Member Info for LWHL

I missed that level, but in profit on the aggregate now.

Need to see if the US dumps later, or holds, but so far, so good :) GLA.

I think that this is a far superior business to Wilko. No retailer is immune to risk, and I was not a buyer until today (albeit I was in the past and took profits). Been monitoring it for a while though in the interim, so not just a blind plunge.

They do have some work to do and need a strong CEO, which hopefully they will get on board soon. And either way, this will not become one of my bigger p/f holdings.

But for anyone who wants to have some investment in a retailer, then IMO, this one has a greater chance of surviving and thriving again, than many of the other options. For some of the reasons I cited earlier. We shall see! GLA.

It probably will take some time and equally, I would like to see the next CEO work on bringing down the debt levels as well as improve the wider financials.

Not saying this is a no brainer/rocket emojis etc, lol, just that I personally like the R/R at these levels.

I added a few more and have plenty of dry powder left to deploy some more at lower levels, should it get there (and FWIW, I do not think we have found the bottom yet, for the sake of balance). GLA.

And these things do indeed often come in threes. But not always.

Nevertheless, the current financials do not give me cause for concern.

They have, IMO, a strong business model which weathered the storm of Brexit, the Covid lock downs and again, IMO, will weather the next downturn as well.

I think they will find solutions to whatever future issues might arise geo-politically, in terms of supply chains etc.

Their target market will indeed, I believe, expand. Basically, because more people are going to have to downgrade their shopping habits/needs, to this type of retailer from 'higher end' options.

But as I said either, only my thoughts and time will tell. GLA.

Normalised P/E of 7.8 at the time of print.

It could well be that the CEO had made his intentions clear discreetly a while back, allowing them to start the process of replacement in an orderly fashion. Or he got wind that they had started the search for a replacement, and so jumped before he was pushed. We will never know, but it is fun to speculate.

Meanwhile, we have seen a flurry of TR-1's over the past month or so. Mostly funds that were increasing their stake.

It will be interesting to see if we get further holdings updates in the next few days.

Either way, as you say, we cannot control the marcos.

Say the economic realities become too obvious to ignore. Which sooner or later, they obviously will.

If you believe, as I do, that this type of outfit will weather the storm (as I said back in November, as a non-holder at the time), then IMO this is a good price from a risk/reward perspective.

Could we revisit five year lows? Absolutely. Even 220's. Both of which are target add prices for me personally, if they hit. Subject to the obvious caveats, naturally.

In the shorter term, I think the new range will probably see a top of 300p or so. Bottom being perhaps 265p - if that was indeed a reliable double bottom. Just my thoughts & GLA.

Nice to be back in this one, with a few familiar usernames. GLA.

Beats me. I thought this would be 2p long before now. Perhaps enough shareholders thought an offer would come in, and so that kept the price in the current range that it has held for a while now.

Might even be a rise today, who knows? Barge-pole territory IMO, but I might be wrong. The stock market often moves in mysterious ways. GLA.

Kenj: No. I probably would not. And raiding the pension pot in itself offers no guarantees of being made whole in future either.

But my comment was based on pragmatism and how I would probably approach the issue with the trustees, if I was in the hot seat. And I think the argument stands, insofar as the trustees meeting their own legal obligations, on behalf of their members. It sucks, but it is what it is. And none of which might happen anyway of course.

The amount Kepler suggests (although I have not looked at their comments personally, so am taking it from posters here who have said so) would be too much IMO not to be highly painful to current shareholders.

I was pondering whether 50-60m might represent that sweet spot that I alluded to previously. More of a stop gap, but hopefully enough to get through the Deloitte review and some additional breathing space?

As to the other poster's comment about access to the pension scheme surplus....while not ideal, if the company goes pop, then the PPF steps in, and the amount received is materially lower. So one would imagine the scheme's trustees would likely not have an issue with them doing so.

I have been pondering this scenario myself, but so far have been unable to come up with a figure that would be sufficient to provide the kind of buffer that would give the group enough short term stability, a decent amount of time to fix things properly, and without being highly damaging to current shareholders. This is a tough credit environment.

In some ways, it would be better than continuing to sell good assets, for the health of the longer term business, but that is easy to say from the outside looking in.

What kind of number does anyone think might hit a sweet spot in this scenario?

I am inclined to agree with James that the institutions that wanted out have probably done so by now. So the selling pressures should have abated.

We also need to see how the general markets behave next week. VIX up 16% on Friday, and IMO that chart looks like it could have more in the tank. Strong USD for now, too.

