Member Info for LWHL

Yes. Well spotted.

I am not advocating such a policy, because apart from being potentially difficult to manage/administer, it would also do considerably more harm than good.

I would imagine that software could be used to navigate this difficulty somewhat - but I am strongly in favour of simplifying the tax code and regulation more broadly, not increasing it :)

I simply put that out there as a potential 'compromise' to the initial idea of stopping funds from investing outside of the UK, which would frankly be a disaster.

It is going to be hard enough (impossible) to meet the requirements of the current pension (ponzi) scheme under current conditions.

If access to global indices for funds were to be blocked, then you might as well apply an immediate 25% hair cut to all existing and pipeline UK pensions. And that may be too optimistic a percentage reduction.

My own current various stock 'pots' make up significantly more than 20% of global names that are listed outside of the UK. What would stop a government from extending such a barrier to individual investors? We all know the answer to that!

Anyway, hopefully it will never happen, but with politicians, you can never rule out bad decisions...

DrP: That would be a dreadful obligation! Perhaps you could remove SDLT from UK shares - or better still, significantly reduce some of the excessive red tape that strangles UK commerce.

Which in turn would increase the attractiveness of investing in the UK, and thus significantly increase the probability of UK outfits performing more strongly.

Which would not only benefit shareholders, but the UK economy more generally.

Wishful thinking, I know!

Yes, small revenues, but the key point is the international dimension.

And agree too, I think our recent visitors from across the Pond almost certainly had a positive influence on this (hopefully first of many) international wins.

These welcome updates are certainly taking the edge off the cold autumnal mornings! GLA.

I hope our dumb politicians do not follow suit.

Nothing wrong with short selling whatsoever.

It can serve many positive purposes, from highlighting problems in certain companies, which the mainstream have overlooked/have not seen, to providing market liquidity.

Not to mention generating a lot of revenue for the public purse.

Which the politicians will no doubt squander of course, but the point still stands.

Laws already exist to deal with the type of dodgy activities that some short sellers/boiler rooms use, so rather than banning short selling, they can simply enforce existing laws to this end.

Which I am sure most people would welcome.

If you want to have some fun, and related to your post about brokers, take a look at PARA.

Currently a holder over there, having traded in and out a few times over the past couple of years too.

First pretty good update in ages last week. Heavily shorted stock. By US standards (even by UK index standards), not expensive on fundamentals. Fairly big debt pile, but not particularly out of the ordinary, IMO.

Broker downgrade this morning.

Not investment advice, but I am a fairly comfortable holder (average circa 15 USD at the time of print) and will likely buy a few more if it holds the 50 DMA. Or around 11.50 ish, if it does not. Will consider taking profits if we see a test of the 200 DMA. Undecided on that currently.

IMO, Mobico is a far safer investment than that one (subject to the obvious caveats) - so let the brokers do as they will.

They are wrong more often than they are right typically. I actually read an interesting article providing data to support this view, but I forget which publication it was now. GLA.

Looks like the shorts might need some friendly broker downgrades to help them exit.

This remains a fascinating play, it really does.

They will certainly have done their dd before awarding this further contract - and with each new win, we become a stronger and stronger investment case to the wider community, IMO.

Anyway, not long to find out what the market thinks! GLA.

Quite so, TDF.

And it further increases my confidence in this outfit, too.

But I am sure some will be along shortly with a different opinion....

What a splendid Monday morning update, to start the week off with :)

This is why getting Songwe over the line is so important, IMO.

The last raise was fundamentally about Songwe. We need to see a tangible return on that.

If we are to have another raise (which seems more likely than not I think), then we need the SP to be far higher than it is now, unless the BOD can secure a raise at a big premium (unlikely in this market).

If no further raise is required, irrespective of Songwe, then it largely becomes a moot point.

Although it would still be a credibility hit to the BOD in such a scenario, IMO.

Well, I do not think we saw a surge in the share price today - happy though I am to see a pleasant rise nonetheless.

The volume was only slightly above the average daily and weekly volume, for example.

It could be someone building a position, sure, or it could simply be fewer 'weak hands' as the phrase goes, meaning the price went up. It is not always smoke and mirrors on the stock market.

