At £2.70 this is very undervalued. Its not without risk though and my biggest fear is some substantial dilution in the event of any liquidity issues. Mulberry however remains a very strong global fashion brand and any turnaround could mean some serious upside from these current pitiful levels. It would also be interesting to see whether one of the major shareholders, Tybourne Capital Management, will at some point in the near future further increase its stake in the company, especially at these current depressed levels. It is interesting to note that on 29th January 2014, TCM had a shareholding of 1,782.709 shares. Its latest shareholding disclosure was on 28th November 2017 when it had a shareholding of 6,602,240 shares. In those few years it had almost quadrupled its holding in the company.
The Woodford name now makes investors run a mile but objectively its the companies/startups in this investment trust and their weightings that matter. Benevolent AI and Oxford Nanopore are hugely exciting companies and this trust is a great way of having exposure to these kinds of companies. Its much better to buy an investment trust containing many exciting and innovative small companies than going directly to the AIM casino to bet on a single horse, where you'll most likely lose all your money. If this goes below 60p I may buy a few more.
Superdry is hugely undervalued. I believe this will come good again in due course. The most important thing is that JD is back, which I am delighted about and I am also hugely relieved that ES and his retrograde leadership is gone. Lots of money to be made from these levels if you are patient
IMB will be worth more than £40 a share in the future. I currently don't know what the bottom will be but at these levels the stock is priced very cheaply and pays a very generous dividend. Now is the time to be buying or topping up not selling (unless you've borrowed money or are investing with money you can't afford to lose).
Lots of people may still keep beating down Woodford, but this is a very good trust to hold based on the companies in the portfolio; some solid companies very much of now and the future. I have a rather large holding in the Scottish Mortgage Investment Trust but that trust is not so cheap (and for a good reason) trading at a premium to NAV. The WPCT, on the other hand, trades at quite a discount to NAV and I believe there is plenty of upside in the long run from the current share price. Even though this fund is more high risk, I prefer this fund over Woodford's other two funds. Many of the companies in this trust have a very bright future.
The share price is now very close to its all time high. Even with short term stock market volatility, this is a good stock to own to have exposure to fast growing and disruptive businesses of a high quality - much better to have exposure to a multitude of these businesses than to focus on a single horse. I still think the most controversial holding, Tesla, could take many by surprise and end up being the best performing of the holdings. I believe it's better to have exposure to Tesla than not have exposure to Tesla regardless of what many people may say. I know someone who's invested all their savings in Tesla. In spite of my optimism for the company that is foolish. Like I said, much better to play all these wonderful companies than just one - and this is what I like about SMT. What's more the fees are low and the leadership of this fund is visionary and first class. Technology doesn't stay still and will continue to play an even greater role in our lives in the future.
ES gets a £730k payoff for decimating shareholder value????
I am sorry but in my book if you haven't done your job well, aside from the agreed base salary, you get nada.
The next company ES becomes chief executive of, I am shorting it to kingdom come.
The market hates uncertainty but I am very certain now that the original founders are back on board (and the previous backward management team are thankfully gone) this great company and brand can be rebuilt and made relevent and cool again. I am taking every opportunity to top up with each short term fall as I am now convinced that in the long run £50 a share is achievable.
And I'll be more than happy to buy some of those shares off him once the founders are back on board. ES represents everything that is wrong with a business leader - no vision (except tunnel vision), overpaid and pitiful levels of skin in the game
Superdry is a brand in the same way that Diesel, G-Star, Levis and Burberry are brands. If it's online business can be developed into a big success (which I hope it will post JD returning) than the health of the high street won't matter
Diageo is a solid and robust global company although now may be a good time to take a little profit and reinvest elsewhere. The tobacco sector is still very undervalued and unloved with both BATS and IMB paying juicy dividends.
