Member Info for Couerdelion

Do you mean this?

"Our core long-term financial objective is to grow net assets and returns on invested capital. Once material levels of capital are monetized from our portfolio companies, we will seek to provide a special dividend. "

It's not new - in fact it is stated as a long-term objective.

Let's not confuse $ and £. The value of the $90m offer is 2.1p per share

Pedro, can you point me in the direction of the phrasing around the intention to pay dividends that you believe is a step change? The phrasing that I saw was identical to their longstanding investment policy so not really a change at all.

Camkite, I understand the factors involved but was really looking for something a little more mathematical. Eg - 50% discount for MV of holdings if sold down plus a further 40% hit from management "profit sharing" to get you to 70% discount. Or from a going-concern basis, value realised in 10 years but costs of 11.3% p.a. erode the value to give 30% going to shareholders. Both approaches give what appears to be quite ridiculous assumptions to yield the current discount to NAV but I wanted to test what people thought might be reasonable parameters.

I too would reject the deal based on what we know so far. But I expect more information to flow in the coming days which might shed some light on the why they can't get closer to $150m for the business. Without more details on the bid, it's a no from me - and I hold stock you can measure in basis points.

I feel it was a step too far today. Copper being the big disappointment over the last few years and an upbeat note from LC for an announcement ditching PGM and Chrome for what appears to be a low price. It may drift down over the next few days or weeks but I'm not banking on it and still holding onto a batch of shares I bought in the 3.3-4.1p range between December and March.

Yes we need to see copper but I guess it is self-evident to anyone in Zambia. For the rest of it we need to see the revenue and production.

I understand the strategic logic of accelerating the copper development but the price here looks a little on the low side. Is this just the sort of prices we see in mining?

Quite enjoying this pre-results malaise.

Dividends will just be added to the pile of cash sitting in my GIA, waiting perhaps for a better price.

Time to dust off that back of the envelope valuation model of yours, Kalan.

...and then some. It will take a little time for the analysts to upgrade their price targets so it's a hold for me.

Not only is it undervalued but they have a strong growth story underpinned with a growth source of recurring income. You can buy it purely on the NAV discount story before factoring into the equation the management charges from a growing portfolio. The CEO purchase today probably did more than the ST article- https://www.investorschronicle.co.uk/content/0c65d8f0-8927-43e4-8fe1-afaa09a7fafb

Looking at the numbers, I don't understand why it rated a hold as this is screaming "buy" at me. I still need 52p before I am breakeven but I can pace myself here for a longer upward trajectory.

CHG and QQ seem to be running their own little competition which barely a month ago had them racing to break through 400p. Maybe not yet ready to become a spectator sport but as an investor it's been fun watching.

Is there some news which is driving the price today?

An 8% profit in one day is very nice, but I think I will let this run for a bit despite Simon Thompson marking this as a "Hold"

You'd have seen the same mood if you'd read the boards here 6, 12 or 18 months ago. The story hasn't really changed over that period and we have had two IPOs during that time - events that are meant to be cash generative for businesses of this nature and, according to their investment philosophy, would also be an opportunity to return cash to shareholders. Instead, they are persistently tapping private markets at discounts to the prevailing SP which inevitably drags the SP down to higher discounts to NAV.

It's very easy to look at a venture capital investment company and see the large discount to NAV but much harder to understand why it trades at such a deep discount. Please feel free to suggest your reasons, then show us the triggers that would narrow that discount.

FYI - I can see this retracing back to 10-11p, particularly if SALT remains in the 80-90p range. But multibagging here is too optimistic. It has been mentioned earlier but there are many investors here who will take a little profit and leave if the price goes too high which will create a significant resistance before the price can get to the heady heights of 15p, let alone 20p

Imagine that. Negative opinion based on history. Shareholders in TEK would have a much more positive outlook if they ignored past events

Couldn't agree more Upomega. I surprise myself in saying this but I'll agree with anyone talking sense.

Government policy will be dictated by tax and jobs and Milliband's role here is running the department; not making the important decisions. .

Happydays, unless you have specific experience in this field, I think you may be speculating here. The "no cherry picking" statement was, to my ears, unequivocal and not one of those overambitious claims that Leon might be fairly accused of.

Unless there is some new explanation for "potential distributions", I remarked after the results that the expression of intent was no different from those we had seen previously, or even part of the strategic plan. I think the market and shareholders will place a value on this when they see it happen - though I would not be surprised if the reaction is unexpected and out of proportion to the distribution.

History covers a wide range of investment timescales - my own is little more than a year - but I would hesitate to challenge those more experienced PI's here whose stories go back to the time before the BELL IPO, which has since become a means to cover costs rather than distribute money to shareholders. LUCY too is now drifting towards irrelevance and SALT may well become the next one the list.

I've been on your side of the argument in my brief period here. Now I am more inclined to support it and if I think one of the subsidiaries is a great investment, I do so directly rather than via TEK.

Pedro, there are many investment companies that trade at big discounts to NAV, typically those where the route from value to cash can only be realised through asset sales. If the market for IPO's is less favourable, the discounts can widen if companies are forced to tap the markets just to pay the bills giving a larger share of the upside to insiders.

Fundamentally, the assets are only worth as much as you can sell them for and like SALT are not cash-equivalent because TEK could not realise its share of the MCap because the SP of SALT would plummet if TEK sold out. In addition, shareholders of TEK will only get distributed profits which comes after costs.

IMHO, the discount is certainly heavy here but it is almost all down to concerns that management will take the lion's share of the profit.