Member Info for lordloadsoflolly

Pokerchips - glad you're happy with the way everything's progressing here. As you say, odd that anyone wouldn't be, seeing how well the share price is doing.

Previous CFO was useless (& pushed out). That said, these results are dire.

TopCatz - you’d best ask warren then, as that’s not my name.

Baf3 - if you're right then I win on both scores, as I'm confident H&T will be higher in 12 months' time than now (possibly considertably so). Don't say you weren't warned!

TopCatz - guilty as charged for being repetitive. But I think you'll find most rational investors would struggle to argue with my main conclusions:

1. NAV disconnect. This is evident, irrefutable & has been that way for some time already.

2. Dividend at IPO. Of the two holdings that have already IPO'd, it would have been prefereable if TEK investors could have banked some profits by now. Particularly in Lucyd's case, whose price has rapidly tanked since it IPO'd.

3. A lower TEK share price is probable. OK, you win over the past couple of months with a life-changing 2p uplift per share (whoppee doo). Any further back than that though and the trajectory has been firmly one way: https://www.hl.co.uk/shares/shares-search-results/t/tekcapital-plc-ordinary-0.4p

I think you'll find buywell3 is an AI bot, spouting random research in the third party, then drawing illogical/bizarre conclusions.

But if it keeps you amused, then fine!

TopCatz - no good keeping on writing "whatever you say, lol, whatever you say".

Just shows you've run out of arguments.

Anyhow, let's see in a year's time whether H&T or TEK was the better option. I've money on both, so am hedging my bets to an extent, albeit skewed towards H&T cos I like to sleep at night.

TopCatz - I can cite plenty of posters who double up on ADVFN & LSE.

Unlike me, some don't have the integrity to use the same name.

Tell you what, TopCatz. Why don't we come back here in a years' time and compare the relative fortunes of H&T v. TEK (with dividends factored in of course).

I'm not saying TEK won't increase over that time. Indeed, I suspect it will and I remain a holder because of this. But I've a lot more money riding on H&T because I regard it as a far safer bet over the next 1-2 years. You never know, perhaps by Sept 24 Clifford will have actually delivered on his promise that all current holdings would be returning some value to TEK investors within the next 18 months. I believe it was about 6 months ago he came out with that one, so the clock's ticking.

TopCatz - You're right, I'm not a shorter.

I see you've done your research on me. Quite happy with the money I've "parked" in H&T thanks. Not sure where you got the "at a higher price" bit from though? The only amount I invested in H&T recently at a higher-than-current price of just under 450p was money reinvested from my recent H&T share sale at 506p. Sophisticated investors often do this. It's called averaging down.

Oh, and H&T has a forward yield of around 5% too. How much does TEK pay out currently?

* SIPP even!

Thefrogster - fair enough. Your call obviously! But I would just say, I've transferred my Shares ISA on more than one occasion now and it wasn't TOO painful or hassly.

If you do go for it, just make sure you keep a printed list of ALL your holdings beforehand, so you can check they all migrate smoothly. It's also worth noting any imminent dividend payments, so you can check these credit your new account as expected.

I just had a couple of transfer issues with shares listed on obscure exchanges, but we got there in the end. That said, I don't have a SIP, so I can't comment on that process.

It would only be listed on AQSE if he'd bought PBX.

Opti is on AIM.

Sadly, these "nice little bump ups" - even the nice big bump ups - in TEK's holdings never seem to produce a corresponding uplift in TEK's price.

Maybe one day, TEK will actually crystallise value in one of its holdings by reducing its stake there and rewarding long-suffering investors with a payout. Until it does, that disconnect between TEK's NAV and its share price will remain.

Optimists can blame it all they like on the current climate for small caps / general bear market / high inflation & interest rates / weather.

Fact is, TEK management is squarely to blame. Rather than take some money off the table at IPO stage, they've hung onto almost all their holdings, suffering cash raise after cash raise ever since, which simply dilutes any potential inheritance we might, eventually, receive.

Thefrogster - glad you also went for the lowest Fundsmith fee option. Now I've just got to convince you to transfer out of HL, as their costs to hold funds are extortionate (and unnecessary, given all the decent cheaper competitors)!

Maidit308 - I really wouldn't quote the Board's beliefs as a sound reason for doing anything.

That same Board has stated exactly the same optimism / belief / self delusion for the past N years. And look where we are now.

Joseywales - that's a brave move and I hope it works out for you. Presumably you've followed this company's history (& share price movement over the years) so you know the risks. Good luck, speaking as a long-suffering holder with major false dawn disorder!

Djframboise - judging by the state of him, I suspect old gravel mouth has already done much worse to his own body!

Owners of Lucyd specs can correct me if I’m wrong, but presumably the in-built tech makes their frames heavier than conventional glasses. In which case the flexible hinge might be more relevant in smart glasses than conventional ones.

I’m not saying this patent isn’t useful or of any value. Simply that it might not gain traction in the main conventional glasses market if my frame weight theory is right.

Chile80 - unfortunately that article undermines its own logic when it says “let’s go 2 months further back to May - July 2023 and think on what progress happened then? (which led to a 36% drop in its share price”.

So it lists several points of progress, whilst confirming these led to a 36% share price drop.

In other words, apparent progress in the holding companies doesn’t necessarily lead to a rise in their own values. And it certainly doesn’t automatically lead to a rise in TEK’s price.

In other words, whilst logically you’d think an uplift in one or more holding company’s fortunes would automatically improve the “parent” company’s value, in practice you can’t read much into it currently.

That may change over time. But as the author points out, it didn’t between May & July. And it hasn’t had a big impact yet, even since then.