Member Info for MattTheBrave

Story hasn't changed - just investor's expectations which seem to yaw around from month to month. End of the day, you have a highly indebted company which is seeking to to steady the ship. The valuation (PE of 4x) reflects this, so you pay your money and take your choice. This might seem strange coming from a shareholder, but I do question the policy of raising the dividend to c29 when debt remains at such high levels, but you could take that as management confidence.

Hi GS - re message on 27 Jan, no I don't hold abrdn - I think I probably have enough! Sorry for delay - got the old Omicron last week, but back to full fitness now!

Different opinions are fine. Poor thinking or proven lies needs to be called out - otherwise these boards are useless at best, and misleading at worst.

BTW - looks like I was right on the 8xx prediction today! :-))

SirBC - you're correct, but J's point was that the forecast was slightly down from mid 30s to 30. However, this is only because of the delay in Canada which will be addressed this yr. I wouldn't be at all surprised if they did more than 30 anyway given IG's normal conservatism.

sigh. 20x you say?
TT 2020 revs were $116mn. Price paid $1bn. So price paid was 8.6x not 20x, which is very reasonable for a good fintech company. With the 30% growth this year, that price has already fallen to an effective purchase price of less than 7x. But of course I don't understand equities - LOL.

JM - the only reason for 30% not 35% growth was the delayed launch in Canada. That will happen later this year, and growth should move back above the 30s again. IG management is very conservative, both on dividends, and forecasts. Expect them to be beaten.

18 - I don't know what you mean by 'locked in'? Now listen carefully, it's very simple. You said everyone had lost money over the last year. 12 months ago (1 year) the price was 750p. It is now over 790p. That is a rise, not a fall. I am desperately trying not to call you names here as I have promised myself I would stop doing that on these boards (for example, the old me would have asked whether 18 was your age or your IQ...;-)). But I think what I'm saying is pretty clear, and struggling to work out how you are arguing against it?

J and AoC - you do make me smile. I'm guessing you were part of the crew who said TT was an awful acquisition - now you're saying wouldn't IGG have been rubbish without TT - LOL. Also, AoC, comparing any stock with their all time high and saying they've done badly since would apply to almost every stock in the market!
Here's the facts:
- They DID buy TT, and it is already proving to be a stroke of genius
- They managed to keep the legacy business stable despite others in the industry getting creamed
- They now expect the legacy business to start growing at 5-10%, whilst TT and other fledgling businesses grow at c30%
- their balance sheet is amazing. £600m net cash, and £900m own funds (= 25% of mkt cap)
- £250mn FCF each year
- Yield above 5% and dividend 100% safe cause of bal sheet and fcf (and v. likely to grow from here)
- PE of 8x this year
It's not really that hard to understand is it?

18 - re your post at 10.58 - are you not bored of being continually wrong?. Precisely 1 year ago the price was 750p. As it is now 794, I believe that everyone here who held the shares made a c6% return.

There isn't an overhang - these shares were bought by longer term institutional investors. That said, this will have taken out a fair amount of future latent demand for shares, but in the long term, this stock will be driven by fundamentals rather than shareholders who ended up as holders effectively by accident. This will finish today with an 8 at the front of the price IMV.

Au contraire - I've made money in this stock having bought most of it at the 4.xx and 5.xx levels. It's all in the posts if you trawl back far enough.

Leap frog - to even maintain the trader numbers, let alone grow them would have been amazing - look at CMC! The only reason the stock is down is a US PE firm decided to take their money - not a surprise - they would have been looking for an out from day 1 as holding shares in a listed UK company is not what they do. Great opportunity today, and I've added at 784p.

18 - - if you cannot even spell the word yield, can I humbly suggest that investing might not be for you.....;-)

AoC - I think you've misunderstood.
General bonuses down for all as targets beaten by less than last year - makes sense
Share-based comp up because it's been rolled out to more people NOT because the amount per person has risen. It's actually a good thing as it means more of the staff are now aligned with us ie benefit from a higher share price.

AV,PHNX, LGEN, LLOY,BARC, MNG - I own them all in decent size - certainly keeps the income in my portfolio up!

Sir BC - good points well made!

18 - sorry, a lot of stuff I disagree with there.
- It's a cash cow because of the the astonishing free cash flow generation (more than £400mn per year)
- The dividend is a Board decision and doesn't affect whether the firm is a 'cash cow' or not . However, I also think the divvy will begin to rise steadily from full year figs onwards
- Long bond prices have actually been more volatile than equity markets over the last decade
- 20 year gilts yield 1.3%, IGG yields over 5%, and this will grow. If you prefer gilts then sell your IGG holding and buy those. Good luck to you, but I certainly won't be following!

This was always the year of consolidation following last year's amazing performance. What IG have achieved here is nothing short of amazing - go and look at CMC if you want to understand how other good operators have fared on the comparables. Single digit PE, 5% yield with growth to come. Still way too cheap in my eyes.

Hi Dan - 99% of my posts here are in response to someone else, the other 1% (like the last one below) when a thought occurs. No compulsion involved (unless you count the compulsion to responded when addressed, which I think most of us have). Cheers!

To the extent that much of what they hold has a market price, it is very easy to put a minimum true value on KR1 (counting non-quoted as zero). That doesn't mean that (a) this value won't be volatile, and (b) that the share price will trade at or near NAV. Hence, I agree (like all risk investments) there is an element of speculation. but your 'impossible' assertion is incorrect.