Member Info for Senator1

Your theory is not correct, trade on inside information irrespective of whether it is "hedging" or any other reason is illegal, full stop. No buts, maybes, I was hedging, didnt mean it.....none of it is a justifiable excuse. Also Qube no nothing about the fundamentals, to them the share price is a time series of data and they are just following the trend. Im sure the PM doing this trade has no idea what PRTC does, nor does he care. Millenium harder to call as they do have both technical and funnymental traders. If you are a trend follower then the short makes sense to me if the borrow is at a reasonable price. They know any reasonable upside trigger is months away so worst case it provides cheap funding for a few months.

The chart looks total rubbish. Over the last 2.75 years this has the worst total return of all current FTSE 350 members. The EMA21 will shortly cross the 200, this is going much much lower if Kroger pull the plug. I wouldnt touch it if they paid me £1 a share to invest. This is on a cliff edge. The smart money has placed their bet, take them on at your peril. 100% they have contacts at Kroger and have a good idea of how they are thinking, that will 100% be the case. Long now is gambling, its not even smart trading, not from the long side at least.

I have forgotten more than you know.

What are you talking about, you can't even write an articulate sentence. All IR teams and CFOs work with the analysts and your view of analysts is just plain wrong & stupid. They are in the business of forecasting the future, this is hard. They dont set out to mislead but they can be wrong. Your the inarticulate id..t!

The BoD should sign off on any public GUIDANCE. In caps as you are sooo slow and utterly lost.

Don't tell me what I was looking at. Back in JULY 2025 the 2026 reported concensus was £134M (more or less static on 2025 but down LfL) with range £132 to £137M. I dont price anything looking backwards and so in July I was looking at the FY 26 and FY 27 estimates. If I remember right they revised to £110-£120 on 31/7/25 which I remember because after the FY 25 my own PBT estimate for 26 was £112M when they were at guidance of £115-125M so the £5M reduction didnt surprise and i remember noting that the concensus should come down which didnt really happen and so we had a first half august rally in the share which i was surprised by as i was expecting Pets to work with the analysts to get them back inline. As I said the 18% revision at low end in call it 6 weeks is just ridiculous, totally unforgivable. Its clear August was a disaster!

Concensus was known so i did report what was known. as i have now said several times concensus was ahead of mgmt and thats fine but if you know that even your guidance is wildly optimistic then this is foolish and unprofessional and you pay a price when it catches up with you. the guidance gets signed off by the Board, or at least it should do, so there is more blame to go around.

-18% at low end of mgmt guidance not 10%, which analyst world thought they were low balling by being above their guidance. To revise again 2 months later by -18% tells you their IT is terrible at HO isnt getting real time numbers on store sales or July/August fell off a cliff relative to what they expected from historic patterns. I doubt they just lied but now they are tarnished with distrust. Analysts going forward, if they have any sense, will be at a discount to guidance rather than premium.

You are wrong, I said concensus. You quoted what mgmt said, concensus was ahead of mgmt. Get your facts straight!

New guidance of £90-100 PBT is 31% lower than concensus £132-137M. To allow the market to be that ahead of reality is a disgrace for a public company. This share will be taught a harsh lesson. The shorts knew they were poor. This will go to £1 and deserves it. Needs more than CEO to go.

Golfnut59,

To spot "market undervaluation" you need hard numbers. The "hub and spoke" is cute terminology but it just doesn't align with this basic requirement of an efficient market. Of course, when you give it this situation, the market calmly deals with it by applying big discounts, such as we have here. I said I give no valuation to the other parts as I think they are still consuming substantial amounts of cash. I am not a star gazer, I will take what you want to give me and if its not all I want I will haircut your private assessments. I gave them the benefit of cost on Seaport. The market isnt as stupid as too many make out. If you find you have to hide behind NDAs in explaining a substantial part of your business, you just are not suitable for public markets. Puretech are learning this basic tenet.

I was totally clear that for Seaport I used Puretech's cost of investment as my valuation basis rather than the latest funding round as no shareholder in Purtech has the data to calculate an independent valuation and so I used cost for Puretech shareholders. There is nothing laughable about that, it is more laughable to blindly accept the valuation of people I know little about or the terms of what I am sure is a preferred share investment which is typical for US VCs. At the end of the day the market is the best fundamental analyst I know and if you find yourself in major disagreement it is best to look at your own methodologies rather than attribute it to market lack of knowledge.

£3,247.30 spend among the 4 of them and even with that they get a free matching share for every 3 held so brings their cost down to 94p. Hardly a vote of confidence in the current share price. sell.

Until Cela and Gallop fundings are arranged the annual cash burn is c$100M so by FY 25 cash will be circa $270M or £200M. If you value the 35% of Seaport at cost for now that is £83M. Thats total £283M, so market is 15% discount to what it knows. On Cobenfy they stupidly added potential cashflows at different times to get $286M, that reduces to $186M in PV terms at 10% (which is generous). As these are estimates discount this at 25% and you end up at just £100M. Cela and Gallop will consume cash after their financings so not giving any valuation here as too uncertain. So market applying a 32% discount given all the uncertainties and existing cash burn. It would only take further delays for this discount to quickly become much less as we go in to FY 2026. There is no reason for this stock to go up until there is more clarity on Cela & Gallop, even then UK market will apply big discounts as the true value in the spokes is hard to discern and stay on top of. This is a difficult model for a public company. It's not really suited to an efficient valuation in times of uncertaintty. The Cobenfy data was a helpful start by management but they need to be far more sophisticated if they do make a presentation attempt. Market was right to puish them!

Does forward eps growth of 29% justify a forward PE of c.40x or 2.5% earnings yield? From a technical perspective this still looks weak and I wouldnt be surprised if its tests the 1.84 area and thats still a PE of 32x. This is no NVDA. Think this reverts to going down to a fairer value. 8.5M shares traded today but for every buyer there was a seller. If you held this share over the last 2.9 years, your TR CAGR is 37.83% p.a., you would be mad not to lighten up in to this volume. This will be interesting tomo.

Could you two go somewhere else you with your petty illerate squabble. if you have nothing intelligent to say on birg p--s off somewhere else

The poiint is he can sell at 71p because he has a million at no cost and loses nothing. talk about making things more complicated. of course you can calc a weighted average cost. btw there will be conditions to these options, 100% for sure. Only an idiot would give them out without conditions. they are part of the LTIP and will have conditions. Its easy to buy sharesat £2 plus when you know you have this cushion. Its a free option in financial terms and when u get one of these you always take it!

What are u talking about?

On sp at 13.4 and Tnav of 10.39 at the half year this trades on a 1.29 multiple. with a return target of 15% this implies Birg cost of equity of 11.63% at current market price. This seems about right but when you take into account a 5% buyback maybe this can run up to e14 per share. Anyone have a view on Birg fair value, with supporting rationale.

Including his nil cost his average hold price is 71p. He doesnt have to worry about purchases at the current price as he is already in profit to £2.4million! Given this, tells you very little. Not a fan of nil costs as they are transferring money from shareholders to beneficiary. they should be banned, totally ridiculous.

Another reason, over the last 2 years and almost 9 months, CRDA has destroyed the most wealth of all current members in the FTSE 350! The bar for this share must therefore be set very high in terms of buy conviction. Bottom 4 are Croda, Ocado, Watches of Switz and WH Smith. Believe it or not only 26% of the names produced a total return CAGR > 15%. 33% less than zero. Unbelievable, one third of names in the current FTSE 350 produced a total return less than zero.