Member Info for fleccy

Honestly LTI I can't decide if you're delusional, or just make stuff up.

On the 22nd May, the close price was £11.27 FACT

The close price on Friday was £8.89 FACT

Nothing to do with going Ex rights, apart from heavy selling pressure on the back of the announcement, it was just the closing prices on those days. If you don't believe me just watch the Pettigrew interview again, where they show the 23rd May pre open price in the background, unbelievably it shows as 1127.5p, go figure.

https://www.cnbc.com/video/2024/05/23/national-grids-new-strategy-a-transformational-step-up-in-energy-infrastructure-investment-ceo-says.html

LTI are you saying that the London Stock Exchange automatically reduces the share price when a stock goes Ex-Rights, similar to the Ex-Dividend effect? I thought TERP was just a theoretical calculation, so if you're saying something different I'd be interested in a link explaining the mechanism used by the London Stock Exchange to lower the price Ex Rights. If the stock exchange does automatically reduce the price due to dilution, then you'd expect they should raise the price for Buybacks 😉

"It has been obvious to me as a shareholder for quite a while reading what would be required because of the expected 50 % increase in electricity usage to satisfy EV's"

Funny you should say that, earlier I posted a link on the Lloyds forum to a picture of an EV.

https://i.postimg.cc/Ssm7xbjZ/Tesla-Float.jpg

"The share price in effect has simply dropped down to last months level."

Actually it's dropped a lot lower than last months level. I'm not sure why, but Google appears to have distorted the historic prices, if you want a better indication look on the London Stock Exchange site and set the chart to one month instead of a year. Even the London Stock Exchange distorts the price if you set it for 3 months and I'm not sure why, it may have something to do with the imminent rights issue and the LSE's charting algorithm.

https://www.londonstockexchange.com/stock/NG./national-grid-plc/company-page

If you set the LSE chart to one month it shows the price as £10.54 on the 29th April, but if you set it to 3 months it then shows the price as £9.68 on the 29th April. The one month chart also shows the price on the 22nd May as £11.26, which is correct, but the 3 month chart shows the price on the 22nd May as £10.36, clearly something's amiss with the LSE's chart software, I suspect Google use LSE's data so that's inaccurate too.

LTI I don't talk nonsense and I check my facts, which is why I know the share price was a lot higher than £8.89 a month ago.

Clearly the technology of the future.

https://i.postimg.cc/Ssm7xbjZ/Tesla-Float.jpg

Lending , maybe, maybe not. How do you explain Pettigrew's comment that NG had discussed the £60 Billion planned investment with shareholder's prior to results day? Even commenting that they've received feedback and are excited about the scale of the opportunity in front of them; Which shareholder's are those, did you know about it? I expect the shareholder's in question would have asked about the funding of the investment, so how much of a heads up were they given?

https://www.cnbc.com/video/2024/05/23/national-grids-new-strategy-a-transformational-step-up-in-energy-infrastructure-investment-ceo-says.html

"You really shouldn't be coming onto this board as a non shareholder talking about damage to sentiment. What damage?"

The damage to sentiment caused by surprising retail investors with a rights issue on results day, when they've obviously been arranging it with underwriters well in advance. I wonder how many retail jumped in just before results day expecting no surprises? The share price was around £11.27 on the 22nd May and is now at £8.89, and as much as I agree that caveat emptor applies when it comes to investing, NG could have at least given an earlier indication that a rights issue was on the cards;

https://www.nationalgrid.com/huge-boost-uk-supply-chain-national-grid-launches-great-grid-partnership-seven-new-industry

https://www.energylivenews.com/2024/05/14/national-grid-invites-derbyshire-residents-to-share-views-on-clean-energy-project/

No hint of rights issues in those articles.

They've been planning this for months, yet it obviously caught the a section of the market off guard, including the unsuspecting retail part of the market. In the CNBC video linked below, when Steve Sedgwick asks Pettigrew if this is good for investors, Pettigrew's response indicates that they've already spoken to the city investors and discussed the investment plans, so if I'm understanding it correctly, the institutional investors already had a heads up this was coming.

https://www.cnbc.com/video/2024/05/23/national-grids-new-strategy-a-transformational-step-up-in-energy-infrastructure-investment-ceo-says.html

So this clearly damaged sentiment, wouldn't you agree LTI?