I can't see why Superdry can't be a business worth at least $10 billion in the future. I consider Superdry a strong global brand but I am very angry that it is in the wrong hands. Why would institutional investors stand by this current cumbersome management? They have absolutely no vision. They are not doing anything innovative or putting any creative sparkle into the brand. If anything they are unwittingly devaluing and destroying the brand. When I visited the flagship store on Regent street not so long ago most of the range of clothes looked tired and too many items were on sale. It all looked very uninspired and the vibe was tired. Was the weather the reason for poor sales? Was it f**k. One has to be a tad naive to fall for that one. JD coming back may create a bit of upheaval in the short run but in the long run it will be absolutely worth it to save Superdry from middle of the road status and bring it back to its cool, exciting and cutting edge roots. Superdry has incredible potential and upside as a brand and I can see at least £50 a share (and no I am not drinking the kool aid) in the future if this is achieved. It will also be very important that it develops strong online sales and relies less on physical stores although retaining a few core, aesthically enticing and well presented stores is very important too.
There's a few ways of looking at all this
I feel that since Dunkerton left, the company has fallen into the hands of management with no vision. For me, Superdry has and should have the same cachet as other clothing brands like Diesel and G-Star, and it is important that this brand strength is not only maintained but also taken to higher levels. Superdry should be a cool, desirable and innovative clothing brand. But I fear this current management lack innovation and Superdry will slowly decline into a forgettable middle of the road non descript clothing brand - the recent sales figures already show this. No wonder Dunkerton is fuming. If I were the founder I would be livid too. All the excuses about the weather just don't cut in my book. The reason why sales have been sluggish is because this current management lack vision and innovation pure and simple.
On the other hand this debacle has also been a blessing in disguise as an obliterated share price has given way to a wonderful buying opportunity. When Steve Jobs temporarily left Apple in the 80s, Apple slid for a time into temporary irrelevance as it was then run by people with no vision not seeing further than their generous saleries. This is exactly what is happening now at Superdry and it is a depressing site. If Dunkerton were to return and more innovation were to return to Superdry, the brand will become sexy again (with more demand for its products) and the share price would then be several multiples of what it is today.
Although TV and traditional channels may for now be still be getting a lot of people's attention, one thing ITV could do in a changing landscape is to quietly establish a buffer fund (in addition to its normal operations) with some of its profits (and dividends) building core positions in Amazon, Alphabet (owns YouTube), Facebook group and smaller positions in Netflix and Snap. This could protect the company in the future against disruptions to its bottom line.
Dignity is one of the largest holdings of the Aurora Investment Trust; a fund focused on value investing via investing in companies which are undervalued. Judging by its portfolio it is UK plc heavy, as all the uncertainty surrounding Brexit means many UK focused companies are now trading at attractive valuations. I see that as recently as 15th January, Aurora (via Pheonix) has been further increasing its holdings in Dignity. The last report released by the fund shows the latest weighting of its holdings dated 31st December and Dignity now represents 8.1% of its entire portfolio. I now expect that % to be larger after the very recent further top ups.
Reading Aurora's latest report I thought I'd copy and paste this paragraph justifying its large holding in Dignity....
The other feature is our investment in the funeral business. This industry is now under competition authority scrutiny, but at the same time is suffering from a fall in prices due to an increase in competition. These two are incongruous, either there is a lack of competition and the authorities will seek ways to increase it, or there is competition driving down prices already and intervention is not needed. The truth is that for a long time the leaders in this field persistently raised prices ahead of costs, but in so doing they increased their vulnerability to competition, in Buffett’s words, they reduced the moat that protected their pricing power. Over time, they paid the price in loss of share and declining volumes until ultimately, they are now lowering prices. We assume this is the world they will operate in, i.e. price competitive, where they will need to use their scale to be the low-cost operator and where future margins will not match the past. However, even on that assumption the shares are worth, in our estimate, three times where they trade today. The best investments we have found in the past are where you can buy the ugly duckling, of an ugly sector, in an ugly market…. Dignity fits the bill perfectly.
I've been following this company on and off for some time and I am aware of the game changing potential of the Parsortix system in detecting CTCs.
One thing I don't understand however is if this product is so important why haven't any of the large pharma companies like Norvatis or Gilead Sciences made any attempt to make an offer on the company? Especially whilst the market cap is rather low?
Also even if the company reached an important milestone like FDA approval what's the guarantee that there would be a high demand for the product? This company seriously needs to start generating cash as further dillutions to generate cash to keep the company going are only going to continue to erode existing shareholder value. I remember when there were only around 70 million shares in circulation. Now the company has double that.