focusIR May 2024 Investor Webinar: Blue Whale, Kavango, Taseko Mines & CQS Natural Resources. Catch up with the webinar here.
I’m with Earache. Say it how it is. The BOD don’t need to ramp their stock if they’re in it until a deal is done so why play with words.
The only one I might disagree with is the nod to a new II (or multiple IIs), as this is new cash to create liquidity within the business.
I did this with GGP and got burnt missing the rise from 5p to 12p. If you’re going to play that system my only recommendation is to do it with a different pot of money and keep your actual ‘investment’ as is. Hope that makes sense?
Because some people in the threads actually have insight to offer. Normally those without a bias or an agenda. Unfortunately I have to cut through the chaff to get to the wheat though. EUA is definitely the worst thread for this. RNS or other updates are generally monthly, in which time there has been hundreds of comments with people badmouthing each other’s thoughts and ideas. It’s important to remember that there are humans sitting behind all these keyboards...
I just love reading the comments from the people on this board that have the naivety to think that their comments could actually somehow affect the share price.
Investors will be looking at analytical trends, RNS, commodity prices, board composition, Director dealings, etc. Not the opinion of Joe Bloggs!
Why don’t we all just be nice to each other, respect peoples’ opinions and help us all to have a better, more informed knowledge of each stock?
Nope.
This is the original article from The Times: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/new-blow-to-neil-woodford-investors-as-sell-off-fails-wfnsfdnxv
I read with interest that the Woodford Fund has an interest in Circassia and that they have, so far, been unsuccessful in attracting another investor to take them on.
This issue isn’t unique to Circassia - for instance, it also affects Oxford Nanopore which I have an interest in.
So for the newbie (i.e. me yesterday), an MM is a Market Mover. They apparently use codes in trades to tell other share traders what to do. So if they buy or sell a specific volume this volume corresponds to a particular action. As the volume of these trades is so small, and the usual broker cost per trade is usually at least £10, some people think that these must be codes rather than actual trades.
This does, in theory, sound reasonable. Until some trading platforms have begun to provide free and sometimes unlimited trades. For instance, I purchased some EUA shares earlier, I then noticed I still had £1.12 in cash in my account. Now, what's the point in cash? It doesn't make any money. So I decided I might as well top-up and buy another 18 EUA shares. I did the same with GGP the other day, buying an additional 29 shares with £1.01.
So, which sounds more plausible? People with free share trading topping-up? Or a secret code between those in the 'know'?
Disclaimer: MMs may well still exist, but I doubt they are able to use small trades as a code anymore.
Cue backlash....
Fairliefoo, I'm in a similar situation to you. I agree with Mavic. SSE has lost the burden of a heavy price-capped business that was struggling to maintain a profit. It can now focus on its regulated generation and networks business. This business, through the RIIO (and RIIO-2 in the future) framework, allows it to make a profit of £X% above its costs. This should mean that it always in a position to pay a (healthy) dividend. So if you want an income stock, my recommendation is to keep it if you can afford to (i.e. don't earn 5-6% a year from this stock if you have 25% interest on a credit card for instance!).
Ps. on the point of RIIO-2. This is the only risk I can see to the future business - if the new framework isn't favourable to SSE.