Member Info for lordloadsoflolly

Wildbunch - if you really hold that many shares, rather than encouraging others to mount a boardroom coup, shouldn’t you be doing it?

I really can’t imagine you need ANY more time/evidence to gauge the current Chairman’s “abilities”.

The RNS doesn’t make it clear (to me at least!) whether the total marketing budget is £1.5m+, of which Opti is a contributor. Or whether Opti’s own share of it is £1.5m+.

If the latter, it seems risky given:

a) the 4-5 year sales ramp up period

b) the negligible sales created from other partnerships we were originally told would be “game-changing”

c) the absence of any information on likely margins

Still, better than having no new initiatives I guess.

Rumour has it anyone who buys or sells on the advice of TW needs their head examining.

VERY odd that latest TR1.

Drew Nelson was required to repurchase 12,821,358 IQE shares @ 43.96 pence per share by 5 August 2024, under the terms of his sale and repurchase agreement with EFH.

So why would he then go & increase his holding on 21 November from 3.388% to 4.015%?

Does he know something we don't?

Or is he just a glutton for punishment? He never did seem any good on the commercial side.....

Stevehuges - at a guess, that's just several investors each buying around £10K worth (47132 x 21.2p = £9992).

Add on the commission & you get to around £10K. A lot of people trade in round numbers.

H&T's already one of my main holdings, otherwise I'd be tempted.

My last top up was after last January's TU when my limit buy order was triggered at 319p. So at least that's still in the money.

I actually think H&T is a share to trade periodically, as it has quite strong down & uptrends. My hope is that January 2025's TU won't repeat last year's "retail nasty" and will lead to an upwards re-rate, but we'll see. Nothing's guaranteed - particularly right now.

Glad you agree. My point is, brokers simply blow with the wind.

They were valuing IQE at 45p. Then, when things change, they simply change their valuation too. More than halving it overnight to 20p. What possible use can that be to anyone?

Gotrader - I've lost count how many times I've told you - & others - that broker reports are a TOTAL waste of time.

Revaluing overnight from 45p to 20p proves they didn't know what they were talking about then. And still don't now.

Err. No it's not - as of 15.39 hrs.

Facester - I think you’ll find PIs have already been well & truly shafted by umpteen false promises, unrealistic forecasts & incompetent management.

Skippysb01 - I totally agree with your interpretation.

Hex has said it is FULLY FUNDED for the drilling and testing of Darwin #1 at Rudyard, being run in parallel with extended well testing at Clink #1 at Ingomar Dome.

That DOESN'T necessarily mean EWT has actually started at Clink #1 yet.

It just means Hex will be able to afford an EWT there whilst drilling & testing Darwn #1, without having to tap up shareholders/lenders for extra funds.

I'd expect the end of Microsalt's lock in period to herald a fall in its share price. Not a rise.

Investors will know there's a potential chunky seller waiting in the wings - hardly likely to increase investor appetite in SALT shares.

Purves - I disagree with that assessment, as I think it only looks at one side of the equation.

As I said in my last post, over time buybacks tend to narrow the discount to NAV. This in turn increases investor confidence which is likely to boost the fund price. Whilst there are plenty of other factors at work, you only have to look at trends over the past year or so, since SMT increased its buyback programme, to see this.

And as you also pointed out, the managers aren’t obliged to resell shares held in treasury. They could just cancel them.

Purves - surely buybacks are usually GOOD for a share price. At least in the long term.

In SMT’s case, they‘ve certainly helped narrow the discount to NAV this year which in turn has probably restored a bit of investor confidence.

Baron - I agree.

Anyone in the least bit swayed by research notes deserves all they get frankly.

Most are client-funded anyway, so are inherently biased.

I hold Hex, but not because of any broker recommendation/valuation. And as we’ve already seen, the only thing that’ll really move the share price (up or down) is if/when commercial reserves are established or discounted. The rest is just noise, causing the price to bob up & down just a few pence either way.

Morri940 - I think we already know the answer.

404x - I don't think it's as clearcut as that.

Anderson will likely have timed his departure to coincide with when he foresaw things getting much tougher. As it turns out, he should have moved on about 6 months earlier, when SMT's price neared its all time peak.

Slater was mentored by Anderson for some time prior to this, so it's likely he'll be of a similar mindset (albeit his own man - & quite possibly less talented).

At least part of the reason for SMT's underperformance post-Anderson is down to the Covid froth coming off sectors where the fund is heavily concentrated. Plus rapid inflation & interest rate rises which hit speculative growth funds particularly hard. Especially those with a high proportion of unquoted holdings. Sure it has underperformed versus the S&P in recent years. But it remains ahead on a longer term view. Anyone's guess which will win out over the next 5 years.

404x - opinions about fund managers are, by their nature, always highly subjective.

Having almost trebled the value of my investment here, I’m quite relaxed about the fund managers (despite Anderson’s departure). But if you’re not, I’d advise you either don’t invest in the first place or sell & move on.

DorsetLSE - judging by your posts, you’ve always been a reluctant SMT holder (at least in recent years).

So if I were you, I’d switch into a tracker if that means you’ll sleep easier.

Your final remark is telling: “I might just sell and put the proceeds in an S&P500 tracker and get a better return”. I’m sure, with all your investment experience, you’re aware an S&P tracker doesn’t guarantee you a better return. Less risk maybe, but that’s about all.

Andypaps - whilst you may be right, I think it’s more likely your imagination’s run riot.

There could just be a totally prosaic explanation - i.e. Hex plans to attend a routine trade exhibition which might - or might not - have some major future commercial relevance.

Your forensic analysis of upper v. lower case letters in the different links is IMHO a total red herring - albeit intriguing. And entertaining!