Member Info for expatwelsh

Agree with all that Craig but left wondering why people with concerns ,however valid , about investing in BT would bother to post on here .

What is the point?

If they don’t want to invest that’s fine they don’t need to.

I visit this board to learn things about investing in BT , people who visit to state it’s not a good idea to invest in BT when they already don’t invest when they have with no substance just opinions are just a waste of time and as you said just Boring.

Hi Aus, I didn’t intend to apply any endorsement to Fleccy’s research, just that there’s some weight to it , I don’t know enough about telecoms to know ether there’s substance behind it or not but I was just observing that most Bt detractors don’t offer any substantive back up at all to their opinions. I did spend a career in business management and have the appropriate qualifications that go with that but I have to say I couldn’t be bothered to go to the detail that Fleccy ( or his robotic mate ) goes to .My substantial ( for me at least ) investment stays because of my conviction supported by published data and more belief in the published statements of BT than much of the stuff published by the media with who knows what agenda and the obviously mischievous statements of the altnets.

I don’t by any means agree with all that Fleccy posts.

I’m staying in because I believe the total value today of Openreach and EE and the future value of the numerous cost savings and capital spending reductions far outweighs todays market cap even allowing for debt,pension and altnet headwinds.

Lots of posters do a lot of shroud waving about the imminent demise of BT but to be fair to Fleccy no one comes close to the level of research he puts out to support his views.

None of us know what will happen, as Aus say there are many imponderables so Fleccy may be wrong but not knowing also applies to the manic deramping of people like Porsch.

We all have our own opinions but that’s all they are.

I wish stating a view on here made it the truth…..I’d be rich if it did !

A change that hit big tech and benefited telcos would indeed be game changing. Such seismic change needs a catalyst . Can’t see what that would be especially as even the telcos aren’t suggesting Anything.

Ian , what a nasty little man you are.

If you get off by sitting in your kitchen in your sweaty vest and pants being a brave keyboard warrior whilst your boss thinks you’re “working from home” that’s fine but for the rest of us it’s boring and what the Block is for.

Mandy is at least entertaining you are patently just nasty.

Goodbye

Ian,I don’t think anyone on these board believes for a nano second that anything on LSE influences any share price.This is a discussion board about BT and not an all agree with each other board. Sorry we don’t all mirror your views but that’s life and abuse about other posters isn’t helpful or constructive. You’ve posted ten times on BT since you’ve joined many recently and you are clearly unhappy with other people’s opinions ,perhaps you’d find people agreeing with you more on another board.If not could we perhaps live and let live?

Ian,Quick?? Check out the price history of the share.

I was just to make a similar response Pete.

I’ve been invested six or seven years which for me is long term and as you say I’m in a loss position.

I’m only staying because I cannot believe the nation’s leading telco is only worth a p/e of 6 ( even in todays markets with telcos out of fashion DT is on 12 France telecom is 9)Sooner or later the markets view of the sector will change I hope. Until it does any difference in p/e between BT and other large telcos must be at least in part do to lack of confidence in the leadership team.

In the meantime any differences between BT and othe

Hi Pete,

I’d like to think the UK government and the EU won’t perpetually act like 4 year olds if there’s benefit to be had for the people they ‘serve’.

If past performance is anything to go by that may be a forlorn hope!

I wasn't suggesting the government would gain by a sale of BT in the scenario I laid out rather that their consent could be traded for something more important.

Who knows? it's all conjecture but I'd really like to see something/anything happen that would make BT Board look like they really care what their company share price is that doesn't depend on all their bets coming good over a few years.

Indeed they have made their plans very clear, what they cannot do is project how the markets will value the company whilst they execute the plan.

The plan has been clear for some time as you say but the Share price has almost halved since PJ took over.

BT wont have a say when a take over approach happens and protesting they've got a plan will not help them if they cannot convince the markets that they are rock solid for trebling the existing share price over a couple of years. They've failed to get markets onside so far so why would an untried and un tested CEO with no big job run away successes under her belt make the markets believe her when PJ couldn't?

I'd love to have the faith that you have but in common with just about investment institution that looks at BT I'm afraid their record so far doesn't inspire confidence.

I remember that Fleccy but don't have your innate belief that decisions by governments are always totally logical and rational.