Something else, I'll post wherever I want, even as a non shareholder I'm entitled to express opinion's.

"Yes, maybe that is why the share price is about half of what is was 36 years ago.

NG being a monopoly has meant it has been a steady investment with increasing regulated returns - share price had increased over 4 fold over the last 28 years"

BT was pushing toward £5 in 2015 and look where it is today, there's nothing to say that damage to sentiment wont hammer NG's share price going forward. The market punishes surprises, so NG could easily be half the price it is now in a year or two.

If you were to do a quick comparison of the annual balance sheets, between BT and NG, BT beats NG on nearly everything, looking forward the main difference between them is that BT can see light at the end of the Capex tunnel whereas NG's tunnel just got longer. To pick out two metrics where NG looks better, NG values its assets (£98.33B) higher, whereas BT's assets are valued at (£51.74B) and NG has less shares outstanding. The figures I'm using come from Google, I haven't waded through the balance sheets.

https://www.google.com/finance/quote/BT.A:LON

https://www.google.com/finance/quote/NG:LON

I think it's fair to say that the only thing separating the share price performance between the two is sentiment, if NG takes a big hit to sentiment the share price could easily take long term downward trajectory from here.

LTI I realise NG has a monopoly position in the UK, but £60 Billion Capex is a lot more than BT's £15 Billion Capex, and BT are looking at big cost savings on the back of their investments; Once BT's current FTTP and 5G capex ends you're talking generations before any further large scale network upgrades will be required, since Fibre will serve customer bandwidth requirements ad infinitum, and 5G is also pushing the boundaries of our current understanding of Physics; 6G is just an evolution to a different standard and many 6G applications will use 5G frequencies. BT have so far managed to fund their Capex without resorting to a rights issue and nearly a third of BT's £20 Billion Net Debt is lease liabilities, so arguably an operating cost and not financial debt, lease liabilities will reduce in line with the building closure program. BT might have competition, but they've had competition since the late 1980's.

I'm not saying NG isn't a good company, I've considered investing here myself, but there's no getting away from the fact that the rights issue and £60 Billion announced investment program has caused uncertainty. You could use the same arguments with NG as the analysts have used to bash BT, there are no guarantee's that the £60 Billion NG are looking to invest will reap significant returns, which might explain why NG caveat their dividend policy statement with "The Board will review this policy regularly, taking into account a range of factors including expected business performance and regulatory developments".

The market might decide to give NG the Rolls Royce treatment, or it might just as easily decide to give it the BT treatment, time will tell.

"The Board has recommended an increase in the final dividend to 39.12p per ordinary share ($2.4939 per American Depository Share), which will be paid on 19 July 2024 to shareholders on the register of members as at 7 June 2024. If approved, this will bring the full-year dividend to 58.52p per ordinary share,"

Your June 7th 39.12p dividend looks good, but next year the number of shares will increase:

"Weighted average number of shares (WAV) is expected to be approximately 4,688 million in 2024/25. Prior to the impact of the Rights Issue, we expected WAV to be 3,750 million shares in 2024/25. We are expecting an increase of approximately 938 million representing the full effect of the bonus element alongside a pro-rating of the fully subscribed shares"

Once the rights issue takes place, they'll still allocate the same total cash plus whatever CPIH is for dividends, but it'll be divided into 4.688 Billion shares rather than their current mentioned total of 3.75 Billion shares:

"Going forward, and following the rebasing of the 2023/24 dividend per share (DPS) following the Rights Issue, the Board will aim to grow annual DPS in line with UK CPIH, thus maintaining the DPS in real terms. The Board will review this policy regularly, taking into account a range of factors including expected business performance and regulatory developments"

There's a caveat to that, I think it's worth re-reading the statement, "The Board will review this policy regularly, taking into account a range of factors including expected business performance and regulatory developments", so it isn't guaranteed if I'm understanding that correctly.

