Member Info for Meconopsis

This is the lock up schedule (from Claude):

After Q2 earnings (the first results as a public company), up to 20% of eligible shares unlock. If the stock is also trading 30%+ above the IPO price at that point, an additional 10% can be sold.

Five time-based tranches at 70, 90, 105, 120, and 135 days post-IPO each release another 7% of eligible shares.

A further 28% unlocks after Q3 earnings, and the full remainder at the standard 180-day mark.

Musk can’t sell anything for 366 days.

There is no secondary offering.

“Why not just sell as much of their holding as possible into that market?”

In any IPO the company makes a “primary offering” that sells new shares, which dilute existing holders but adds at money raised to the assets.

The is usually a “secondary offering” that allows existing holders to sell *a very limited number* of their shares. This is to prevent the market being flooded with shares and tanking the share price.

The existing shareholders are subject to a lock up period of typically six months before they can sell any more shares.

So, the short answer to your question - via a long explanation - is that THEY CAN’T SELL (very much if any) at the time of the IPO.

Fela96 - the managers could choose to hold SpaceX at a discount if their view is that it’s the likely price level once their lock in expires.

Mlc2010 - over a 3-5 year period, absolutely.

The issue is that the next seven months is going to go one of two ways. Stratospheric, or carnage. With carnage my favourite to win once the likely six month lock up period for SpaceX ends.

I suspect that the managers will keep the holding value of SpaceX at 1.25tn until the market properly settles.

“For what it's worth, this share has not recovered very well from 2021. Over 5 years its performance is pretty atrocious”

You’re entirely correct. But over 3 years it’s fantastic.

1, 3 and 5 year performance figures sometimes aren’t that useful. An investment measured between Jan 2021 and Jan 2026 might look fab, but not if measured between Mar 2021 and Mar 2026.

None of us is buying historic performance.

What we are buying is a personal return - because all returns are personal - down to the day and exact time you buy and decide to sell.

In truth, all we have to get right is choosing when to buy and when to sell. And my investment returns have gotten much better since I’ve been able to separate identifying a good investment from identifying a good entry timing.

So, you’re right. But the point is somewhat irrelevant.

If you were lucky enough to buy at 700 in 2023 then exiting now is a great result. Even if you might miss the top, you’ve doubled your money and crystallised it. And a profit is only a profit when you sell.

Yaz18 - of course they know what is happening.

Which is why they are taking profits here (and other places) to invest directly into SpaceX when given the chance.

…has filed for an IPO.

https://apple.news/Amf385QXhR8OijY2VusFo_w

Couerdelion - you’re not wrong. “Own funds” is certainly a reasonable basis for valuation.

What I was trying to highlight is that - by convention - analysts use (multiples of) Unrestricted Tier 1 as the valuation basis.

Couerdelion - you’d normally use Unrestricted Tier 1 capital for a life company, which is shown as £9.9bn vs total own funds of £13.8bn

From page 93 of https://group.legalandgeneral.com/asset/49851f/globalassets/group/reporting-hub/reports/2026/solvency-and-financial-condition-report-sfcr-2025/legal-general-group-sfcr-2025.pdf/

"Equity Stake: SpaceX holds a roughly 10% equity stake in Filtronic (via share warrants), aligning the rocket company directly with Filtronic's financial success."

Just as a point of accuracy (and I don't know the answer to this), but has it ever been confirmed whether SpaceX have exercised their warrants?

Fleccy - at the point where they mention “claims processing” you need to walk away on the basis that it’s a load of AI generated dross.

Life Insurance companies don’t have claims processing.

Just saying.

Overall, the Starship launch was largely a success - they only lost one engine on the way up for the lower stage and lost an engine in the upper stage, but corrected for it to successfully deploy.

The lower stage had a hard, rather than soft landing because they could relight enough engines and they missed their objective of showing an orbital relight for the upper stage.

Everything else went remarkably well given that it’s a new version of the hardware platform.

@Phyl - I’m holding here. LGEN is the only position I’ve moved to cash - although it’s “quite a big” position.

I’ll be back into LGEN when the time is right.

I might also have made a very bad move.

Time will tell.

I regard PHP as such a boring company that my dog gives it 5 snoozes -would woof again. Which is great for the role it performs.

The results are better than they look.

The +£60m trading increase doesn’t feed through to the broom line in the same way as the c -£30m licensing. Trading flows through to profit at around 35% (so £20m) against licensing, which flows through at c 90% (so £27m).

They already report tariff headwinds of c £6.5m.

So, a flat PBT suggests internal efficiencies.

This is at a time of substantial capital investment in Factory 4 and the Easter Park paint plant.

@Crossley - you have a PM

@Couerdelion - I’m sat in cash for the moment.

I think that MNG and SDLF are as least more attractive takeover targets - and potentially much easier for an acquirer to ingest and get approval for.

@strictlybricks - I completely about the riskiness, but the n my view a change of PM is a certainty and Iran isn’t over yet.

You don’t launch a politically-sensitive bid that will have a timescale attached to it into a political mess. You wait to see who you’re dealing with.

Both - I take your points and I’m still very much committed to LGEN as a company. And/but I’ve got 10 weeks before I’m in danger of missing out on yield.

As I say, I’m here to be made a fool of by the markets ;)

TheWickerMan - you just need to ignore the IFRS numbers and look at the alternative investment measures when they’re published.

Long term, the gilt chaos will be positive for L&G as it’ll provide the opportunity for them rematch liabilities to better paying assets. Overly simplistically, if you can match a liability to an investment paying 5% in place of one that was paying 4% then it’s all gravy. Long term that’s more profit.

In the short term, though, it’ll suppress the balance sheet value because of the mark to market impact. In a predatory world this isn’t great.

I will declare that I’m (temporarily) no longer invested here. I’ve taken the view that, whilst the speculation is real, the time isn’t now - and the share price bump won’t survive the macro environment. I’ll buy back in when the share price drops back.

I’m here to be made a fool of, of course.

…into ISAs and SIPPs…

For UK REITs the payment should be made without withholding tax.

(HMRC reg SI 2006/2867/Reg 7)

https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/investment-funds/ifm28125#:~:text=The%20UK%20REIT%20company%2C%20or,2006%2F2867%2FReg%207.

Hey Phyl - good to see you here.

You're almost certainly correct that the PHP dividend increase won't substantially outpace inflation anytime soon.

But - equally - around 85% of the tenants are NHS (or the Northern Ireland equivalent) and they are generally tied into inflation, or slightly better,-linked rent reviews. That generated annualised rent increases of around 3.4%.

There is absolutely nothing sexy or exciting here. Just a seemingly well-managed company with Net Tangible Assets of around 100-110p per share - so it's trading at around a 10% discount to book value.

I hold it because it's boring and gives diversification for the income bit of my portfolio away from the life insurers.

Sometimes boring is good :)