If Rishi wants something from the EU and negotiations are in play then promising not to obstruct a takeover could win him something that he cares more about.

None of really knows..............lets check again 1st January 2024...............we should know by then.

Of the options you describe I see only one likelihood and that’s DT who may already have agreement in place whereby Drahi supports their bid. That would explain why Drahi has bought 25% of a share that the market don’t care for and publicly says he’s a believer in the strategy despite being underwater on his investment. I can’t see how his lenders would have the patience to wait until the fibre roll out is completed to see a reward unless they know their investment is safe because of the DT link. If the Portuguese fraud blows up and his BT investment remains unchanged that would be pretty convincing proof that something is up. If as someone commented earlier there’s a fire sale because Drahi is implicated in some way that’s my theory up in smoke. When the government is trying to get closer to the EU I don’t see that they wouldn’t go along with DT as long as they had safeguards in place for the long term on sensitive security issues.

Who knows , but unless there is a grand plan somewhere I can only believe Crozier and the Board have just consigned BT to Five years of mediocre share price performance with this appointment and surely that’s a death wish as the major investors patience surely won’t last and both Chairman and CEO will be out before 2025 dawns.

Being a BT shareholder is the modern day equivalent of wearing a hair shirt as continuous penance.

When you think things can’t get much worse instead of looking for a CEO with market recognition as a driver of value they appoint someone associated with no obvious big successes.

A quick look around the web shows articles saying she’s occupied this that and the other jobs but haven’t yet seen any significant accomplishments.

The only possible positive could be that she won’t rock the boat whilst a takeover takes place.

Pete,last paragraph very true. Is it a big game or has it just happened. Whilst it feels like things are being manipulated somehow surely FSA or someone else would be aware and blow the whistle on it if big players were truly rigging the market for a FTSE 100 company.

Most recent reports dated February 23 showed Altice debts in excess of 50 billion dollars…… he definitely has convinced his bankers so far.However With that sort of number at risk he may be pushed in action on BT soon whether he’s ready or not.

He must have a plan he is sharing with his creditors as they seem to be happy funding his BT adventure. I’ve read that he is up to his neck in debt or underwater on his investments in his other companies so in a time of higher lending rates he must have sold a very convincing plan to multiple investors, private equity or hedge funds very likely, who aren’t known for their understanding when their cash is at risk.

Hi Fleccy,

We do of course make our own investment decisions. I have been in here since the Italian accounting shambles which I thought brought about an exaggerated response on the price and represented a buying opportunity.

little did I know how wrong I could be!

Instinctively for many reasons including those you outline I see long term value still and for that reason I’ve averaged down but today I’m still 33% underwater but not going to sell come what may.

It is true that others are also beset by the same issues and Fund Manager Nick Train apparently made similar comment last week.

I don’t know if the others have as many options to raise short term value as BT does . This board has discussed many of them ….from selling masts to whole divisions and many things in between. At the extreme if everything not core to the future fibre net work went there would be a much smaller company with huge margins and ROCE in a few years time and the roll out would be amply funded and dividends doubled.

I’m not suggesting that but don’t understand why the board doesn’t do something to throw a scrap to benighted shareholders other than say “ Build and they will come “ ( apologies to Kevin Costner and Field of Dreams) just trust us.

OOPS…….Don’t understand how that posted again me or LSE?

Apologies either way

I think both Fleccy and BluePete make valid points but for me the question remains.

If Crozier and the CEO have a prime directive to increase shareholder value which I think they do who decides timescales?

If the markets see the long term benefits and value BT based on futures then they are meeting their prime directive and everyone is happy.

Or

If the markets don’t believe the plan and place minimal value on the company then Chairman and CEO are failing to meet their prime directive certainly in the short term.

As things stand they are failing unless someone can point to a free pass they’ve been given by shareholders to deliver Jam tomorrow.

I think both Fleccy and BluePete make valid points but for me the question remains.

If Crozier and the CEO have a prime directive to increase shareholder value which I think they do who decides timescales?

If the markets see the long term benefits and value BT based on futures then they are meeting their prime directive and everyone is happy.

Or

If the markets don’t believe the plan and place minimal value on the company then Chairman and CEO are failing to meet their prime directive certainly in the short term.

As things stand they are failing unless someone can point to a free pass they’ve been given by shareholders to deliver Jam tomorrow.