Member Info for NicName

"YOU CANNOT STOP IT FROM WORKING. IT WORKS AND IS PROVEN"

Well, that's one way of looking at it. In the circumstances it's just not very sensible.

"my love for Eroxon will get even firmer with spectacular sales"

Unlike the majority of ED sufferers members to which it is applied, I fear.

That point was already reviewed earlier today if you would care to read further down the page, title header: "Youth".
When growth's not 'like for like' that suggests to me that is a change taking place. Perhaps also consider the lost year and fresh cohort of 18's.

As to 'this share going up' (sic) you couldn't be more mistaken Rod, maybe you need to think a bit deeper, or maybe you did already... I'm reminded of "chain letters", or maybe we should call it 'linked promotions'?

AFAIIA. there's been no news released in the past couple of days. So what else has gone on and where? Cui bono?

Whilst you ponder that, here's the suggestion you asked for: WOSG:LON

Did you read the title line Banbury?

"This is definitely worth a watch."

And I'm sure that the promoters will each be able to buy themselves a very nice one as they cash in on the rise!

" Copied below is an extract from Wetherspoons’ trading update today; bodes well for RBG. "

Actually what that might be telling you is that there is migration to venues who sell at a cheaper price away from those with high(er) prices, hence bodes less well.

Direct Line, one of UK’s largest motor insurers says cost of claims is running beyond expectations.

(H/T FT.com)

Bed O'Roses No.9 : The colic shines through...
Remember, RAMPERS NEVER Ramp A GOOD STOCK.

"It’s not a new short. It’s reducing or closing its short position, which is a positive indication"

As reported, I think you may be mistaken.

"MED3000 is a unique formulation of DermaSys® using volatile and non-volatile components tailored for the treatment of ED."

Fact is the control substance used in the trial was DermaSys and that lead to the study results that concluded there was little to choose between DermaSys + active ingredient and DermaSys on it's own. So the claim made was that manually applied DermaSys itself might be having some beneficial effect in respect of E.D. and those 'conclusions' were the basis for seeking EU and FDA approval. So, surely, it does not take much thinking to realise that MED3000 (Eroxon) cannot be materially different from DermaSys and "unique formulation" must be largely blandishment.

What it does best, in recent years, has been to make considerable losses. So let's hope not.
Malcy is just a sponsored promoter on most occasions AIUI.

"I think you're being unduly harsh."

I somehow doubt that might be your view if the sequence of guidance had been reversed.
Cautious is one thing, but this is rather stretching 'under promise, over perform' even in these circumstances, I feel. If they simply don't know, then that's fine, they can say so. But they chose to guide distributions as being 4 years away. Then, a few months down the line, in the space of a couple of weeks they find circa £3m, of which they explain £1.9m, the balance of £1.1m found down the back of the sofa? This during a period when, in general, outlets have been closed, transport and shipping costs have escalated, supplies have been disrupted and input prices have been rising. They suggest they have been on top of that, so how come they aren't, apparently, on top of the numbers. The point I'm making is that one would like them to be a bit more on top of the numbers as it spoils confidence going forwards to think that they might not be. This would apply to any business, it's not singling out Shoe in particular.

For a family run business one has to wonder how it is that they have been so far out with their guidance. In the space of a few months this has gone from no dividends before 2025, to £6.5m pre-tax profit, to £9-10m pre-tax profit.

I'm not considering "the principle", I'm considering real life practice.

"Shorts and Dervertives !!!!" (sic) - not sure what your point is there but the BB concept requires 'going short'.

The gain/ loss figures are illustrative only. There is no money invested. One could not open / trade a circa £100 position in Saga for 0.6% cost and as you have pointed out the s/p used is a 'fiddle' and them there is the issue of 'going short'. As illustrated a p/i could not physically replicate it. The nearest would be a derivative.

Which would you have chosen to 'replicate' over the past 24 months?
https://www.google.com/finance/quote/HSBA:LON?comparison=LON%3ASTAN&window=5Y
https://www.britishbulls.com/SignalPage.aspx?lang=en&Ticker=hsba.L
https://www.britishbulls.com/SignalPage.aspx?lang=en&Ticker=stan.L
:-)

The gains / losses are imaginary, hence not 'real'.

It's just an algorithm using hindsight. It is not predictive.

26/03/2020 250.3177 BUY 128.93
20/03/2020 211.1801 SHORT 160.18
17/03/2020 219.3084 BUY 168.36

Sometimes it's 'lucky', sometimes it isn't. An investor would be unlikely to be able to replicate it because it isn't 'real'.

Oh, I've just realised you were referring to the hypothetical 'gains' on BB rather than real life.