Member Info for LWHL

Can you provide some thoughts after the call? I am a bit tied up to dial in myself and as always, would welcome the views of others.

Hopefully it will be available to listen to later.

I think now would be a good time for the CEO to put his hand in his pocket, with the window open to do so.

But it has not retested the lows so far, so that is one positive. And as another poster said, if MA or one of the other insiders adds to their position in the coming days, that should provide a degree of support for the SP as well.

On the fence currently, but watching with interest for another potential trade. Not seeing any clear indications from a TA perspective at the time of print, but that does not mean anything with a rookie TA dabbler like me :) GLA.

I did not think my post was particularly negative. I thought I made some sound points.

I mean, there are plenty of examples of potential red flags, and I remain puzzled at the radio silence over those false prescription number projections (as cited in the RNS of 21st Feb 2024, during the tenure of the last CEO).

Something that would have, in all probability, led to some investors putting more cash into their investment here after essentially being misled.

It seems to have been treated as something quite trivial, which I still find extraordinary.

But to each their own views and research. GLA.

That was exactly my thoughts and what I referred to the other day when I said risk of 'contagion'.

It is bad enough if confined 'just' to this particular space, but I cannot see how it would not be a risk to a whole range of other sectors at the same time.

Entirely avoidable and entirely unjust, I really do think so. GLA.

From one of your posts here, you said this can '10X etc' - although you also stated what the potential downside risk might be too, so I am not accusing you of anything either.

However - imagine you are the CEO or CFO here. Taking into account their respective salaries.

Would you not put a chunk of the salary, heck, more than a chunk of it, into buying company shares, with that risk/reward proposition?

Even 'just' a double. That would comfortably beat a government bond, or high interest bank account.

Nothing speaks louder than significant inside buying. Especially with an AIM stock, IMO.

As my posting history shows, ex-LTH. And yours suggests you are perhaps a holder since August of this year?

Are we going to do the 'de-ramper/FUD/looking to get in cheaper/bitter ex-holder' etc dance, or was your comment going to lead to something different?

Indeed, but WB has been selling down for a while now; has the biggest cash pile on record for BH, so I am not convinced your quote is suitable for this name at this point in time. Or probably any names right now.

Price action in this sector does not currently suggest panic, but this wretched cloud needs clearing, sooner rather than later. IMO, it cannot wait until mid 2025.

This is a very good example of where excessive state interference causes unnecessary value destruction. Hopefully nothing like contagion.

Broker notes are far less reliable than charts. You only need to examine a general cross-section of them - US, UK, European, pick wherever you want - to see that they barely hit a 50% accuracy rate.

Charts, especially certain patterns, offer a material improvement on that. But not 100% obviously, otherwise everyone would make profits all the time on every single trade :)

For example: take the current gold chart. Odds suggest a pull back right now. Based on the current channel it is in.

Silver is right on a support line. It is either going to break to the upside, or perhaps a retest of 29/30 USD, or so.

Not an exact science, but as I slowly improve my TA, there is a clear correlation with my own percentage win rate, I have found.

It begs the question, if the BOD (and the CEO and CFO in particular) are so confident that the most recent placing will be the last one, why they have not chosen to load up at these prices?

In their shoes, would you not do so, assuming you take what they say at face value?

I know I would, if I saw the kind of returns that some seem to think will happen.

Especially as they are not exactly taking peppercorn salaries...

To any new, or potential investors here, considering whether to take a position, just look carefully over the history of RNS's, as well as the investor presentations. Going back at least a few years. Preferably right back to the start.

I really do not think a lot of people do this basic research, but, especially on AIM, it cannot be advised strongly enough.

But always your money, your choice. Own your decisions, for good or for bad.

None of which means it cannot be traded of course, and hey, maybe this time will be different? Then, in spite of anything else, who knows?

What is a 'fair cap'? Sounds like a recipe for more difficulties down the line if they take that route.

And yet more state interference in what should be something decided by the market, not the central planners.

And the percentage would never be alterable after that point either, further stifling innovative enterprise, IMO.

Ah! TA purists would smite you for such sacrilege! :)

Which was in line with my read on the charts, and which I suggested I thought might happen, a month or so ago. I think it was.

Anyway, it has actually dropped below the level of support that I thought might be quite strong. So I am still sitting on the fence, for now.

Not sure if the market simply does not trust that the company has had its final raise before cash-flow positive and profitability, or - because this is AIM - fearful that a rug pull might happen just around the point where LTH's are about to be rewarded for their faith, their financial support through the various raises, and the risk they took on in supporting the company during the perilous journey these years past.

Perhaps a little projection on my part, but IMO these are thoughts that might hold some weight for some.

Anyway, will post again if I take the plunge for a speculative punt, but if that day does not come and this is the bottom and plain sailing from here, then GLA and I hope you get your just rewards for what you have done to help get this company to where it is today.

That would be a dream scenario IMO. Fingers and toes very much crossed for that outcome! GLA.

In no circumstances must the taxpayer be called upon to pick up some, let alone, all of the potential tab.

That obviously includes the BoE.

