Member Info for stt1

Who's the seller? What do they know? Why sell if there's so much potential?

Were they influenced by the chairman, who dumped his entire holding just 4 working days after the TU/investor presentation? What was the urgency for the chairman to dump his entire holding as quick as possible?

It proves that IIs could and can buy quantities in the markets, doesn't it?.

Why then did the sitting chairman need to dump his entire holding and just 4 working days after the TU?

https://polaris.brighterir.com/public/hvivo/news/rns/story/xpdodqx/export

Is that a 1m share sell, reported after hours??

Thinice,

That's fine, it's your choice if you don't want to debate any red flags, with evidence, I have mentioned.

Some posters are incapable of forming an opinion on facts, so it's understandable if you're unable to counter the red flags, it's fine.

The sitting chairman at HVO dumped his entire holding, whilst the CEO has huge >7m options, awarded only last year, so an incentive to talk up the company. I see that as a huge red flag.

Whilst the sitting chairman at TLY has been buying.

I believe the chairman knows more about the company than IIs or PIs.

Thinice,

Just looking in, having not done so since Monday, to see what sensible debate

has been going.

Where's this sensible debate you were referring to?

"suggesting II's are unreliable as they are using someone else's money:"

Where have I ever said IIs are unreliable? It's a fundamental fact fund managers use client money and not from their own pockets.

Whereas the officers/directors (chairman/CEO etc) would buy/sell using their own money.

"The Chairman there, co-founder of Liberum has also been buying"

Here at HVO, who do you think receives the money after the chairman dumped his entire holding?

Likewise, as per my point, the chairman at TLY was buying. IIs are also continuing to buy as can be seen from today's rns. Where do you think the money the TLY chairman spent on buying shares came from?

The fact is the Chairman here has no holding and knows more about the business than any II or PI.

That is a debate. Feel free to put your points across to counter them.

The rate cut was expected, has been for months.

The important part is the outlook statement from the BoE governor:

"Andrew Bailey adds to the message that it is unlikely there will be a flurry of interest rate cuts over the next few months.

“We need to put the period of high inflation firmly behind us," he says, and "we need to be careful not to cut rates too much or too quickly”.

The Bank is forecasting that inflation will increase to about 2.75% later this year, before returning to its 2% target next year."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cx92wjll8k8t

Interest rates staying higher for longer.

The increase in above inflation Public Sector Pay is inflationary, as well as potential Middle East war beyond Gaza, which would hike energy prices.

HBs made hundreds of millions of pounds from Help to Buy (H2B).

The difference between H2B and a mortgage guarantee scheme is H2B offered a upto 20%(upto 40% in London) interest free loan for 5 years. With the mortgage guarantee scheme, the homebuyer still needs a high deposit.

The H2B scheme was introduced during latter part of GFC to kick start the housing market.

Currently, the govn hasn't money to spend to offer interest free loans.

I think the H2B scheme was toxic, anyway.

"While interest rates and mortgage rates remain high, our teams continue to work extremely hard on the ground to support our customers through the homebuying process"

In other words, they are using incentives to encourage buyers.

"Though it is early days for the new Government, we welcome their recognition that planning is a major barrier to economic growth, of which housebuilding is a significant component, and we look forward to working constructively with them to deliver much needed new homes across the UK."

It just goes to show, house building isn't down because of planning. It's lower due to affordability. Doesn't inspire confidence in Govn plans to build 1.5m homes.

Outlook - post GE, which is more important.

"As at the week ended 28 July 2024, our total order book value was £2,102 million (2023 equivalent period: £2,175 million), excluding joint ventures, representing 7,667 homes (2023 equivalent period: 7,900 homes), of which 74% are exchanged (2023 equivalent period: 77%)."

Order book down/sales down.

"Whilst we have seen some benefit from market stability, mortgage costs remain at higher levels than in recent years which continues to impact affordability for some of our customers, particularly first time buyers."

As expected, high mortgage level continuing to impact affordability.

1gw_

We've been here before, where you suggested a company's performance should continue but you failed to consider the huge environment changes.

You need to consider whether there are huge environment, political, demand for products/services etc. changes.

