Member Info for Marcus_

Clearly the market likes the announcement

I'd never go all in on a share.

There are too many variables and too many opportunities out there to focus on just one.

You never know what will be your big earners, I would never have thought I'd get a 25% capital growth on a share like shell in a matter of months.

Similarly with a share like bt.

On the other hand I've taken stinking losses on pfc but having that balance allows me to relax a little and sell when the time is right.

I was tempted to cut my losses the other day but stupidity kicked in and I decided to hold.

I think this will rebound but it's going to take a while to shake off the stink around this.

Disappointing but that is the gamble when buying shares in a company under investigation.

Already within 7p of the offer after all the day traders have jumped ship.

Just wish I had bought more.

Depends on how you buy your insurance. If you get it yearly. Most people will have renewed as they would expect to travel within 12 months

Not really concerned with whether this will be 40 or 45p before the new year. Now the deal is done it removes huge uncertainty and hopefully after many years of chaos we can start to enter a period of stability to allow the company to grow.

I held off buying until today, not because of Lloyds but because you can't rely upon politicians for your share picks.
With Brexit done this will become what it was an old reliable dividend generating stock, so yes I've missed out on the rise from 33p to 39p, but you don't buy for tomorrow you buy for 5 to 10 years time.

So don't get caught up in the big jump today, look for the growth potential and income in the next few years.

Hi Warthog,

I've read the same article and it does say that no charges have been brought against the company or any employee.
It would be a challenge to speculate on what it would do to the SP if the SFO went away.

We all assume it would increase the SP but by how much is a guessing game as you have to know how much business has been lost or deterred due to the investigation. This is a huge unknown and since SFO we have also had falls in the Price of Oil and COIVD, so what percentage drop in inbound work is due to SFO is pure guess work.

Indeed the SFO could linger for many years (and has) with work on hand going up and down.

I thought it was a fair reflection and seems that the market had already priced in most of the drop in revenue. SFO can't create demand for their services they can only attempt to secure work from that market.

At the moment it is purely about survival and hoping that when you come out the other side there are new contracts to be won.

PFC are doing their part as a well run business to shrink to match demand, but basically we need that demand to grow by either a growth in oil service demand or by diversifying further into other services and other energy markets.

From my view PFC is working as hard as it can, it does not feel like management are just sitting on their hands.

Hi Asperger,

I'm hedged more towards no deal.
I've been selling into the recent rises but it is a gamble as no one truely knows.

I would never have thought that a few fish would be the issue but the need for the UK to follow EU rules is a huge hurdle for any independence minded MP's to swallow.

I'm inclined to think no deal and then once we are on WTO terms a slow lowering of tariffs over the coming years, but it is purely speculation.

Sub 20p?

I don't think it went that low even during the wild days of the pandemic and that was when the Dividend had been cancelled.

This as 60-70p pre pandemic and is now trading in half that range, I'm expecting a dip on no deal but we have to be realistic about the impacts.

Most UK GDP is generated inside the UK's own internal market 70-75%.
Exports make up 25-30% of UK GDP, with trade to the EU making up about 45% of that 30%.
So trade with the EU is about 13% of GDP, we are not looking at a loss of that trade but a tariff on that trade which will suppress some not all demand.

I can see that panic will hit the Lloyds SP but the underlying value of the business is not going to be impacted another 50%, so at anything below 30p I would read that as an over reaction by the market and an opportunity to buy.

Sub 20p just seems like crazy prices.

This is why cash is king.

Not sure the drop today will be the last, but will be back in Lloyds when the dust has settled.

Ha...

I'm so completely happy with my shares here, I had not bothered to check the chat boards so was totally unaware that an offer was on the table.

130p. Ha

Nice try, why would I take that when the potential here is so much greater, I'm up over 100% on this stock it is literally my best pick of the summer.

Hi Cornish,

Looking across my stocks the common theme is Brexit and the lack of a deal.

Well it's been a few great weeks so far and I do find that the rate that I post on this chat is inversely proportional to how well my stock picks are doing.

