Member Info for lordloadsoflolly

Nobody cares

Sadly I doubt it, as Boris clearly has no intention of implementing such a tax. But there is some momentum towards healthier foods nonetheless. So anything which substitutes sugar without the usual unpleasant backtastes or safety concerns should do well.

kernowlad - I, too, first bought when this was a lot higher. But I also added with the latest cash call. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but we are where we are I guess! I think the positives are that the new team dismissed Creightons' offer out of hand. Since they've also plenty of skin in the game (notably Mark Ward), this implies they're confident of unlocking greater value than Creightons' offer would have. Mark Ward appears a very smart cookie to me, with highly relevant IT experience and a successful track record in creating shareholder value. Coupled with Covid restrictions easing and a renewed in-house focus on cost control, margin improvement & new product development, this looks like a potentially very lucrative (albeit still quite risky) proposition to me at current levels. Barring a black swan event, I plan to hold for at least the next 12 months & seeing whether the new team delivers.

Might be wrong, but I suspect Creightons will wait & see now. If management fails to deliver by June '22, investors would welcome almost any low ball offer. So Creightons could be quids in. But on the flip side, if - as I suspect - new management delivers, investors would likely want to stick with them. Personally, I think Creightons were just trying to scoop something up on the cheap and won't come back unless they can buy even cheaper then.

I don't think you can safely conclude that, when H1 results were unaudited and didn't give a full breakdown. But by all means go ahead if that's what you want. I shan't be responding further, except to add that it sounds like you should be selling up, as you don't appear to have any confidence in past/present management.

shandypants2 - I'd query your conclusions about EBITDA. The RNS clearly states: "Trading EBITDA before accounting changes is expected be broadly in line with consensus forecasts for the year of £(0.9) million......In reversing the (previous) accounting treatment, the marketing costs will now be included in the calculation of the Company's EBITDA and consequently this reduced the Company's EBITDA by circa £0.6 million. As a result, the Company expects to report trading EBITDA for the year ended 30 June 2021 of circa £(1.5) million." So nothing to do with a specific H2 loss. The new management team has made a fairly bold promise - return to profitability for the year ending June 22. If they deliver, fine. If they don't, Creightons will be back anyhow. So also probably fine (compared to the current share price at least).

Certainly brutal! But they've done what most sensible new managements do. Restated the accounts prudently (/over-cautiously?), to give themselves the best possible chance of "turning things round" within the next year or two. I think they deserve some credit for this. Unlike the previous management, whose antics - it could be argued - bordered on the fraudulent, this new team is finally getting to grips. How the previous auditors failed to detect a delay in writing down out-of-date stock, for example, is beyond me & appears negligent. There are some glimmers of hope now though. Margins up significantly. Period end net cash of £2.2M, with a further £0.95M available on an undrawn loan. The Directors believe this will be more than enough to return IDP to profitability, implying no further cash calls (assuming they can be believed of course). I, for one, will keep the faith for now and give the new team the benefit of the doubt. If they fail to deliver, Creightons will be back.

Unfortunately it won't be that. They've already made clear at AGM that H1 will be broadly in line with LY on a constant currency basis. So if anything, H1 profit likely to be down once currency headwinds are factored in.

ODONNELL - who's the "we" you keep going on about?

Initially yes. Shame it's lost over half its gains so far today though. But it's a volatile share ATM, so no big deal I guess.

So I guess the only question then is "how far does anyone trust Tim McCarthy"?

Thanks jpgould. This (second) delay is clearly down to the FCA alone, whose competence is debatable! Private Eye readers will know exactly what I mean. Trouble is, it's likely to impact directly on small PIs the longer it drags on beyond the previously indicated time.

Alas_Smith - I'm interested in your comment that ATT is "the techie equivalent to SMT". My understanding is that SMT has a heavy tech bias in itself (though possibly less than ATT's). Trustnet shows SMT's benchmark index as IT Global, whilst ATT's is IT Technology & Media. SMT also has a better short & long term performance. much lower charges & - unlike ATT - it even pays a small dividend. I get you need to hold a diverse portfolio, but can't really see why you'd buy both these funds. Especially as they each have heavy US exposure (ATT in particular), so aren't even geographically diverse. You may not be suggesting anyone buys both. Just that ATT is a potential alternative to SMT. Anyhow, I'd be interested in your view. PS: I only hold SMT, so am not professing to be an expert in ATT!