There's another view that NG are tapping shareholders because they have to. I think the uncertainty will center around NG's ability to grow profits from the £60 Billion they're looking to invest, and whether shifting focus toward Grid services will pay off in the long run. Is a percentage of the £60 Billion reserved for renewing old network, or is the whole planned investment aimed at completely new infrastructure with new revenue streams? Especially since they're selling assets to cover part of the cost; Whenever I see mention of listed companies selling off assets to private equity, like Macquarie, it makes me wince and wonder who's pulling the strings and who'll eventually benefit in the long run.

"Disposal of the UK Gas Transmission business

Following the Group’s disposal of a 60% controlling stake in the UK Gas Transmission business in the year ended 31 March 2023, the Group completed the sale of a further 20% of its retained interest in the business (held through GasT TopCo Limited) on 11 March 2024. The other 80% of GasT TopCo Limited is owned by Macquarie Infrastructure and Real Assets (MIRA) and British Columbia Investment Management Corporation (BCI) (together, the Consortium). The Group’s remaining 20% interest in GasT TopCo Limited is classified as an investment in an associate on the basis that the Group has a significant influence over the business"

Apparently Macquarie were the previous owners of Thames Water, then selling it on after loading it with debt, they own KCOM as well as a large stake in Southern Water and other things apparently. That's just a side issue since NG will only own 20% of GasT TopCo Limited compared to Macquarie's 80%, but that will likely soon be sold too:

"Taking into consideration the timing of the RAA exercise window, the Group has continued to classify its remaining interest in GasT TopCo Limited as held for sale and has not equity accounted for its share of the associate’s results."

Adding everything up you have the rights issue, sale of assets, and uncertainty as to the Net Debt position going forward; As I said previously if there are any long term holders who've taken an in depth look at NG's financing and understand the long term outlook, it'd be interesting to read their analysis.

Wow sub 1p. I'd really fill my boots if the whole of BT was only worth around £90 Million, in fact BT would be able to buyback a significant percentage of their own stock from petty cash.

DS I understand what you're saying, but I already purchase products from Amazon using my Debit card, why would I need to use BCH to do what I can easily do already. On a few occasions we've also had to return products and request refunds.

If I'm understanding Bitgree correctly, you make a wish list and someone agrees to purchase the product using Fiat, and you then subsequently release your agreed BCH payment from Escrow to the purchaser once you receive the product; I assume in the case of fast product returns the BCH will remain in Escrow until the goods are returned, and the actual purchaser receives their funds back from Amazon, at which point the wish lister is refunded their BCH from Escrow; I'm not sure how this works if the transfer is completed and the product goes faulty soon after the transaction's are completed. The transaction doesn't actually take place using BCH, it's just a barter system where someone else is offering to purchase you goods in exchange for your BCH; It seems a little bit complicated and I can see how it might go wrong. I'll just add I've only taken a quick look at this and formed a judgement based on little research, so apologies if I've misunderstood something.

IDMB I don't disagree that BT investments will add to their bottom line, with the biggest addition's being cost savings through building closures, workforce reduction and Network Convergence, once the current Capex cycle comes to an end.

Because I'm not invested in NG, I haven't looked closely at the debt and was surprised to see Net Debt at £43.607 Billion. Their results statement says they have £12.5 billion of distributable reserves to cover the dividend over the next 5 years and as long as their finances hold up they appear to be indicating that the dividend is safe.

I've only glanced through the annual results, but if their are any long term holders who've taken a deep dive into NG's finances I'd be interested to read their opinion? I have seriously considered investing in NG in the past and may do again in the future. The rights issue, dividend debasement and commitment to invest £60 Billion does cause some uncertainty for prospective and current shareholders; And even though NG are partly funding the new investments through the rights issue and asset disposals, how much additional debt will they have to accumulate as well?

LTI I don't see how this can be seen as anything but bad news for NG investors. The algo's will have a field day with NG leading up to the 6th June and it'll likely see further downward momentum post ex dividend, SUF might just see his 600p target.

