Cobus Loots, CEO of Pan African Resources, on delivering sector-leading returns for shareholders. Watch the video here.
Absolutely. Strong opinions, weakly held. Posted as much that I'd sold at a pound once the technicals flagged up ultra bearish in August. The results then confirmed it. Posted about that sell signal much to the chagrin of everyone here. What's your point? That I bought at 55p, sold at a pound and now think the market is still signalling that it wants to go much lower? Where's the credibility issue?
If you've got nothing better to than trawl through my posting history from 7 months ago, maybe you ought to spend more time on the charts yourself.
Cheers for posting Oke.
"CAC has already risen to £26-27 per customer" - If that estimate is anywhere close to accurate, that's ridiculous. They're sprinting just to stand still.
"we believe any US growth could be margin dilutive and potentially put Boohoo in an ever worse position." - More or less the same prognosis as when they first attempted to break into the US then, an enterprise they should have ditched.
"spending more on marketing than any other listed peer (+600bps over eight years), while the recent sales performance has been the worst of all European listed eCommerce peers." - Speaks for itself. Not the sign of a company with any competitive advantage.
Oh T4G, there's just no need to argue. It's in the BoE data we've both posted. The hiking cycle started BEFORE 1979, but reached comparable tightening BY 1979. You go ahead and take everything literally. It ain't gonna change facts or the reality of your Boohoo investment. You live in your land of make believe. You've shouted this stock up all the way down. Why stop now? Why stop at 13000 posts? Wouldn't want anyone else using this forum for useful discussion would we?
Good luck with your investment. But you are an exceptionally silly person.
Ah Bank of America, in for a good ol' pump and dump again. Pretend like everything Moulding said is true, everything rosy, corner turned, insane price target, just in time for a disappointing Q3 update to dump into. Not their first rodeo.
"Kando, I'd suggest you stop telling a bunch of stinking porkies. Interest rate rises were nothing like you posted below. Here's the link to the actual BoE data.
I don't argue with anybody, I just like to point out the lies posted by the uninvested to keep some balance on the board
https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/boeapps/database/Bank-Rate.asp"
You've literally reposted the data I posted to you, and claimed it's a lie. You are such a donkey, t4g. You're like chat bot from 1998. Even Clippy from Microsoft Word has better reading comprehension and analytical skills.
Are the BoE telling porkies? The rates set by the BoE in 1973, 1980, 1990 are as I said. Go argue with Andrew Bailey.
Good luck with your Boohoo investment. Donkey.
"when rates have never previously risen so aggressively" - What?
In the UK alone, rates rose from 4% to 15% in 1979, and from 6.5% to nearly 14% in 1989. There's been plenty of more aggressive rate hiking cycles in America. '79 was so aggressive it made Paul Volcker a household name.
You're immune to reality t4g. The data is there, but your insane obsession with Boohoo won't let you accept it.
You clearly are disputing it, else what is it you're asking, is it exactly 6 months? No, it is not likely to be EXACTLY 6 months. There is often a lag and on average, it's around 6 months, hence the ~... Now that means it can be longer or shorter, but there is often a lag, and averaged out, it is around 6-8 months.
Just for a change, why don't you just nod, go "huh, that's interesting" and not argue with every commenter on this board about things which are factually true and available for you to research YOURSELF. The links already posted show everything. Stop demanding explanations of others to fill in your lack of due diligence. It clearly isn't going to change your misplaced optimism in a fast fashion brand that went out of fashion at the wrong end of an economic cycle.
Sure, can do.
In the US:
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FEDFUNDS
1959, 1969, 73, 79, 89, 2000, 2006, 2018
In the UK:
https://www.resolutionfoundation.org/app/uploads/2019/09/Slide5.png
1973, 1980, 1990
etc, etc.
Aggressive hiking cycles to combat inflation inducing recessions is not a new thing. In fact it's by design. To beat down inflation central banks want to slow the economy.
Acting like this one is somehow different is naive, and contradicted by centuries of data.
Boom and bust, yes, but the busts of this cycle have only just started. Yield curves have been inverted longer and deeper than almost any other time, and they unerringly predict recessions. In tightening cycles, recesssions lag central bank pauses by ~6 months, and an outright pivot would signal the start of one. Central banks have only just (probably) paused. There is a big chunk of downside to come for equities in the next 6-18 months.
How sure are you that Boohoo isn't going to be one of the casualties of the bust part of the cycle? It's not looking too hot in the macro environment before the recession, how will it fare when unemployment starts to soar? How robust is the balance sheet?
Why would they buy shares in a company they have no faith in?
That they're not buying tells all you need to know about the company's prospects as viewed from within. If they thought it was a bargain at these basement prices, they'd buy. They clearly have "got a clue" enough to know not to.
Not even invested here. Who's upset?
You've been here for years shouting down realists. 13,000 angry posts. By most accounts a fairly tedious troll. But no one is upset. Engaging with you is like batting away a gadfly. The price of posting on the Boohoo LSE page.
It's clearly an agreed price, by the way it snaps to it, and sticks with it. The algo trades are probably third party players taking advantage of the situation to sell on every tranche spike. Hence why the many algo trades don't add up to the underlying volume.
Must you disagree with everything T4G?
What part of a 30p share price trying to hold 28p makes you think there's much buying demand. You spent much of last year disagreeing that it would hit 35p. Has there been no selling pressure all the way down? Are shorts not increasing? Are brokers not slashing price targets? It's someone selling, otherwise the buyer wouldn't be picking them up off-book.
@t4g - Whoever is buying at these volumes needs a motivated seller, there isn't the liquidity for this quantity without spiking the share price through their own induced demand. If the seller wasn't motivated to sell, they wouldn't be selling this quantity at a price capped BELOW what was just last week, more or less, ATLs, they'd allow the buyer to take them at market rate - which at these volumes, as above, would elevate the share price. So they've agreed the sale price where the seller offloads huge volume without tanking the price while they're doing it, and the buyer takes that volume without exploding the price. Just because it's slightly above where the share price organically wants to be, doesn't mean there isn't a desperate seller behind it. Every sell is obviously someone else's buy, but this looks more, in my opnion, like a motivated seller than a particularly motivated buyer.