Member Info for MattTheBrave

PS - my post below to GumT, not Steve (whose post I agree with BTW)

If the market always prices a stock correctly, why on earth are you here??!! What is the point of trying to pick stocks to make money? How on earth do value managers like Warren Buffet outperform the market so systematically and successfully? Once again, your naivety is clear. The price simply tells you what the consensus is, not the 'correct' price. Any decent knowledge of financial market history tells us that markets are inherently more volatile that the underlying businesses which is what creates value opportunities. Sentiment often outweighs critical thinking in the short term. You when the stock was 480p is actually an excellent example.

...owe the bank �10,000, the bank owns you, owe the bank �20m, you own the bank. Looks to me like AVN is now holding the shareholders (largely the old bond holders) to ransom. Come up with another wad of cash, or risk losing all of the money you've continually poured into us over the years. Ironically, the D4E might be helpful to PI's in insolvency. Debt holders get first dibs, then equity. As a great slew of the debt is about to transition to equity, it might be a case of better to get 7.5% of something than 100% of nowt!

Agreed. Getting a handle on EPS is tricky, but assuming we take the Company at their word that margin fall from sales is being mitigated by cost control, we should still be looking at eps to year end April of $1.75 or �1.25. I think 12x this figure would be reasonable short term equating to �15. That's my target by the end of summer absent a big market fall. Still a strong buy in my view.

First time I can recall that they have actually talked about putting the Company into insolvency. Red or black folks, take your pick.

I'll just say this one more time to see whether you are able to understand. You invest largely using technical analysis, which requires some understanding of stock price historical behavior, and that a stock will to some extent behave in a mean reverting way within a normal distribution of returns. However, Vislink/Peb had become a binary stock ie no normal distribution, and historic pricing not going to help. Either the banks say no, and stock worth 0, or banks say yes, and you see a healthy bounce (and I literally said this months ago!). This was not a risk-adjusted opportunity that I fancied as the outcome was not, IMV predicable. I'm a fundamental investor who hopes to be right more than he's wrong based on predictive skill over the long term. Simply put PEB didn't fit my investment criteria, and still doesn't - its a punting stock, and technical analysis will not help you one jot! My issue with you was that you were telling people to buy based on technical analysis - nowhere did you say, that you believed that the stock was s buy because the bank would extend credit facility, or that it was a risky play. I simply ensured that potential investors on this Board had knowledge of the overall picture which for some reason upset you, and seemingly, continues to do so. Want my trading history, bought at 9p (when it was still Vislink), sold at 18p, bought again at 9p, but then sold again at 9p when I realized the depth of their financial position. All of this I posted on at the time (where were you??) So, no humble pie for me, but can I suggest fish pie for you - good for the brain cells apparently...;-)

Oh dear WO - Quote: 'Look at other Satellite operators, very few have SPs that high.' Still thinking that comparing share prices is relevant, regardless of how many shares are in issue, the level of debt, quality of customer base, size of revenues etc etc etc. Assume your IQ is around the current share price...?

Actually, you don't even hold any shares do you - you only invested for about 5 minutes last year. I think we can add lying to unintelligence. Starting to feel a bit sorry for you TBH.......

Gum T - it's very simple. You have a very blinkered and biased view on the IG and the financial industry, You refuse to accede to logical argument or even admit your errors When presented with facts and obviously superior knowledge to yourself. All of which makes you perfect for some kind of regulatory role IMV, as this seems to be the required characteristics. The regulation industry is one of the clearest manifestations of 'you pay peanuts, you get monkeys'. And remember folks, whatever GumT says, he was decrying IG when it was down at 480p, only then to magically have bought at the bottom months later!! Everyone can come to their own view as to the veracity of his posts on here.

