3x the current MCap of TEK.

Yes the market has got it wrong LLOL - maybe better to say that it has overreacted to the BELL news and the influence of Acorn Guy.

p.s. Wait for the Guident IPO ;-)

Yet the discount to NAV is so steep that this 3.8% represents gains of over 8% of MV over a 6 month period.

Didn't see any mention of a Bolt IPO

I've run a few calculations to estimate how quickly the $50m deferred payment will be recovered. Based on FY25 guidance volumes, the full amount will have been repaid within four years under the higher guidance figure while $2m would remain outstanding on the lower guidance figure.

The weighted average payment schedule is 2.45 years under low and 2.3 years under high guidance.

I just bought another 0.02% of the company which will (very likely) be voting in support of the sale.

Try reading the circular then ask legitimate questions rather than claiming that no account has been taken of the change in basket price.

Much better than I thought now that they've added the debt to the purchase price. Essentially the save is for close to MCap which means all the copper in JLP is now free in the SP.

Plenty of answers to all the questions being raised if people were to read the information in the circular.

For me this is now a clear buy

I can't disagree with your assessment of the short-termism in politics, Warthog, but I don't believe politics operates in a vacuum and we do clearly have a problem with a politically active "grey vote" lobby who are quick off the mark at any suggestion that the triple lock should be abandonned - it's been in place for around 15 years and already people are treating it as a guarantee in perpetuity. How do you

a) change a policy that is a manifesto promise

b) not include it in the next election manifesto when parties will be queuing up to make all sorts of hopeful promises and failure to include it in the manifesto will lose a lot of votes.

My guess is that things will have to get a lot worse before the voting public accept the need for change. Right now they are happy enough bemoaning the state of the nation but not yet willing to pay for the cost of repair.

BELL shares were already pretty worthless.

10.7% most certainly does confer a significant interest in CTL. Keep an eye on these guys.

Sometimes I don't understand how company announcements filter back into price movements. I would have thought that the buyback announcement would have seen the price rise last week but when they announce it has started, the price finally reacts.

Not complaining of course.

A few hefty buys in this morning.

You're referring to something call "Yield on cost" - https://www.investopedia.com/terms/y/yield-on-cost.asp

Casapinos, there is no useful purpose in defining a dividend yield in the way you describe and following the idea leads to fallacious reasoning. For example, in the hypothetical example I would never be able to sell my LGEN shares with an infinite dividend because I can't beat that but if I were to sell them at 300p then buy back more at 250p, I'd be 20% richer and earning a dividend yield of infinity plus 20%.

Shares are not "cheaper" when they go XD. If the companies buys them back before that date, they make the savings through reduced dividends paid.

Dividend yield is dividend divided by share price and has nothing to do with historic purchase prices.

To illustrate, say you bought 2500 shares at £2 per share and later sold 2000 shares at £2.50 per share. You have 500 shares earning a dividend of £107 p.a. for which you paid nothing making your dividend yield effectively infinite. A different example would be shares bought at a discount under a company share scheme - do those shares have a higher dividend yield than others?

Back to LGEN, you can take cash now at the current SP or you can leave it with LGEN to earn you a yield of 8.34%. And while this dividend yield is lower than it has been recently, it is comfortably higher than the 8.05% I am earning with PHNX shares which is why I exchanged a batch of these for LGEN about a week ago.

Solomon, I'm not sure you are proving the case but merely providing some evidence to support it; some of which we could argue is circumstancial.

a) It's a low p/e for sure but there are lower ones on the main market.

b) The largest, yes but hardly an outlier. There are several companies worth over a billion

c) I can't dispute this but the counterargument is that there won't be lots of PI's investing in Jet2 for IHT purposes - I used to think that the tracker funds and those restricted to main market companies would far outweigh the IHT planners but after GAMA, I'm not so sure.

d) Well maybe but this is not a new argument but an encapsulation of the whole, but nice try :-)

How does this affect our holding? Capital raises are fairly expensive for early start-ups

Of course it is also easy enough to point out that people should be making their own provisions for retirement rather than relying on the basic state pension. They should be "running down" their savings at this stage in life - at least this is a "funded" approach rather than the PAYG scheme run by the government.

From a "fairness" perspective, the triple lock is demonstrably unfair giving the best of all three on a simple annual basis. A more fair system would be as proposed by the IFS to remove the 2.5% (both arbitrary and meaningless) and to replace the average earnings link to one that operates on a cumulative basis.

But whether it happens and how it does is a different point. Just think if all the fuss caused when they tried to remove the winter fuel allowance - as if this really is the difference between eating and heating.