Member Info for Oldnewboy

LTI: Valuation of Met1's EV1 stake has increased by about £300,000 currently

Great! That's a start. But only worth .0357p per MET share? Keep going, more work needed to answer question fully.

LTI: how many more fking times.

It's odd for us alleged high IQers to have to keep resorting to obscenities.

How many more times do you have to show you are not as clever as you think, or perhaps simply can't be bothered to put figures on the current valuations of all their "investments" and your figure for the current estimated cash balances. Either do the sums for us or go to a fundamental valuation chat site where your investment criteria will be fully appreciated; and relevant.

LTI: paying double asset value, would be an extreme gamble.

Hallelujah! You've got it at last. And of course it was even more of a gamble when people were buying at up to 10 times the price.

So now please do the sums (if you can) to let us all see your calculation of the estimated current NAV so we can all know how silly we are being not to sell our shares before they fall even further, since according to your logic that is where the price must eventually settle, or probably even lower if everyone agrees to value it at a discount like your prized BRWM investment trust (which I have just got out of (at a small profit) in view of its declining dividend payout record since covid.).

LTI dodging the question and missing everyone elses’s point, as usual.

1. Please show us your updated maths valuing MET1’s total investments (? At cost or market value where relevant) and your cash calculations.

2. Please don’t again tell us GAMBLERS that there can never be premium for as yet unrealised future potential growth? Isn’t that what shares selling on p/e’s of 40+ are screaming at you every day? And don’t just quote this back with a stupid one worder: either refute it with some logic, or accept it.

Bowlers

I wonder why JS has stopped claiming he’s buying and reminding us he thinks it’s worth what he paid when he started buying?

LTI: intrinsic value.

Now who’s clueless and losing your own plot.

When I asked you to justify the market value of your house compared with its land and construction costs, or why penny blacks sell for anything, let alone why works of art cost more than their canvas, your typically dismissive response was I shd move to another discussion board. Why not take your own advice and leave us GAMBLERS alone?

LTI please stop your silly clueless insults, they demean you.

I asked you to do some useful sums to determine true probable NAV which so concerns you.

Can you do so or not?

LTI wrote (again!!) nav needs to double to get near the Market cap valuation. There is nothing to justify having any premium over asset valuations.

As you know I have given up responding to your juvenile barbs and impression that everyone else doesn't understand the gap between market price and NAV, which clearly most of those posting here do, but consider it irrelevant. Everyone asks you to stop your broken record, as it debases the value of some of the useful stuff you have provided.

So why not congtribute something useful and attempt a reconciliation of how much MET1 is known to have paid for its investments in other non-revenue producing companies and what their market value is now (if ascertainable) and how much this gain or loss represents per MET1 share. I leave to you the investment made based on a higher share price than today's -- presumably a theoretical book gain? Then work out how much of the warrant cash might have been spent (I think you estimated £3k a day?) and we may find NAV is actually a lot less than 1.75p and you can use that figure in future, if you must.

IF as often you can't follow this, do me a favour and don't just tell me I am writing nonsense as you only make a fool of yourself that way.

Rog

Congratulations for encapsulating what LTI will never understand. He sometimes has helpful mathematical information but no understanding of markets, such as his belief the well-known number of shares in issue means they are all “available”. Indeed most things are, at a price. What he doesn’t grasp is the market is trying to find the price at which people no longer want to remain long term holders — which currently seems to be at a premium to NAV.

LTI

''you have nothing to say, like the gaps between market valuations and intrinsic value''

FFS you mind has completely gone - I must have given the difference/gaps a hundred times.

You sad little creature, classic illustration that IQ. is rarely correlated with common sense or knowledge. The valuation gaps I have been asking you to address are between the intrinsic value of your house, or a penny black -- are you REALLY unable to see that? If you really cannot see the relevance don't display your foolishness to everyone. As you can't see beyond your one useful contribution which you have felt the need to post and repost over 30,000 times, I am clearly wasting my time trying to engage you and broaden your tunnel vision.

I'll read you childish riposte avoiding the debate but am not wasting any more of my time replying to your ruderies.

PuzzledPete

The short answer is none of us know, other than the fact that 90% of the shares are in hands of speculators who are nearly all in at higher average prices. Depending on the size of their exposure they will either regard their shares as sleepers, or cut their losses. I cannot understand the preponderance of tiny value trades which currently make up most of the action, nor frankly why the price is holding up as it is when the only deals of any size are sales. These may well be the remaining shares obtained through warrants deciding the game is over.