I'm not invested in NG, but I know from my BT investment how sentiment can drive valuations well below fair value. In BT's case, one of the narratives used to damage sentiment was the suggestion that any money invested in Fibre and 5G is wasted, with many analysts implying that the new technologies won't result in increased profits going forward; I disagree with that narrative, but none the less the mud stuck and the Telecom sector is where it is currently. In the case of NG the returns on any new investment will depend on the ability of their customers to pay more for use of NG's grid network, but that will be constrained by the end customer's ability to pay more, as well as the regulatory environment.

Going forward much will depend on the market view of these investments, and how much NG can increase profits based on the £60 Billion cost of the upgrades; If the market is kind to NG then the price will probably recover quickly, if they treat NG's investments in new infrastructure the same as they've treated BT's investments, then expect the share price to get hammered.

Quoting a Fool Aim?

BT could go back down, but it could just as easily go up. Guessing the direction of travel for BT's share price is a Fool's game.

Ethereum is a proof of stake token unlike BTC which is proof of work, QBT's methods are aimed at proof of work so don't apply to Ethereum. Although Ethereum is far more energy efficient than Bitcoin, I'm not sure why any of the Crypto's have a tradeable value since anyone, or any entity, can create their own Blockchain to do whatever's required.

Decentralised distributed ledgers will only be secure until they aren't, you can be sure bad actors are continually storing the decentralised blockchain's with a view to committing theft, or breaking the blockchain's once the technology's available to hack them. Even firewalled databases are open to attack by hackers, companies are continually fighting to secure their data and networks.

Because big money hijacked Crypto and decentralised Blockchain in general, it's hard to find content talking about the possible weaknesses.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XyyGq3GX4K0

I honestly couldn't guess how many rigs would be required to skew the probabilities when mining Bitcoin, but I'd guess a lot to meaningfully test QBT's software. The Nonce field is 32 bytes long, so I would guess the miners first cycle through all the possible Nonce bit combinations with their preferred transactions in the block, and if that doesn't work they might change or redistribute the transactions, effectively replacing the Block and starting again. Different miners might have different front end customised control software to run their operation's, how QBT's software would fit into those is anyone's guess.

I'm not trying to be antagonistic when I say I'm sceptical that QBT's software will work commercially outside of the lab, I believe they may be trying to achieve the impossible; But what do I know I'm not an expert on the subject, I'm just expressing my personal common sense based opinion which might be misplaced, time will tell.

I watched the first short video and I didn't know how to interpret the comments around live testing on "One" mining rig with their methods compared to one mining rig without their methods. The reason I'm confused is because mining BTC is all about numbers and probabilities. Mining BTC is comparable to buying one lottery ticket vs buying thousands of lottery tickets, it's possible to win the jackpot with one lottery ticket but your chances increase dramatically if you buy thousands of tickets; I don't understand how one mining rig running QBT's methods, vs one mining rig without them, will reap reliable results on the BTC live network. A true test would be to run thousands of rigs on the live network using QBT's methods, and measure any performance improvement over time; The chances of one mining rig finding a winning hash is infinitesimal, whether or not it's running QBT's methods.

It maybe that QBT are testing using multiple rigs, but that isn't clear in the video, mining BTC is a numbers game they'd likely need a lot of rigs to prove their methods on the live BTC network.

For Canada PPIB, this is the spreadsheet data I base my chart on:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vSzpntXIbDbv3WIJxMzgrF484U08WUxqoWPJuzrHhTKoVPC-2NGC_bsiH4p5RVM3E8LnsOtS6NazImN/pubhtml

I used the closing prices on the day the short was reported as taking place, and calculated the short positions based on percentages, it wont be completely accurate but should be close.

Using my guesses for the short prices, I get Canada PPIB as shorting total as 79,614,629 shares at a price of £86,958,084; The website mentions -91.56 M as the latest win/loss, which is closish to my calculated full aggregated short price, maybe the website column is actually the total short price and not the latest Win/Loss? I'm happy to be corrected if anyone can see any errors in my spreadsheet calculations.

These class actions are funded as a bet on profiting nicely from the action, I suspect Patourel will be rewarded handsomely should BT lose.

"ex-dividend date is 8 August 2024"

I did say if the shorts are still in play on Ex Dividend day, the fact it's over a month away is irrelevant to the point I was making.