Member Info for Spikeyj

hi jake, i am almost certainly in a minority view on this, but personally i would
prefer it if she just dismantled the company, sold most units down to a rump,
and then flogged that rump off too, with full return of all cash. norwich union
/ aviva etc have always been bloody awful companies, so anything that can be
done to squeeze out & sell the assets, the better. amanda doing a good job,
but i would have preferred hanson & white to asset strip it for me even quicker!

in particular, not just that she’s done well, but she has pretty much being
doing what she said she would. that transparency about aviva’s corporate
strategy, dividend policy etc, means that everyone has had plenty of chances
over a lengthy period to decide whether they want to stay onboard or not.

hence, i find it strange that there still appear to be so many
bitter folks from days of yore (...if they don’t like aviva’s strategy,
why the heck not long since sold out into something they prefer?)

pulled my 11.80 bid. too generous.

lol, pearls, unfortunately there are one or two frequent
posters on this board who seem to believe that GSK’s
prospects are mainly connected with covid19. bad mistake.

all depends if the slide stops at some
point? ...6% divi is not much use if the
share price loses 10% every year, lol.

(plus, no particular reason to think that SSE will prosper s/term as a covid
‘recovery’ stock, so at the moment some money flowing to other sexier /more
of-the-moment shares, as vaccine programs roll out ... e.g. travel & leisure
stocks, some financials, etc. ...so SSE as a semi-utility a bit out of the spotlight?)

suggest, some of the share price drift partly from
changes in the yield curve, rising at the long end.

i am glad that SSE didn’t pay the prices
that BP did for those wind farm sites.

i don’t think fatprofits is arguing that dividends per se ‘don’t work’.
rather, that it tends to be counterproductive if dividends are set at
a level which detracts from sufficient investment in future growth
(e.g. new drug pipeline). GSK is still struggling to rebuild market
credibility in relation to its future pharmaceutical products. the
company has been quite explicit in its statements, that the future
dividend is not simply going to be “looked at”, as TR64 likes to put
it, but they are already advising that they expect the combined
dividends to be lower in future than they are now. that’s probably
a good thing, but arguably they are still being a bit too slow to bite
that bullet, & such delay hits expectations regarding future growth.

given the slide, is there a point where alexion holders
will start to cavil about receiving some AZN paper?

& bought a few more.

sure, they have channels to ask for funding.
am simply noting, that’s not the same as having
a guarantee it will be agreed, nor at what rates.

i agree with those aje questions,
as i have previously posted here.

... their price discovery has been a bit approximate, lol.

results don’t seem to have stirred many strong passions.

just while we wait for results,
this was some of RBC’s logic:

https://www.proactiveinvestors.co.uk/companies/news/942744/prudential-looks-cheap-compared-to-asian-rival-suggests-broker-942744.html

3rd feb RNS describes itself, clearly, as ‘Final Results’.

chris, some of the answer is right there in the
wording of the paragraph that you quoted -

“... entitled to provide...”
“... conditional ...”
“It is anticipated ...
“... may subscribe ...”

in other words, the MOU simply means, on a non-binding basis, that
trafigura have only said they are willing to take a look at deals that ADME
might bring to them, & *if* they like the look of those deals, they *might*
offer to provide some of the funding, on terms which are not yet specified.

so there is nothing in the MOU that states that the subscription
*will* come from trafigura, as per your 12:56. ...might, might not.

more broadly, any attempted fund-raising is a negotiation. the company
will obviously want their funds at the lowest possible cost, whereas any
potential lenders or equity subscribers will of course want a higher price.

so *if * ADME is trying to negotiate some finance from trafigura, then ADME
would be in a better negotiating position if it had other options available to
raise funds (e.g. big retail interest, or several keen HNWIs). conversely, if (#!)
ADME is struggling to raise money from others, then trafigura could strike a
very, very hard bargain for finance, if they were considering possible funding.

[(#!) and of course, the recent failed placing shows that it is struggling to raise.]

hard to see why any sane punters would want to buy in on the open market
just now, when the whole world knows this company is working its tush off
to get a whopping placement (soz, “subscription”!) done as soon as it can.

ADME RNS ... wave your hands in the air (like you don’t care)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIkfiOClAGw

papucel, different companies and different sectors will vary how
much they are able to change their pricings in line with inflation.

bear in mind too that pharma is a sector which can suffer from
substantial government interference, which may constrain pricing
power. also need to factor in that *costs* of labour, raw materials,
marketing, distribution etc may also tend to rise at different rates.

not entirely sure i understand what you mean by a share “is a piece of
asset”. main value for someone holding a share in AZN is their stake
in a percentage of the total cumulative discounted future earnings for
the company, not really their stake in current assets like land, plant or
precious metals. ... intellectual property is an interesting kind of asset,
since it can for example decline as better discoveries are made by others.

papucel, much of the value in AZN is from expectations about earnings that
people think it will make in the future, rather than sales it is making today.

so if there is a significant change in the amount of earnings expected in
the future, that will affect the shareprice significantly (hence, success or
failure of the alexion deal in the longer term is important). but the share
price will also be affected if there is a significant change in how much people
think those future earnings will actually be *worth*, when compared with
competing uses for the cash people have available today. .... so if market
expectations for inflation rise, then the effective value of those future AZN
earnings will fall, when one factors in an anticipated discount rate. (a billion
dollars of expected earnings in 10 years time if the average inflation rate will
be 6% is worth a lot less that a billion dollars in 10 years time if the average
inflation rate turns out to be 3%.). ... i am just suggesting, many of the share
price movements we are seeing recently in the markets are about changes in
anticipated discount rates, not just about shorter term market trading, or the
medium term corporate outlook (e.g. when AZN might charge more for vaccine.)