But once the traders are out, what are the prospects? Before long MET1 will run out of money again, so another "interesting" placing must be on the cards if they can "guarantee" a similar exit. This is unlikely to enhance whatever the price has settled at. An absence of any equity action will either mean it become a zombie stock, or will drift on down until market makers have squared their books.

Or of course the gamblers could return if MET1 can generate sufficiently sexy RNSs to make them believe "it got to fifty once, so why not again".

Either way, nothing LTI will understand!

LTI

I realise you are probably deterred from actually discussing any of the parallels I raise, and resort to dismissing them as ME losing your plot, since the only two occasions we have crossed swords (reliance on AI and whether market-makers influence prices) you revealed yourself to be completely ignorant. I have acknowledged the value of the NAV calculations when people stupider than you did not understand the impact of dilution caused by exercising warrants.

But if you wisely choose to stay in this narrow lane but not broaden your discussion into areas where you have nothing to say, like the gaps between market valuations and intrinsic value, there is little point in me rising any more to your silly quotations followed by question marks.

As to what the shares might eventually be "worth" see my next post to PuzzledPete. Maybe you can even supplement it with something other than the current premium over NAV?

LTI ‘s “plots”

Have you really not grasped that not everyone follows the same plot as you. Until you can rationalise the gaps between the intrinsic value of houses and penny blacks, you will never understand that a share, like everything else, is only ever “worth” what someone else will pay for it. Rail against the fact that enough people are currently buying and selling these shares to make them “worth” 4p as much as you like, but that is what the market is telling you. Until all these tuppenyhappeny traders are flushed out only then will we discover how genuine long term holders are valuing it. It might be at a discount or a daft premium to NAV, it makes no difference to reality. Why can’t your tunnel vision recognise these simple truths?

And for once, why not try answering questions instead of dismissing stuff you don’t understand, or does it tax your not very exceptional intellect too much? it just diminishes your already tarnished “credentials “.

LTI

Losing the plot: ???????

Just because you lack the empathy and/or market experience to understand why some of us are happy to behave what seems to you irrationally , WHY just keep repeating the only useful thing you have had to contribute. What’s your answer to house prices and penny blacks? Silence. Try addressing other people’s viewpoints occasionally if your brain has the emotional bandwidth to do so, rather than your pathetic one line dismissals.

LTI

Clueless????????? You couldn’t resist another rant, could you?

Strange thing for YOU to say. We know the maths; you lack the empathy to grasp the psychology.

How about addressing the comparisons between house prices and Penny Blacks’ intrinsic values rather than just repeating your broken record nearly everyone who’s still a shareholder here must have grasped and chosen to ignore.

Bowlers

I think you will find the Hargreaves Lansdown holding, like Halifax, is not on their own account but the hundreds of gamblers who are currently mostly dealing in derisory quantities for reasons I cannot fathom.

All these weak speculators need to be shaken out before we can know what this share is “worth”.

And before LTI tells us for the nth time about NAVs, remember your house is “worth” (viz currently sells for) many times its intrinsic value. Same is true of penny blacks. This is what LTI fails to grasp about stock market psychology/stupidity as he rails into the void.

JS

Your book losses must now be massive and you have not been boasting about how many more shares you have "mopped up": why not, do you hope/fear it may go even lower so you get even more "bargains"?

I averaged down my tiny 5p holding higher than the current price at what turned out to be my feared dead cat bounce, and will sit on my hands until a strong base is reached, which I have no reason to believe will be not be below your historically calculated 1.75p NAV. Unless of course in the meantime we get some RNSs indicating sustainable value or realisable profit.

Does anyone else think these grey trades represent MMs buying in because they are short of stock, and if so would we expect an opening sp tomorrow of something over 4.10, followed by a sharp rise if they get follow through or sharp falls if they don't?

Andy, we are in agreement, aren’t we?

However the EV1 so has to double before the warrants are worth exercising. But we’ve got till 2028.

Andy may have cracked why this company might potentially be worth more than its diminishing net assets: its warrants in EV1 might produce exactly the sort of spectacular returns the 2p warrant holders in MET1 reaped when the MET 1 price was being ramped sky high. Since nowadays no one seems interested or capable of preventing such market manipulation, and the warrant trick is not technically illegal, lets hope EV1 can ramp its shares so MET1 can benefit from a multiple perentage exit! Here's to financial engineering!