Charty, you moron, if you'd actually had the sense to read my posts you will know that my view was (and I quote) if it survives you'll make a few bob, and if not, the SH's get nada. It was clearly touch and go with the banks there for a bit, and it is clear that if Santander had said no, that would have been it. My issue with you was that you were just spouting a lot of technical nonsense, when it was a highly risky stock with a binary outcome. Today, the fundamentals just got significantly better with the Santander news and righty, the stock has jumped So, not a technical bounce, but a fundamental one, you nitwit. Now off you go to find where you left those missing brain cells and let the adults talk.

I'm not blaming the FCA, because it didn't exist then (duh!). I think you'll find that everyone in the industry recognizes that one of the major contributors to the GFC was the inability of the FSA (which was the regulatory body in the UK at the time, just for your education) and other regulatory bodies to understand the complexity of financial instruments used by banks, particularly in the area of structured credit (which killed Lehmann), and the policies which insured them (killed AIG). It is this complete misunderstanding of counterparty risk in the system, and an inability to regulate it properly which has led to the requirement for central clearing of all derivatives (Dodd Frank, and EMIIR), and the recent introduction of Mifiid II. The fact that you don't understand this would reflect the fact that you weren't very good at your job (quite possible) or your assertion about what you did as a job is false (you have previous here). However, you are touching on a subject that I DO know extremely well (as I think this post shows) so I suggest you step carefully, lest you appear even more foolish that you have already on this Board. Finally, you seem to be fixated about intelligence and education - I find this ironic, as you don't appear to have the former, or be a beneficiary of the latter. Chip on your shoulder perhaps.....?

Ah, now I see why you're so bitter - a jobsworth involved in regulation. This explains much about your attitude, and frankly, your intelligence. Previous incarnation of FCA managed to allow the last financial crises happen right under their nose because let's face it, the smart people go to where they get paid, leaving the morons in the regulatory bodies. Everything's much clearer now. And yes I am a joker, as well as an investor. Happily, I am far better at both disciplines than you..... PS, your earlier rude posts have been reported (if you really want to play that game...)

...no but it has been your loss to completely misunderstand IG Group. If the proof of the pudding is in the eating, then you've just rustled up a vomit soup, with excrement croutons......

Forced retirement.....? ;-)

Indeed asclypius. BTW, I think you'd be well within your rights to report his last post which is simply rude. He was very happy to report my posts not so long ago - Live by the sword, Die by the sword!

asclypius - We're wasting our breath mate. Even when presented with words he has posted himself, he denies their obvious meaning. At the end of the day, he's only hurting himself and his own wealth by refusing to acknowledge any truth in others' posts which deviate from his own view. I'm quite happy with my 80% return here and 100% return in CMC based on my own views of this industry.

Thanks OPB - yes, point well made. Of course, that's still only $380m, so smaller than 'miniscule' in GCC language...;-)

Two can play at that game (but only one of us is an informed investor..) Any comments?? "So $450m is, er, 'miniscule'? What word would you use to describe Avanti's market cap then? (PS - it's about �18m)"

So a - you did not sell at a 'good' price. You allege (see point b) that you sold at around 665p, and whilst maths might not be your strong point, let me tell you that that means you have missed out on a 20% plus increase in what has been a falling market. b - We have established that you didn't make a big profit on IG 'cause you actually sold at the beginning of last year. Hence a above may be moot as I'm not convinced you even had any shares c - it has already been pointed out to you now by 2 posters through rational argument, and the firm's own annual report that your characterisation of IG's business model is wrong, yet you persist with your bizarre rants. Your arguments make no sense. If they were genuinely exposed to client's winnings, then there would be much more volatility in revenues and profits. Are you saying that all IG's clients are idiots, and hence always lose money?? Clearly the answer is no. Given the large numbers of clients, even assuming a 45% right 55% wrong split would be heroic. Ladbroke's is different because they are able to assign odds which don't sum to 1. However, IG has no such tool (apart from spread) to protect them. That's why they tend to be close to 100% hedged at all times, as asclypius has shown. On a side note, I have decided to make my posts more more polite and less rude. Can I suggest you adopt a similar approach.

So $450m is, er, 'miniscule'? What word would you use to describe Avanti's market cap then? (PS - it's about �18m)