Parliament, if needed, should pass emergency legislation that abrogates this ruling, including retrospective application thereof.

Which should then render any appeals to the SC as unnecessary at a stroke, and put the lid firmly and irrevocably back on this stupid can of worms. AIMO.

No worries. Having a free and frank exchange of ideas and opinions is healthy. And the freedom to do so must be defended at all costs, across the political spectrum. Censorship ensures failure. GLA.

I care about the environment too. The global population has basically doubled in my lifetime. Which shows that I am not old. Which brings wildlife extinctions and rising numbers of critically endangered species every year.

The overwhelming, exponential population growth, has been happening outside of Europe. And the growth now within Europe is also largely from the same demographic cohort.

The reasons for this are fairly obvious and do not need exploring.

That is not bigotry. That is simple fact. And that is also something embraced by genuine neoliberals. Because it helps to drive down wages, sow division and destroy community cohesion. Destroy the middle class. Divide and rule.

You and your fellow so-called left-leaners should give your heads a wobble and just think about this for a moment.

You are the useful idiots for the globalists that you hate, unwittingly helping them in their cause, some might conclude.

Ah well. It has been enjoyable shooting the breeze, even if I doubt you will take a step back and consider some of these concepts/ideas.

I think we have both de-railed this thread enough now. GLA and I hope you prosper with your holding here.

I agree with your final sentence.

As to much of the rest of it: naive at best.

Especially the quaint notion of wealth being distributed more equally among society in the past. Perhaps for about 0.2% of the history of humanity.

But I presume you mean 1945 - 1979? I refer you to some of my earlier comments, which pretty much dispels this too.

I did not mention the pensions ponzi scheme though, so that is a new aspect that adds to the rebuttal. And can be added to the taking out a loan to be paid by future generations comment I made.

Lol at your comment mentioning only two of the world's 2700-odd billionaires. Quite a few of those are from the third world, where their own people are indeed starving in the millions.

Perhaps you should list a few of those ones? Actually, it's probably best that you do not. Outside of the West, you might not find the same degree of indulgence.

We do not need more social housing stock. We need to deport all of the illegals and do as the ME nations do: bring in only those who bring what we need to the table. And then leave, when it is to the good of our country.

The Geneva Convention is also due for a few tweaks. Written with the best of intentions, but for a totally different time and place.

It would not have been penned in the first place, had the 'founders' seen what has happened since. You could say that for a number of policies and laws I guess, but we are where we are and ultimately, history is written by the winners, so we will just have to see how this all plays out.

Just seen your further comment re NF. I thought you were referring to the current PM at first.

And he might yet make personal tax payers pay to see the doctor. Give him time :)

Good trolling by the way.

Recessions are perfectly natural and actually healthy. MMT (or as you might know it - money printing - but without the equal rise in productivity to balance this) is essentially not so much as spending the kid's inheritance, as taking out loans in their name and leaving them (and their grandchildren) with the bill.

Arms dealing: who has not done this, after Maggie? Would you rather we simply left it to all the other major nation states to take what remains of our small market share in that space?

Same for your comment re Murdoch, insofar as the politicians who have followed her to date.

Boom and bust: As per my opening sentence.

Asset stripping: I actually agree with you on this point. The selling off of council stock (continued until very recently of course) was a mistake IMO.

But, apart from being a shrewd political move at the time, it was also done on the basis of giving working class people the chance to own their own home.

One of the reasons why a lot of Tories at the time disliked her. Because she was not a Tory in the traditional sense. Not 'one of them'.

Likewise some of the other decisions at the time, like when closing the coal mines, not making significant efforts to help the men in those communities to retrain for new careers, or at least put some investment into those areas to stop them ending up as they did.

Selling off various utilities was a disaster, although seeing how utterly inefficient the public sector was (and still very much is, in the main), I guess it was logical to think that the private sector would do a better job than the public sector.

A few other criticisms that you could have also raised, but even allowing for these as well, she is still the last PM the UK has had who was a winner.

The Tories really ought to just formally merge with the Lib Dems. There is absolutely nothing of real note that separates those parties anymore that I can see, nor has there been for quite a few years now. The trans issue perhaps being the one exception.

Saw an interview with Kemi the other day. Her answer to one of the questions concerning immigration and illegal immigration was reasonably honest I thought.

Makes them impossible to vote for, for anyone who does not want more of the same on that particular front. They have been worthless since Maggie, IMO.

Then again, most of the voting public slavishly supports the red or blue gang, in a manner that would be understandable in relation to one's football team.

So I am sure they will still get a few million votes in the next one, no matter what.

Same for the current government, although with an ever increasing number of people choosing to join the useless classes (domestic and newly arrived) then at least there is some logic to the appetite of those ones for quasi communism.

Just wait until the CBDC Brit Coin gets launched.

Some think it may spell disaster for the banks, like this name and others, but I am not so sure about that.

Disaster for everyone else though, if enough people tolerate it. And a more structured Social Credit System than we currently have. But, hey. I could be wrong. I certainly hope so. GLA.

Hopefully that will be up to a major to 'negotiate' with the politicians on. Not us. Sell it, please BOD! :)