Member Info for littlened

I am sure Dan and the rest of BOD are well aware of his hopes of a deal by Q1.To date there has been no further news.Any bad news would need an RNS so my view is there is some good news to be announced shortly but not quite ready for an RNS within the 'hoped for' timescale

I saw today an interview by Malcy on 10th March with boss of Rockrose and was quite impressed.They had an update today in lieu of results.Like HUR they are cash rich,but are not an exploration company and both hugely undervalued.If I was a marriage broker I would be tempted to arrange a meeting

I view the stats on FE Analytics and any fund which is below its sector average over a 3 year period gets switched unless there are special situations involved.Most of IP funds fell into that category many years ago and still do !

No apologies to Robbie Burns needed,Winalot.Even a Yorkshireman can enjoy that

Quite right,I disinvested from Invesco (Perpetual) many years ago but JG is something different,a world figure not a self satisfied mere fund manager like Barnett.

This is not my opinion.I am simplifying that of John Greenwood chief economist of Invesco Ltd,a world renowned scholar in monetary policy.Check his CV.He was on the advisory board which set up the HK currency when UK left in 1997. I have read JG for over 20 years and in particular his stance on inflation,or lack of it,since 2008 .He has been right on every major economic issue since then,and not many economists have been.His article today can be found on the Invesco uk website if you are interested.

Yes this is a huge shock to the economy,essentially caused by the response of Govt,s to combat the spread of the virus.But it is a monetary shock not a systemic one and the solution has to be monetary,which is why Govt.s are substituting public funds for the loss of private capacity.Provided the various world authorities do this sufficiently and comprehensively the economic consequences should be reasonably short lived.

The huge reduction in private sector activity is being replaced by equally huge Govt.financial support and provided financial interactions aren't disrupted ,and this seems unlikely at present,there should be little permanent damage to the world economy.As usual some businesses will not survive but others will take their place and keep the ball rolling.Markets will recover from this shock as they always do.

This is estimated to be £350billion.The vulnerable are estimated to be 1.5million. and it is to protect them that the curtailment of social and economic life is being suspended Is this £23m per person ? Or is my maths wrong ? Every day in the NHS decisions are taken to approve or deny drugs on a cost effective basis .Why is this different for coronavirus ?

The causus belli in the uK is to support all the very vulnerable and take strain off the NHS.The logic then is that after the 'shielding' of the 1.5m vulnerable has been put comprehensibly in place then the non vulnerable can resume normal life .Seems like a good plan to me

Why don't you wait and see what Dr.Trice says rather than telling us what he wont say ?
I remember the distinguished historian AJP Taylor being asked on TV on election night what he thought the outcome would be.He said 'lets wait an hour or so and we will know'.

Thanks all

Where is Malcy when we need him.Has he caught the bug ?

We closed up 1.75% today. LSE is wrong.....again

Ah yes I have had double baggers before !

Are the brothels closing in France ADUK ?

It is not Johnson’s policy. It is that of Chief Medical Officer and Chief Scientist who have based the policy on science and common sense.Take the politics out of this.

I think our scientific advise said that each infected individual is likely to infect around 1 to 5 others in a sporting or large group gathering.You seem to be suggesting otherwise

Your nickname is very apt in view of your calculations of probability.Of the top of your head werethey ?

Isn’t it clear a joint venture with a vulnerable partner on beneficial terms