Member Info for EasiWynns

Also a shareholder, and have both car and home policies with the Direct Line brand.

The car policy renewed last Aug had increased by about 11%, but then a quick phone call reduced this and resulted in an increase of just 0.05% over the previous year's premium for what seemed to be the same cover. Then I had a refund towards the end of last year from their 'Mileage Moneyback' guarantee relating to the prior year of about 3.75%, which I guess just means I inaccurately predicted my mileage for the year and had overpaid. I'm not sure if this scheme is still in place for this or future years.

It will be interesting to see what it is later this year, but unless its significantly more than rivals, I'll probably stick with them. The only other car insurer I've used in the last decade or more is Aviva, who have been close on price, and occasionally marginally cheaper. No experience of claims from either, though.

Let's hope that what ever happens to premiums, including mine, the future for DLG shares are brighter than in the recent past!

Why pay for them when they can get them for free?
(This posed from the directors' perspective, and not from that of most independent shareholders.)

Answering the simple, uncontroversial questions that no one asked is a proven strategy that sometimes works, at least for a while.

QCM tweeted:

"We are preparing a complete response with a thorough list of follow up questions for Darktrace's management.
Such list will also be forwarded to Darktrace's auditors, regulators and other investigative bodies, along with our initial report." [Twitter, 01/02/2023 @ 08:00am - I'm guessing this is EST, and if so, it's 1:00pm UTC/GMT]

If QCM have made accusation and presented facts that are incorrect or malicious for the purpose of making money from shorting, then this is a very serious matter, and I would imagine they will be investigated.

But first QCM's accusations against Darktrace will need to be followed up by the organisations they have sent the report and other information to in order to ascertain the "true" facts, including possible investigations by the FCA and perhaps also National Crime Agency (NCA) in relation to "alleged channel stuffing and round-tripping activities may have involved shell companies in offshore jurisdictions manned by individuals with ties to organized crime, money-laundering, and fraud".

And herein lies some of the uncertainty when trying to value the shares. If QCM's report is historic and/or fabricated rubbish, then all is well, otherwise, perhaps less so.

"Your transparent Propaganda may work on individuals with a few thousand shares but that's hardly going to make much of a dent"

Just to be clear that I - obviously - have no idea whether QCM's accusations have any basis in reality, and am not recommending anyone should buy, sell or hold on the basis of their report or indeed for any other reason.

But one thing does seem to be certain: they do not appear to be your average short seller.

Countries and organisations are helping support Ukraine defend itself against an illegal invasion by the Russian Federation.

What can be so complicated about understanding this simple fact - except, of course, for those that deliberately and systematically choose to misinterpret it as something other than it is.

Have Darktrace formally responded to any of the allegations made by QCM?

One from QCM's website seems to be rather serious:

"These alleged channel stuffing and round-tripping activities may have involved shell companies in offshore jurisdictions manned by individuals with ties to organized crime, money-laundering, and fraud".

That seems to be quite a bold claim by QCM, and not one they would have made up without some evidence - surely?

I think there is also a body of evidence that suggests short sellers are often very informed investors. However, if their report is merely to manipulate the share price for their own benefit ("short and distort", I believe it's called) then I would expect QCM to be investigated by the relevant financial authorities for market abuse.

Perhaps it's very simple to explain the share price movement (or lack thereof) following the RNS announcement of the FSS contract:

(1) The information is not 'new' in any sense - this is just the confirmation of what everyone already knew
(2) The value of HARL's portion is less than many have been expecting and stating here - and obviously less than those saying it was £1.6bn

'In 2018, Pilger said his "written journalism is no longer welcome" in the mainstream and that "probably its last home" was in The Guardian. His last column for The Guardian was in April 2015 ... Pilger is a strong critic of American, Australian, and British foreign policy, which he considers to be driven by an imperialist and colonialist agenda.' [Wikipeadia]

You can still follow his nonsense on Twitter, if you are so inclination.

It's clearly unwinnable for Russia in any meaningful sense, and I think it has been so from the outset, but the problem is that Putin can drag it out for some while yet - assuming he remains in power. And of course sanctions are not necessarily, and probably highly unlikely, to be removed, even if the war ends.