Could all be a moot point if you see an RNS on Monday with an offer, or some other positive news. GLA.

I agree with the sentiment of not blaming the individuals, YorkshireBlues.

That is why we are likely seeing the start of a genuine shift in the Overton Window across many western nations. Things simply cannot continue like this indefinitely. I recommend Jared Diamond, if you are unfamiliar with his book Collapse (I think it was called). Also the Sovereign Individual, by William R-M. You would think the latter had been written in the past couple of years, but it was more than 20 years ago now!

And that is fair enough, CC, although I would say that that well-known legal disclaimer is generally used when managing investor expectations, particularly in relation to outfits that have historically delivered shareholder value.

To date, this one never has. In any of its names. 80M being only the most recent one.

You certainly have been very patient and for the likes of you, I hope it is rewarded at some point.

Brexit was a symptom. It was not the cause of most of the chief issues we now face.

That said, I think the boat people problem, which Merkel was fundamentally responsible for in 2015 (I think?) was IMO a big part of the reason why so many voted to leave. It was not skilled immigration from Germany, Poland or France that was ever deemed undesirable.

Furthermore, Germany is now in a really nasty recession, along with most of the other European nations. I presume you do not blame Brexit for this? Or caused the same issues that we have, in terms of increased terrorism, significant rises in assaults and other crimes?

You are correct though that it is indeed the system that is the problem. Along with a number of current international laws that were written in a different era and that are no longer fit for purpose.

If you were able to show Henry Dunant and other leader contributors what the future would hold, then I do wonder what they might have changed. Or indeed the politicians that signed their countries up to such laws that have contributed to some of the problems that we face today.

Maybe we simply cannot escape the fate of The Fourth Turning. And what will be will be?

Anyway, nice to have a frank exchange of ideas. GLA.

Unfair to compare this name to STX IMO.

Not least because, with one solitary exception until very recently, none of the BOD in that one participated in any of the numerous, highly dilutive raises over years. And the recent inside STX buy was buttons anyway, lol. And they have essentially sold off a large percentage of the family silver (future earnings) to one of their main shareholders, as part of the terms of one of the loans they took from them.

My views on that one in more detail can be found on that chat board, if you have nothing more entertaining to do :)

Back to GENI: Positive news will indeed no doubt see some flippers, but not necessarily so much that this name cannot revisit double figures again. Longer term, no idea, but that is my chief focus at this point. And as I said previously, this is a small punt for me, so certainly not going to try and advocate others jump on board.

Others obviously feel this has considerably more potential than that, and they could be right as well.

We will likely know one way or the other before 2025 is out. GLA.

CC: After all these years and all the fund raises...how much money has been generated from any of the assets to date?

I see a best case scenario where one or two of the assets do end up with some demonstrable value. But I do not see ordinary shareholders getting much, if any, reward for their support and capital risk during this journey.

The worst case scenario of course is that they all have zero value.

Obviously some feel differently (including PMI) and for this reason primarily, I hope to be wrong.

IMO, the odds are far more in favour of the downside, but sooner or later, they will reach a point where they can no longer raise. So we will all find out, one way or the other, within a couple more years at the most, I would have thought. GLA.

Sloppy RNS. Look at the last sentence - 'at a price of 10 pence per ordinary share'.

I dislike typos on formal documents :)

Anyway, I saw this one on the risers board the other day. IMO, it looks a bit expensive on fundamentals, but the chart looks interesting to my eye at the same time.

And I can see why it rallied on that previous RNS. Some relief perhaps with fears somewhat abated.

Will do some research over the weekend and may join you for a small trade, or potentially an investment. GLA.

This one is making fools of us and our TA right now, mate :)

See what happens next week. Have a good weekend all.

I would also add to F-F's post that because we did not revisit, or break below, the year low the past three days, even though it looked like it was trying hard to, lol, means this is quite a bullish signal.

Obviously, this is short term signal stuff and could change by close of business, or next week. Probably not without something company-specific happening, or an unexpected indices-wide sell off etc, so low probability IMO. But not impossible.

The chart is starting to look a bit better now IMO, but for me, 87p feels like quite an important number to break above and hold in the short term. Just my thoughts & GLA.

Well, I do not know whether the ratios matter much when it comes to platinum, as many seem to think it does the gold silver ratio (which I am on the fence with anyway, personally), but I think that the platinum chart looks like it is going to break to the upside at some point. Which was the primary reason for my joining this name recently.

All of which, time will tell. GLA.