Byot -

thread titled "New interview", 16th May 2021, when sp was 6.55

Your post:

"Roadrunnr, how you can look at byot's performance last year and not see multiple indications of how they are positioning for growth in the coming years is beyond me."

You failed to notice the environment for covid had changed. By May 2021, vaccines were being given to everyone eligible/at risk. Therefore, it was naive to think the boost Byot got in 2020, when covid hit will continue in 2021.

My comment, same 16th May 2021, at 9pm:

"Having a product doesn't GUARANTEE they are making significant money from it?

As restriction ease, so will the need for sanitiser/cleaning products. People are desperate to remove masks and use sanitiser and put covid behind them."

https://www.lse.co.uk/ShareChat.html?ShareTicker=BYOT&share=BYOT.L&thread=88C7E434-A01A-4E06-988C-7A7F4F81C3E3

I was right, as the company, themselves announced slowing sales and sp crashed, only to be delisted recently at 0.1p. They crashed down 99.9% in less than 4 years, from peak of around 10p

Have you not learnt anything in 3 years since your post?

You really must consider major changes like political, environment etc

1gw_

The fy2024 period you refer to ended 31st March 2024, 4 months ago!! Over a year ago, the company themselves said they were going through a period of restructuring as NHS environment was difficult due, eg inflation and junior doctors strike.

Due to the difficult NHS environment guidance was withdrawn, which was a sensible thing to do.

Since then, there's been a GE, change of govn, new chancellor, new PM, new Health Secretary. Since the GE there has also been easing of contracts awarded, as the company has stated. The company has re-issued guidance as they are now in a better position to do so.

It is naive to consider figures from accounts, which ended 4 months ago and which represent a period when the company was restructuring.

The company adapts to NHS requirements, which is exactly what they have done.

Thompi

"clearly Octopus Investments don’t see CF’s sale as a “big red flag”,"

IIs buy using other people's money. IIs/PIs will buy on the story they have been sold to them.

CF sold entire holding.

I think the chairman knows more about the company than any II or PI/BB poster.

The fact is the company's updates show lack of revenue growth rate and falling order book.

Trmr, was blnx/rthm, now called nexn:

IIs held around 30%. I was warning of the red flags, the ad tech bubble. The shares still crashed 80%, despite the IIs holding. The CEO there also has huge options, which I saw as a red flag.

TLY:

TLY IIs hold c40% and have been adding. The Chairman there, co-founder of Liberum has also been buying.

etc

Junior doctors strikes have been a major problem impacting NHS and therefore TLY for well over a year. The strike was a bear point for TLY, not the rubbish posted by some.

If the bear points can be countered then the bull case is stronger.

Junior doctors offered 22% pay rise in deal to end strike action

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cjqe82lk5g5o

Bazzaman

"if it is an accurate statement and to be taken literally, a seller (as with a buyer) will always try to justify their actions."

Absolutely a seller/buyer will always try to justify their actions.

However, the seller here is the sitting chairman of the company. A sitting chairman selling is entire near 50m holding says a lot.

I believe he knows the company better than any II or PI. Others may disagree and that's fine.

Re Fastnet Oil and Gas. Whilst CF was in charge, they had placings, made huge losses.

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/health-pharma/fastnet-shareholders-back-amryt-pharma-reverse-takeover-1.2614704

I think a sitting chairman selling his entire near 50m holding whilst the CEO is talking up the company as a big red flag.

It's also a red flag that the CEO has huge >7m options, awarded last year and back dated a year, exercisable in few months.

It gives him the incentive to talk up the company.

The sitting chairman dumping his entire near 50m holding whilst the CEO talks up the company is a big red flag.

Do you agree Hallsworthy? You can always divert away, as you normally do.

Others are entitled to disagree.

Hallsworthy

"The reason clients paid for new facilities is because the old ones were at capacity and they would have to wait. It is better business for them to pay for a new facility and increase capacity than wait."

Great, you're agreeing with me again. Clients who largely paid for the new facility would get preferential treatment. They paid for it as THEY, as client, would benefit. It was cheaper to pay a few quid for a new facility than wait and lose millions waiting.

It is to the client's benefit.

Great you're understanding at last.

Now those clients who didn't pay.

What's stopping pharmas, who didn't pay from setting up their rival facilities so they don't have to wait, given you and some other rampers suggest there is huge demand?

