Member Info for sageoflondon

Whilst the past is never a predictor of the future I have no idea if the same will hold. Assuming it does though, this is likely to fall a lot more than say a tobacco stock or most large oil companies. If the wider market goes down 20% this is likely to head down 30% etc. So providing you're happy with the thought that this could see £5 for 6 or 12 months I don't see a problem. I'm not saying it will - I have no idea what VP has in mind in terms of scale etc. Either way even the thought of war is having a significant negative impact at present.

This is essentially (at least in part) a leveraged technology play. If technology falls then this is going to fall a lot more - the performance fees on the flagship fund mean earnings are likely to be significantly lower with a technology pullback. In addition to that this also pays a decent dividend - that's likely to be cut if earnings are significantly lower. This has had a great run, long term I think it's an excellent company but earnings will be very volatile. Would consider buying (again I have held before, I sold everything at mid £8s). Love the company but started to look expensive. I would consider coming back in at mid to low £5s.

It's holding £7 just about. It wouldn't take much to push it under £7 though. My main concern is that we haven't really had that much of a pullback in the US at all. This is purely sector / type of investment related in my view. Considered higher risk in this inflationary environment, investors shy away.

Very brave, particularly if leveraged. For me the risk is to the downside at present. I don't see any big upside catalyst to this at present. This could easily go sub £7. Essentially we have gone nowhere in the last 12 months from a share price perspective. This looks like it is suffering on general market moves, suffering on US tech declines etc and then doesn't come back up much when there is a minor recovery.

Crimea was much smaller in scale in reality. In addition to that it's the already precarious energy situation that will drive the problems in most of the West - not the bullets flying. It won't take much for Oil to head of up to $120 a barrel or more and a full on recession / debt crisis in some countries. Putin is very smart. Now had the Ukraine decided to join Nato with oil at its Covid lows it may well have happened without more than rhetoric from a weakened Russia. This is about much more than the Ukraine. The West is already feeling some pain from this, particularly Europe. That's not to mention the amount of refugee crossings into Western Europe from the Ukraine. That has an economic impact regardless of who is in the direct firing line.

Today's little dip will be the tip of the iceberg if there is a full scale invasion.

I think it very likely that Beazley will post some excellent results. I think the market is underestimating this somewhat. Given the progress made, rate rises (and corresponding adequacy), pre pandemic highs will be achieved at some point soon, regardless of the capital raise previously completed.

I think a lot of un-unionised workers will just leave if they don't get what they want. There are a lot of jobs out there that cannot be filled. Unions were helpful in wage negotiations when unemployment was running above average, it isn't at present. Anyone who actually wants a job (not always the right job) can likely get something at present. This is particularly true in large urban areas, that's below professional level. At professional level, particularly in technology, some of the demands are beyond a joke. No way wage inflation isn't going to rear its head. Blackrock gave all of its employees an 8% across the company increase middle of 2021 from what I recall - things like that ripple out.

sorry I meant to say 860k shares not £.

CEO has £860k in shares. I am sure he is hoping they will double back up. £2m isn't small change to all but the richest of CEOs.

We have the highest across the company annual increase we have had in the prior 10 years.........

Trustpilot is getting beaten down. 155p almost versus high of 480p. That's some drop. I am very glad that I decided against investing in that - I wouldn't have touched it anywhere near it's high but did think about it on IPO. I was put off by the fact that I had shares here and the fact that it looked a bit toppy to me. Either way it can now be picked up much more cheaply.

I think this is likely to be a few steps forward a big step back on repeat. I can't see this changing for the moment. I think we will likely sit at around a 10-25% discount to anticipated NAV (i.e. beyond what is already projected). What anticipated NAV is depends on what the broader market is doing to some extent - at least it does until we dispose of everything listed or very large - something like Revolut can't decouple from the listed market given the size of it's last valuation round. No point watching daily gyrations. I was a bit surprised how Facebook got hammered yesterday. In reality that's what happens when a share is priced for continuous growth or for perfection essentially into perpetuity.