BT is going great guns at the moment but I know I can't day trade for toffee, so it's just a matter of sitting and waiting for the dividends to restart as unless there is a huge shift in the telecoms market, I can't see me ever selling these BT shares unless they hit something stupid like £5 in 2 years.

Well it has been an interesting few months since the jump in short positions declared in September. For once the share price has slowly been walked up since that point.

Unusual for shorters to get this so wrong, but happy to be back in the black.
To me this is a safe space against any Brexit impacts on the £v$ so can see why the share is increasing as a way of hedging against that risk along with all other oil shares.

Lifestyle is key.

How many times do people travel 1600 miles a day?

On average most people probably travel maybe 30 miles a day, (when I say average that is average not a personal experience).

I'm sure some people will travel 100's of miles each and every day but they will be few and far between compared to most o the population. But people do not buy cars for the day to day, they think about what if I need to go see family 100's of miles away that 1 time each year.

But again for most people anything with a range of 200-400 miles will cover off any one time trips. What I am not certain about is the longevity of batteries. They still require raw materials to make and that still means digging stuff up. But for my lifetime I will be ok. But whether battery operated cars will last the next 100 years is another question.

As has been said it is only a ban on the sale of new cars so the whole infrastructure does not need to be in place by 2030.

Indeed if you look at the battery development that has taken place in the last 10 years, then there is no reason why it cannot go further in the next 10 years.

Tesla has said that its new Roadster, planned for the 2021 model year, will be able to run for as much as 620 miles on a single charge. It is not inconceivable that that technology will get refined made smaller and cheap in mass production environments in the next 10 years.

How many people drive 600 miles a day? Not many.
Most just go from home to work and back again. So a range of 300 miles would be more than enough for most users.

So there question is how much infrastructure will be required? The main issue is going to be for houses that have no off road parking. But then again those cars will need to be parked when at work either at a work site or a paid car park.

So it maybe a case for those who cannot charge at home, that it will be incorporated into parking fees in multi-stories. Sure some will add it as a surcharge but as car parks start to compete it will drive those prices down.

But there will still be petrol used in other parts of the world, so for PFC the 2030 deadline is not a big deal. But it is a signal that a diverse portfolio of clients will be needed for long-term growth.

I think energy wise digging stuff up and burning it was always going to have a finite shelf life.
However, I expect that oil production will continue at much lower levels for many decades as plastics are very difficult to substitute.

But for PFC a switch to a more general engineering and infrastructure role will provide a future long beyond any peaks of troughs in oil.

I get what you are driving at that oil will still have a demand, but you have picked a very old article and the dates around power generation are rather old.

This gives a more recent update but is still 2 years old

https://www.eia.gov/state/analysis.php?sid=CA

The California renewable portfolio standard (RPS), implemented in 2002 and revised several times since then, requires that 33% of retail sales of electricity in California come from eligible renewable resources by 2020, 60% by 2030, and 100% by 2045.80

In 2018, an estimated 34% of the state's electricity retail sales were generated from renewables.

Good luck Nige and Aus,

I think you will see your averages sooner or later.

For once I'm fairly smug on a share at 107p, but that was purely a case of luck rather than judgement. But it makes a nice change that for the first time in 4 years I can relax on a share.

It's good to have that visability that the business is pushing back on the restrictions to government. Whilst it is a government decision it builds confidence as an investor to know the company are fighting for a reasonable approach by government.

When it was radio silence that is where doubt and rumors' start to swirl, plus a general dissatisfaction with any perceived lack of effort.

As for the vaccine programme, for once this moves in SAGA's favour as the SAGA customer base for cruises will be the top priority to get the vaccinations .

Also whilst you want maximum coverage on vaccinations, even when 10% have been vaccinated that will start to provide some relief as it will act as a fire break preventing further spread and reducing the impact on the NHS with a reduction in the number of serious cases or deaths.

The rest of the population (under 55's) who will take longer to get vaccinated are far less likely to impact the medical services or add to the horrendous death toll.