Anyway, good evening all.

I agree with Xenor. This is not a SP rise that suggests anything really, in either direction.

If we see 20% plus on nothing...that is when the old radar triggers a small signal :)

Even then, this is AIM, so really you probably need to increase that percentage considerably, to think a leak might have happened.

Anyway, IMO, pre-finance news, anything under 18p or so is pretty much within the range of this name right now.

On a technical basis, I would say a break above 16.50p ish (which then holds) will start to get interesting from a TA perspective.

But I am sure there are some proper technicians here, who can offer more refined specifics on this than me. GLA.

One would hope to see some significant inside buying by the CEO and other members of the BOD either today or tomorrow.

Proof of their confidence in the future etc...

I am glad I only retained a tiny position here.

Will look for some further trading opportunities though.

If this update does not see a retest of the year lows, I would be amazed. I guess it also depends on whether the shorts start closing now, or even increase.

Equally interesting will be what MA does now too. GLA.

If we take that article at face value (and no reason not to, it would seem), then this guy should have already been booted out.

Is there not a mechanism to do so before 2025?

If he is typical of their politicians, then that country is indeed an univestable basket case, and we are wasting our time.

And also our money, in the form of IMF hand outs, although we cannot control that, unfortunately.

Well, if we do not get the MDA, it will serve me right for not trusting my knowledge of business in that part of the world.

I wanted to give Malawi the benefit of the doubt, but it rarely pays to do so.

I guess I need to do some thinking. If it was not for the Hypromag stuff, I would definitely be gone by now.

Having finally got a little peace and quiet, and away from distractions (and therefore hopefully less likely to make another brainless post!)....I really am struggling to find evidence in that article to suggest that they are bending.

I appreciate that the politics seems somewhat complicated/conflicted.

IMO, it does not paint a particularly positive impression of the nation, when WC seems to pour scorn on the idea of their Parliament getting to ratify MDA's, among other things.

To be blunt, it is the kind of impression that leads to a lot of Western outfits avoiding Africa like the plague, full stop.

There are so many historically negative commercial examples across that continent, which leads to the 'risk premium' of doing business in Africa that exists today.

Even though no corporate would speak openly of it. And which is such a shame, in many ways.

Perhaps that explains the corporate tax 'demands' that we have allegedly made in this instance. Along with other requests that do not currently exist within Malawi law.

Anyway, perhaps adopting the new laws we allegedly asked for would actually be in the interests of Malawi to do?

Both in terms of giving the impression of a country that is now commercially mature, and also therefore a safe investment for western commerce?

Either way, an update from the BOD really needs to be forthcoming soon IMO. Even if only to correct those allegations, if they have been misunderstood by WC, or to explain them, if he has reported them accurately.

My apologies, flundra. It was I who entirely misunderstood your comment.

Not enough sleep and not enough coffee, clearly :)

Although GLR makes a strong point: we have heard all this before, over and over again and like him, my take on that article differs from yours.

But I am sure we all hope that your more optimistic take proves to be the correct one. GLA.

Nothing undiplomatic about the language whatsover. Unless you are referring to the lack of discretion concerning the negotiation process by said politicians?

But I guess it is possible that some people who do not have experience of doing business in Africa may draw the wrong conclusions on the basis of mistaken impressions.

I had to look up NRCC, so your own comment speaks volumes.

No matter. I will be delighted if you turn out to be right about this. But you are entirely wrong in what you allude to in the first part of your post.

Yeah, politicians gonna be politicians. Although Africa tends to take it to another level.

It is a big continent, but as far as the way business goes, well, a lot of synergies, you could easily conclude.

I think in time some of these countries are going to regret some of their decisions when it comes to who they choose to partner with. Geopolitically speaking in particular.

Naturally, it will be the poor masses who pay the price for the decisions of their politicians. It was ever thus.

Anyway, it continues to remain a waiting game here for now. GLA.

Hard negotiating is fine. Results are all that matters though.

Failure is failure, however you try to dress it up.

So the BOD need to make sure they do not fail.