You're kidding me, right? That interview's not going to persuade ANYONE to invest! Still, today's unrelated uptick is overdue & welcome.

You may be right about whether it was paid for. But as Kalkine Media's not a charity, why would they bother otherwise? Unless it's to get more site traffic, through which they could possibly monetise their ads. I'm doubtful though. And I certainly don't think it was done as a favour. Surely SOH would have better contacts than this to ask favours!

Further to my 4 June post, the FCA needs to get a move on if (as HAT suggested) we're going to hear their outcome by 30 June. What's the betting it'll be pushed back yet again?! Hope not, as it's creating uncertainty & damaging investor sentiment the longer this drags on.

I'm an Opti holder & remain cautiously optimistic about their future. But I never take these sort of paid for interviews very seriously. And I have to say, this particular one with Kalkine Media seems particularly amateurish & shallow in terms of the questions & the interviewer's subject knowledge. I find it odd that SOH would even associate himself with such an outfit. IMHO, it's more likely to damage than enhance investor sentiment. Nothing to do with the interviewer's ethnicity by the way. Just the shallow, staged questions asked.

robleo - I didn't say "don't put any money into dividend shares or Lloyds". I simply cautioned over-reliance on dividend payers. Below is my investment mantra since you asked. But everyone's risk appetite & time horizons will be different, so it's not intended as a recommendation. 1) If you decide to self-select individual shares, I'd be wary of holding more than 3%-4% in any one company. That way, you can better spread risk across different commercial sectors, geographic territories & management teams. 25% invested in a single share to me rings loud alarm bells. Even with an ultra high conviction share, I'd be wary of exceeding 10%, as your hunch might still be wrong. 2) Balance out the risk from individual company holdings by investing in a diversified range of funds as well. Generally I much prefer investment trusts to OEICS, as they can sometimes have lower charges and you know exactly what price you'll buy & sell at. I've always regarded forward pricing on OIECS as archaic and it introduces further risk, as you never know quite what price you're dealing with. Charges can have a huge corrosive impact over time. So all other things being equal, it's well worth choosing the lowest fees you can find, providing past performance has also been good. 3) Use Trustnet or similar to research fund performance over time. Look at 1, 3, 5 & 10 year charts and ALWAYS value consistency of performance well above occasional erratic periods of stellar out-performance. 4) Having selected your funds, watch out for any management changes and monitor performance closely after any transition period. Don't give a new manager the benefit of the doubt for too long (I'd say after 12-18 months max, you should have a fair idea whether they're up to the previous team). If not, bank your profit/cut your losses as applicable and move on. 5) Monitor the premium/discount on any IT you're interested in, setting limit orders at an historically low level of premium / high level of discount. (Some ITs will almost always trade at a discount, others at a premium, so it's when they err from the norm that it can be a good time to top up). I did this with SMT back in Feb & March 2021, when the discount rose to an unusually high level. This enabled me to top up at just below £11 and again a bit below £10, which for the moment looks like decent timing. Though that could always change! 6) Don't chop & change investments too frequently. It's always hard to get the timing spot on and excessive commission charges will eat into profits. There, in a nutshell, is what I'd do.

Alas_Smith - I'm inclined to agree. You can't lump all ITs together to draw any meaningful conclusions. Robleo - I'd caution too much reliance on dividend payers. Some dividends may look high, only because the share price gets ahead of itself. That may not mean the dividend always stays high. The share price could equally come back down to earth, followed by an almost inevitable dividend cut. Lloyds isn't a company I'd want to put a quarter of my retirement pot into. Its long term historical share price suggests why. But I appreciate 2008 in particular had a pretty devastating impact on it from which it has yet to recover.

Historically, I'd say any time SMT trades at a significant discount is a decent buy signal. I topped up in Feb & March 2021 - the first time below £11, the second time below £10 - (probably just as you were bailing out!). The discount then was around 10% or more, which seemed a huge market over-reaction. There are likely to be similar future opportunities, when markets fret over inflation and people start talking about a rotation from growth to value shares. That's when I'd pounce. But if you're "looking for gains in months not years" and can't afford a short-term (or possibly even a long-term) real/paper loss, you shouldn't be in shares at all. Easy access / 1 year fixed savings in that case. Even though you'll lose money in real terms, your capital will be secure and will rise VERY slightly over time (before taking inflation into account).