Member Info for Spikeyj

"the figures are wholly irrelevant" .. let's see if mr market agrees with you at 8am.

clock, sure, you suggested waiting for the whole picture, but after you had already picked out two particular phrases which you chose to label as the "Key parts of this RNS.." ... neither relating to the losses, bad debtors, or weak revenue. - pretty selective. "working towards" ... leaving themselves a little wriggle room? "bad debtor write offs" ... (RT says, the cheque's in the post?)

just a bit of symmetry, clock, since you immediately attempt to edit out the negatives as though they are not 'key points.' ... better to let people read the RNS in its entirety, eh, and form their own opinion. it's not like it's v long? no, of course i'm not invested here, lol.

....or alternatively, key parts of this RNS from Dan: " the Company will report an increased pre-tax and amortisation loss .." "This follows an upwards revision of bad debtor write offs...."

but taken a hammering today

.

woodford again?

sorry

general market rotten, this one has a sell lid at 1.88 but demand under.

hi ben, my apologies if it came across at all that i was getting at you about it, not intended at all. snag can be that *some* graphs do get shown 'corrected' and some don't, but more usually it is simply the raw price data that is displayed, regardless of changes to underlying share issue. atb.

a little

hi rollin, i suggest you are perhaps being a mite over-sensitive. i tend to assume that anyone reading such posts would be reading the thread as a whole -- it is not a particularly long one, & not on a very busy bulletin board either, so it's not that hard to follow, really? more specifically, i was wanting to respond to ben's 16:51 post, which seemed to indicate a possible misunderstanding on ben's part about how lse sp graphs can be interpreted. "Surely the charts get corrected for that kind of thing? Looking at the SP graph, you can't see a 15:1 consolidation happening in mid 2014. It would be appalling if historic graphs did not capture share splits and reversals!" (... & not my intention to be critical of ben in doing so) my posts weren't trying to make any special point about qpp that has not already been made a thousand times over on various boards, just wanting to offer a constructive comment about the importance of reading lse graphs alongside the RNS history, as it can cause expensive errors not to do so.

i think midland and benjamin brought the topic up because of RT's involvement with IMTK, & the recent press coverage regarding RT & IMTK. i think ben introduced qpp as an example of how much good money RT has made for pis, in his view.

"Spikeyj: Didn't TW say recently he was going on a sabbatical & handing the reigns over to someone else?" .... lol, yes, should one believe TW about that? mind you, one can argue anyway that most of the time TW only acts as a glove puppet for others anyway. he's not in charge of much.

i do see what you mean, but the snag is that ben seems to be mixing two different pricing conventions with the 12:16 and the 12:21 posts. "Going back a year earlier, to July 2010, the share price was under 4p. Its around £1 today" if one is simply intending to quote the sp in 'post-consolidation terms', as you put it, one would describe the july 2010 price differently. it's that comparison of 4p vs £1 which makes me think he may be confusing sources. it was certainly true that people who invested in qpp while it was on the way up, & remembered to lock in profits made money, i am not trying to dispute that at all. i made good money on qpp myself. i think the point is simply that RT did not build up qpp as a business between 2010 - 2015 in the way that 4p vs £1 would suggest, that's all.

benjamin: "I think a lot of people made a lot of money on QPP, didn't they? Share went from 45p on 19 May 2011, to 626p on 11 April 2014. " the lse chart shows qpp as being at 41.75p on 11th April 2014. i think that the 15:1 consolidation happened on 23rd June 2014. (when qpp price changed to 227.5, from around 15/16p week before). (? i wonder if you might inadvertently be getting confused by using two different price sources / graphing programs, one of which gives prices 'adjusted' for consolidation, & one not?)

hi ben, caution is needed, the lse site charts *do NOT* make any automatic 'correction' re share consolidation,warrant issues, share buybacks, etc etc. so in looking at any share price chart on lse, it is very important to view it alongside the RNS history, so that you can double-check what particular price spikes or crashes may relate to. sometimes, as with rem's massive spike up in august '13, the sp change represents a real change in the company's underlying prospects (REM discovered a major lithium supply in mexico, big news) but other times, as with qpp price movement in 2014, the spike simply represents a share consolidation, so actually real value for qpp longs was falling, not rising.

Recommendation type: Income Jonas Crosland LondonMetric Property (LMP) was born in November 2012 from the agreed merger between London & Stamford Property and Metric Property Investments. Since then, it has shrewdly shifted its property portfolio out of office and residential and into areas where property prices have been growing more quickly, namely out-of-town retail distribution centres and convenience shopping. In doing so, it has managed to achieve a significant arbitrage between selling off highly priced assets and replacing them with cheaper acquisitions. And the company is now entering a new phase of value creation as it focuses on property development. While LondonMetric still has some assets that are likely to be sold, the mixture in the portfolio has been changed dramatically. Residential and office assets comprise just 10 per cent of the portfolio, compared with 45 per cent at the time of the merger. In value terms, 90 per cent of the portfolio is now within its core sectors. Chief executive Andrew Jones takes an unemotional and pragmatic approach to recycling assets, and in the year to March asset sales totalled £289m, while investments in retail and distribution amounted to £309m. Contracted rental income last year rose from £78m to £85.6m, and 20 rent reviews conducted during the year provided an extra £0.6m of rental income. Together with new lettings, this lifted rents by £2.6m. The change in direction has been made to benefit from a seismic shift in the retail sector, thanks to technological advances and changing consumer habits. Online shopping, click-and-collect services and home delivery have left most retailers with an inadequate logistics infrastructure at the same time as a seven-year drought in the availability of big, purpose-built premises. However, prices of such properties have risen considerably since LondonMetric began to refocus, so the company is now turning to development to get maximum benefit from the strong demand. Typical of the LondonMetric's drive is a pre-let agreement with Primark for a 1.06m sq ft distribution centre on the A14 in Northamptonshire on a new 25-year lease, which is expected to deliver a 6.9 per cent rental yield based on expected development costs - better than could be achieved from buying such a property in the open market. The current committed development pipeline totals 2m sq ft, of which 90 per cent is pre-let, while the company has a further 1m sq ft of developments conditional on planning approvals. Finances are in good shape, too, boosted by a £400m revolving credit facility, while the loan-to-value ratio still looks modest despite edging up from 32 per cent to 36 per cent last year. Cost of debt has fallen to 3.4 per cent, while average debt maturity has been extended to six years. Rental income is expected to jump from £54m in 2014 to £74.5m by 2017, which should mean the attractive dividend is covered

zigs and zags. but the business continues to grow according to strategic plan, looks ok. needs to continue to reduce over-reliance on foscavir, as generic competition on that would be a risk, but otherwise looks fine. won't be immune from general market action, & has already had decent results fairly priced in, but plenty of scope for further international growth. need to understand this as an international niche player based in UK, rather than a UK focused company per se. have a good w/end, finn& fellow holders.

tom winnifrith on shareprophets. http://*********************/views/15263/quindell-fraudster-rob-terry-guilty-of-market-abuse-at-imaginatik-i-have-asked-the-fca-to-investigate ... please note, i am *not* suggesting TW is a reliable or honest source. i do keep a little eye on him as an active market participant, but i think he & his team are often highly problematic mischief-makers, & would be reluctant to trust him any further than i trust RT. (i do not follow twitter myself normally, so have no idea whether TW is being truthful or not in this case)