I also think this has broader appeal than Ted Baker - we buy an awful lot from Joules, Boden etc, particularly for the kids, not just for us. I have however just ordered a sweatshirt and really like Joules myself. Ted Baker do some great stuff (a lot smarter, less casual, more going out, dare I say slightly younger, I'm mid forties). This is an excellent brand with broad appeal. It should recover with time. If it did need a little more cash (which I don't currently think it does) I would be more than happy to put my hand in my pocket to support. That said I am a very recent investor.

In reality whenever we have had silly rates in the past, no-one really predicted things would end up as they did. I think predicting inflation is very difficult even with a large team of highly educated individuals who studied Economics way beyond my degree. I think even the impact of modest tightening is heavily amplified today given where debt is at both a governmental and consumer level. So a 1% increase is effectively a 4% increase in old money given debt levels etc. That's not accurate I know (it would be possible to model, but I don't have the time or inclination). Such increases will likely have a big impact and as such bigger rises may not be needed. Either way even those comparatively small rises have a big impact on disposable income with say a £250k, £500k mortgage. 1% on £500k is £5k per annum, along with an NI increase, rising fuel bills etc. All chips away at purchasing power and living standards.

Previously the Fed and BOE was saying the inflation was transitory. It doesn't look as transitory now.

I always liked the comment by Ray Dalio - 'He who lives by the Crystal Ball will eat shattered glass'

They are more qualified than I - however qualifications don't always lead to lack of bias or objectivity - I think it is somewhat wishful thinking to think that VC valuations are completely uncorrelated to technology valuations - how? If we had no listed technology (most of which has a higher Beta than say Apple or Alphabet) like Cazoo, Ui Path etc, then that would get me a little along the way. If technology valuations fall across the market the value of our portfolio will fall even if we dispose of all of the listed technology we have. The valuation of any larger component in terms of overall value will track the wider market unless it is truly differentiated. Whilst there will be uncorrelated elements I don't buy this in its entirety. In reality the proof will be in the pudding. Technology valuations overall haven't really had a big crash - just one component of the market. Broadly however the Grow share price has fallen in line with say SMT, along with a discount to NAV at present.

I don't see a general crash. I do still see an unravelling of any or some technology valuations that don't have substance. Quality like Netflix, Google, Facebook, Apple, Amazon etc will prevail - proven profit making credential (well almost Netflix). These companies will through off real cash profits, even if valuations toppy, valuations reflect global dominance. This is unlike Cazoo (lots of competition, unproven profitability of model as it exists, difficulty scaling etc), Ui Path (massive multiples of Blue Prism Price still), Peloton - these are just a few examples. Interest rates will be higher than they are now, not back to 5% now, but higher regardless. I think the jury is out on these types of company for the moment. It shouldn't be a question of what the market does generally, albeit that has an impact, it will ultimately come down to whether we have a decent proportion of winners. It's going to be a lot more difficult to persuade IPO investors that the next Cazoo, Ui Path, Trustpilot are really worth the premium when the share prices are sitting at one third to a half of the original IPO value. That's assuming there is no further fall back.

The overall cash proceeds still look low given the business disposal noted - i.e. how much was that worth in total out of the figure quoted - key thing I would like to know if how much of the quoted portfolio has been retained.........

Interesting reading and article just now - in 2000 at the bursting of the dotcom bubble, the US Nasdaq index fell by 75% in the subsequent two years, but shares in banks and utilities went up a lot. British American Tobacco went from £3 to £55 over the next 17 years (fallen back from then but interesting nonetheless).

I agree re this. Interest rates will be the catalyst, but tech was overvalued regardless so was due a pullback. It's never a one way street. Valuations had become very stretched indeed. Sentiment will fluctuate daily, but over a year or two I think this will at best be around where it is now, possibly lower if rates move faster than expected. A lot of tech was priced for complete perfection with a cherry on the top. Difficult to find value in technology at present.