Nothing, as you agreed earlier!!. IF there's huge demand then there's nothing stopping those other clients or any other pharma from setting up facilities, say in India/China etc. If there was huge demand, they could then take away huge amounts of business from HVO.

Now, to the point I see as a huge red flag.

Do you think the sitting chairman dumping his entire holding of near 50m shares 28p/29p, whilst the CEO is talking up the business is a huge red flag?

I do.

Hallsworthy

"what I said was pharmas won't set up rival facilities."

Great, we got there in the end. ;-)

WON'T as opposed to CAN'T due to 'high barriers of entry', which is what the usual rampers want readers to believe.

As per my assertion IF there was huge demand then what's stopping pharmas or other companies setting up a rival facility? Nothing, is this because clients that huge demand doesn't exist? Company newsflow shows revenue/order book showing growth rate has slowed significantly. In fact the company's rns showed order book has fallen.

That's why I think pharamas paid largely for the new facility. It's cheaper and significantly lower risk more beneficial to them. Clients aren't charities and thinking of HVO.

If HVO have huge spare cash balances then why didn't they pay for the new facility themselves, thus avoiding any preferential treatment they are likely to have given to those clients. Do those clients get any financial return on contracts from other clients? Do those client get preferential treatment, thus allowing those clients to test their vaccines ahead of their rivals, which in itself would drive potential clients away.

Did the sitting chairman dump his entire near 50m holding because he saw demand, revenue growth rate has slowed, so sell at the top?

It's good others are beginning to agree with my assertions.

Thanks for agreeing, Hallsworthy.

;-)

H1 results on Wed.

I'm expecting TW to continue to have reduced number they have been building compared to fy and last year.

I'm expecting cash to be lower.

The problem TW faces is their commitment to c7.5% of NAV dividend.

It means during a market slowdown, they will payout more cash, reducing cash in bank. I think that is a bad policy when housing market is slow.

It explains why they need the extra banking facility.

Abject,

All HBs have been rising. If you look at graphs of HBs, they tend to rise in sync.

I see most of the recent rise is to do with Labour's committment to build 300k homes per year and I think some think big HBs like TW will benefit - I don't.

Crucially, Labour's commitment to build 1.5m homes in 5 years is a mandatory one. The last time there was a mandatory commitment to build thousands of homes was in the 1950s, some 70+ years ago, just after WW2. At that time there was huge migration from ex-British countries like South Asia and Carribean.

During 2000's, pre-brexit, there was freedom of movement from EU. That freedom of movement no longer exists, so the huge demand no longer exists.

Labour also want huge increases in social housing, council led and use compulsory purchase of land.

HBs have themselves, reduced the number they are building due to affordability. There isn't the demand that Labour seem to think there is. Forcing them to build more won't resolve the underlying problem, affordability.

I think building hundreds of thousands of new homes will lead to over supply, lower prices.

I can't see how that would help HBs like TW.

This from ThisisMoney

"CEO Yamin Khan has made it clear he wants Hvivo to buy smaller rivals. "

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/investing/article-13679223/CITY-WHISPERS-French-fizz-eyeing-swoop-British-sparkling-vines.html

How can the company want to buy rivals? According to Hallsworthy etc, there's huge barriers to entry and so there can't be any rivals. How can the CEO then want to buy rivals?

If there is huge demand, what's stopping pharmas setting up rival facilities. The fact the usual rampers are unable to come up with an answer tells you everything.

Business Post article, subscribers can read the whole article and form their own opinion.

‘Six or seven million quid for my shares? That’s bloody good’: Cathal Friel on selling Hvivo stake

On top of growing the value of a company, Friel said his ‘core skill’ was in picking the right executives to lead public companies beyond his involvement

Picture with comment: Cathal Friel said that he had traded out from Hvivo now that the company was ‘fixed’. Picture: Fergal Phillips

Business Post subscribers can read:

• Why the successful investor has decided to sell up now

• How there’s ‘no way’ Hvivo’s share price will double or triple over the coming years

https://www.businesspost.ie/news/six-or-seven-million-quid-for-my-shares-thats-bloody-good-cathal-friel-on-selling-hvivo-stake/

I see that as sitting Chairman's view as "I'm all right Jack".