Member Info for LWHL

I kept a few of those I initially bought pre ev-div, because on fundamentals, it did not feel frothy. And still does not.

But I sold the majority, because on technicals, the balance of probability was to the downside. Which has played out, to a point.

It might end up being one of those where I retain the baby tranches for the medium term, without actually doing much of anything.

Anything less than 275p-ish (short of bad news) would not really make it worth selling, given my current position size.

But if needs be, that is fine and after that CEO purchase, happy to give those ones a decent degree of patience and the BOD, some faith.

I do not see the SP continuing in this range for that long though. Either a solid grind back up to 275-ish perhaps, or that low retest and a possible lower low. Which will make things interesting again :) GLA.

To be honest, it was his stake-building, even more than that 80p raise, which led me to taking an initial position here again.

But the price action is not to be dismissed casually either.

Hence only a small position, and not periodically adding, as I usually do.

Still no disclosed short interest here at the time of print.

Must be one or more II's reducing, or exiting IMO.

Not adding to the small stake while this knife keeps falling. Needs a flush to clear the stale bulls I think. GLA.

Jtan: It's a tricky one, isn't it? I am caught in two minds as to whether this is forming a solid base (which would naturally be a buy signal), or wants/needs to retest the low print.

Hopefully at that point seeing strong buying pressure and confirming a trend reversal. Gut feeling says another flush, but that is pure speculation on my part.

Still sitting on my small position, but keen to add back those I sold for another trade.

Not desperate though, so if I miss out, so be it. Not a lot of support that I can see before circa 214p, if that 224p does not hold on another attempt. An attempt of course, which may not happen. GLA.

Only one of those examples has to pay out of their own pocket...the other one can expense pretty much anything and everything. Threat to capitalism IMO. Eat the corporatists, not the capitalists :)

A satisfactory update IMO. Solid and steady stuff. Nothing that should scare the horses, but also not an update that will justify rocket emojis either :) See what the market thinks. GLA.

I have followed this recent dialogue with interest.

I have my own opinions on the topic in question, but mainly will be interested to see how you go, DSFLAT.

I hope you will share news, as and when applicable, should you decide to proceed.

No change to the disclosed short list today. Hoping we see a little squeeze soon, but first up, let's close above the 200 DMA again tomorrow....GLA.

Agree - but I still think we have a bear flag on the gold chart.

It might not play out of course and regardless, I am relaxed/indifferent to whether or not it does.

Because stagflation is still a real prospect, IMO.

Have a look at the sugar, coffee and coca prices, among others, to this point.

Oil is an exception to this, but I think it tells its own story. I will be buying some oil stocks again if/when the spot price ends up a lot lower than it is today.

Anyway, if I did not already have a boatload of these, I would be nibbling all the way up and down.

But I do, so am only going to add more if we get a savage sell off (that is not company-specific of course). Otherwise it is a hold until a much higher SP, before I consider slicing a few again. GLA.

A break (and hold) above 101.23 (200 DMA) is what we need first.

That will likely attract a bunch of new investors and traders, as well as potentially triggering some short closures.

The combined impact of those moving parts could be enjoyable to watch over a few days :) GLA.

A bit of resistance around the psychological 100p number is to be expected. I stand by my earlier comments about the current trend and TA.

While no certainties in life of course, I would be surprised if we did not break above it this week. Perhaps even later today. Then onto the next bit of resistance circa 105p. GLA.

AOP are not to blame for the destruction of shareholder value here.

The buck stops with the BOD. And the historical lack of inside buying, with one exception, is IMO extremely poor.

But everyone is entitled to their own opinions, naturally. GLA.

Look again. It is a fairly trivial point, but I cannot remember seeing that kind of sentence/paragraph in other fundraise RNS's in other names, so it piqued my interest to a degree.

The key thing to my mind is that AOP are not willing to make another offer (I forget now, but was it 6p last time?) and that, as I said before, they are the python and this company is the mouse/other rodent.

This further update provides more weight to this analogy.

But AIMO of course, and while I would be absolutely amazed to be proven wrong about this, it cannot be entirely ruled out unless/until the greedy lady starts singing.

Hey bankboy. I see I missed your reply to my post back in early November. Apologies for that.

But I presume you have adjusted your downside risk that you mentioned back then from 4p to....what number now?

Poundstopennies: That is because apparently 'no feasible such options were identified' to raise additional capital - apart from the one, main shareholder. Who is not willing to make a bid this time either.

And like I said a while ago...why would they?

I look forward to seeing how much retail interest follows this announcement. Especially given the particular part of the RNS that mentions retail participation versus non-retail participation.

Not sure I can remember seeing content like that before.

Fascinated, in a morbid kind of way, to see how this plays out. GLA.

You might get 1.5p if you are patient (or not, of course), but the retail offer is for 3p.

If the tone of this latest RNS, which I somehow missed on the date it was released, does not tell you all you need to know, well, it likely will sooner or later IMO.

But, hey, I could be wrong. And no doubt someone will be along shortly with some rocket emojis and the like.

A correction will happen at some point, but the stock market does not represent the real world, so who knows?

I thought it would have happened long before now, but luckily I went against this instinct and kept buying various names (including this one) and trimming along the way.

It works until it does not of course, but what is the alternative?

Sit on the sidelines, maybe for years, and then buy in after a correction? You might miss 50%/100% upside in that time. And then at what point do you decide to buy back in?

There are apparently some investors who never got back in after 2008, because they kept waiting for a bottom, then waiting to see if the rises that followed would hold....then felt the market was too frothy...you see my point.

Anyway, I sold some I bought around 30p for around 40p. Hopefully the Santa Rally happens and gives me 45p-ish for another offload. Then I am sitting tight with the remainder to see what happens.

Or repurchasing those ones potentially if we get another pull back.

But that is just me and not a recommendation in either direction. GLA.

Now, now....that article is from August :)

For those who can accept the limits of their capabilities.

Anyway, I wonder if NT has closed his position, assuming 280p was his stop loss.

IMO, a TTG offer of 160p or more will see this print a new year low.

But, just my opinion and no skin in the game now. Merely curiosity. GLA.

My own performance has improved materially when using TA, especially when combined with a few other processes. Versus simple research.

I have also had a lot of pure TA trades without doing much, or even any, research into a few names. Which have yielded significantly better than a 50-50 outcome.

And I am a novice in that stuff. But working to improve as I go. Hence my sometimes mentioning my opinions on TA and requesting the views of others. Because there are some people on these chat boards who know that stuff in a way that I too hope one day to be as confident with.

So we will have to agree to disagree on that point.

What matters, is that we agree that we think the SP here is going to be a good deal higher than today at some point. Which we will hopefully be proved correct on. GLA.