I think this is what the Poly board are cognisant of, as when they were asked by someone on the recent webcast what would happen to their plans if sanctions (the question didn't specifically mention the war) ended in 2023, there was an immediate wry smile from CFO Nazimok, and a look of weary resignation from CEO Nesis, who said he thought that was a "highly unlikely" scenario, and they needed to pursue the redomicile and split plans.

Also Nesis mentioned the "war in Ukraine", which surprised me a bit, considering he's a Russian - though he may be resident in Switzerland, while also having citizenship of Israel, Malta as well. Or perhaps Russians can now mention the war without fear of reprisals.

It was reported by The Times today that '... embattled shareholders are demanding the board find an external candidate to replace Penny James ...' Who these are, we will of course never know.

In another article there today was an interview with the CEO of Admiral Group, Milena Mondini de Focatiis, who, when questioned about Admiral's share price fall from the highs during the pandemic lockdowns when there were fewer car claims, responded that '"We never really run the business for the share price."'

It also went on to say [presumably after the DLG profits warning] she was '.. speaking ... before the departure of James, who is not only her rival but also a friend, and used to sit on Admiral's board.'

'... Mondini de Focatiis says it is her job to be ready for the weather ... "It's at the core of insurance," she says.', going on to then say it requires the business to be run in a 'conservative and responsible' manner.

WolfofWarks - Thanks, I thought not.
Aside from the fact that EVR is also sanctioned, this is where Polymetal can because Jersey allows such a redomicile.

"Yes u can! Do u lot of media brainwashed know annything"

Ok, that's very interesting - can you provide some info on this, as everything I've read seems to suggest you can't re-domicile a UK-registered company away from the UK?

Apologies, but I've confused Polymetal (Jersey) with Evraz (UK), so you probably can't transfer a UK company's domicile - and hence I disagree with MCATEE on this as well.

Agree with MCATEE that Jersey law seems to permit companies to be transferred to other jurisdictions - thought I disagree with them on virtually everything else.

"I had an exchange with him last night where he was trying to tell me the FSS contract won't be profitable."

Let's hope they DON'T know what they're talking about. Any problem in this respect with such a big potential contract relative to the size of the company would be, well, less than ideal.

The buybacks don't seem to have been very successful (at current prices), being mostly purchases in the regions of 250 - 300p per share as far as I can see. This is the type of scenario where Warren Buffett thinks buybacks are a very bad idea.

This is maybe why the ex-CEO was focusing on the share price right to the very end of their tenure:

From 2021 Accounts: "The 2021 LTIP figure for Penny James reflects the relative TSR element of her 2018 LTIP awards and the RoTE element of her 2019 awards. The value is calculated based on the share price at the date of vesting for the 2018 LTIP awards, of £3.20 and £3.09, and a three-month average share price to 31 December 2021 of £2.78 for the 2019 awards."

Total 'long term incentives' were £1.107m in 2021 [£1.208m in 2020], and the above forms part of this, with total remuneration of £3.235m.

It always surprises (disappoints) me that 'Fixed pay and benefits' approaching £1m [2021] isn't sufficient motivation, and another couple of million on top is required, which then raises the question of how much a successful CEO should be paid - and considering it's now a FTSE 250 company.

MCATEE - "Dev is right uk in recent years has become very corrupt and the old freedoms have gone"

Are you in the UK? If so, which freedoms are you missing?

I thought the ex-CEO was getting a bit confused about what their own stakeholder role was when they started claiming the shares were undervalued, below "intrinsic value", but without saying what that value was, or how it was calculated.

That's my role after all, trying to decide what to buy/sell/hold.

There's no reason yet to think the next CEO is vastly superior to the old one, but that will hopefully become apparent with time, and the share price will react accordingly.

Thanks for the info regarding the reinsurance arrangements.
My hope is that by doing something like this, and along with the actions on dividends and not wasting money on share buybacks (at what now seem like high share prices), they do not need to raise any more capital.