Member Info for Svend

Athens81, I never asked you for anything; you decided to come on board and sling your AI hook. Now take a walk off the plank, will you? It's feeding time for the sharks

Athens81 AI is not required to explain that you have managed to get yourself into a pickle and are now trying to dick yourself out of a big hole. So I shall leave it at that.

Serious answer: because the argument matters more than the keyboard it was typed on.

You keep trying to move the debate away from the substance because the substance is where your case gets thin.

The actual points were:

* “Oil up, RR down” is a short-term headwind, not a complete Rolls-Royce valuation model.

* Buying only on a confirmed rise is one valid strategy, not the only intelligent one.

* Scaling into weakness is a recognised method precisely because nobody can call the bottom.

* A price fall proves the price moved; it does not automatically prove the full reasoning behind your view was correct.

None of that changes because you shout “AI” at the paragraph.

And let’s be honest: copying my post into AI, asking it to mark the argument, then coming back to tell me “my AI said you were losing” is not exactly a triumph of human originality, is it?

That is like bringing a calculator to an exam and then mocking someone else for knowing maths.

If you want to challenge the argument, challenge the argument. Explain why RR should be valued mainly through the oil price. Explain why scaling into weakness is automatically wrong. Explain why momentum buying is the only valid method. Explain why a 20% pullback destroys the long-term thesis.

But “your posts are AI” is not analysis. It is an escape hatch.

I use tools. You use tools. Everyone uses tools. The question is whether the thinking behind the post stands up.

So far, you have attacked the style, the structure, the writer, the emoji, and now the keyboard.

Still waiting for the actual market argument.

Stan, a Chinese JV partner, seems a very legitimate and serious contender, given the company's history on the Tanzania projects.

That’s a lot of words to avoid the actual point.

Also, accusing someone of using AI by posting what you openly call “my AI response” is a bold little pirouette. You’ve basically brought a parrot to court and asked it to testify against parrots.

Less English Literature GCSE, more market substance.

Athens81, who invited you on board? You seem to circle around the same roundabout all the time. If you have anything RR-related, please communicate it properly.

Retirment, you’re still treating one trading method as if it is the only valid investment discipline.

Buying strength after confirmation can be intelligent. Nobody disputes that. But saying it is the only intelligent method is nonsense.

Some investors buy breakouts.

Some buy pullbacks.

Some scale in at valuation levels.

Some wait for moving-average confirmation.

Some use tranches precisely because nobody can call the bottom.

The fact that nobody can call the bottom is not an argument against scaling in; it is the exact reason people scale in.

Also, buying at £13 and watching it drop is only a mistake if the thesis, sizing, timeframe or risk control was wrong. It is not necessarily a mistake, since the next candle was red. If every temporary drawdown made an investment “wrong,” then almost every great long-term holding in history would have looked stupid at some point.

And yes, oil can hit sentiment. That is a headwind. But “oil up, SP down” is not a full Rolls-Royce valuation model. It does not cover defence, power systems, engine flying hours, service margins, free cash flow, buybacks, guidance, balance sheet strength, or future earnings.

You are making a trader’s point and pretending it defeats an investor’s argument. It doesn’t.

A trader can wait for the tide to turn.

An investor can buy when the tide is rough.

A fool is the one who thinks the whole ocean is explained by one wave.

So by all means, buy the rise if that is your system. But stop pretending anyone who scales into weakness is “thick.” That is not market wisdom > it is just your strategy wearing a crown it has not earned. 🤡

Retirment,

Yes, I read it back > and it still stands.

A price move proves the price moved. It does not automatically prove the reasoning behind your prediction was correct.

If RR drops because of war risk, oil, forced selling, market rotation, index weakness, profit-taking, or general risk-off sentiment, you don’t get to point at the red candle and claim every part of your argument was proven.

That is like seeing rain and claiming you personally diagnosed the entire weather system.

You said “oil up, RR down” as if that explains the whole company. It doesn’t. It explains one headwind in one market phase.

So yes, the share price is down. That is obvious. But being temporarily right on direction is not the same as being right on valuation, timing, business quality, or long-term thesis.

Even a stopped clock gets two good trades a day if it shouts loudly enough. 🤡

Retirment, that sounds sensible on the surface, but it is too simplistic.

“Buy on a known upward trend” is fine for a momentum trader. No argument. But not every buyer is running the same system, in the same timeframe, or with the same risk model.

A trader may wait for confirmation.

A long-term investor may scale into weakness.

A value buyer may buy when fear creates a discount.

A mechanical investor may add at pre-set levels.

None of those is automatically “thick.” They are different strategies.

Also, by the time an upward trend is “known,” a large part of the move has often already happened. That is why some buy strength, and others buy fear. Both can work if the discipline is sound.

The real issue is not whether RR is down today or oil is up today. The issue is whether the long-term thesis has broken. On that, I have seen no serious argument from you yet, only price commentary dressed up as certainty.

So yes, traders may wait for the turn. Investors may buy the panic.

The mistake is pretending your method is the only intelligent one.

The sea is rough. That does not mean the ship is sinking. It means you need to know whether you are trading the waves or owning the vessel.

Retirment,

You’ve confused shouting with analysis.

Nobody denied that the share price is down from the high. The point was that one daily 1.8% move is not, by itself, an investment thesis. Calling it “20% down” after the fact does not magically turn a short-term oil-and-war panic into a complete valuation argument.

Yes, oil prices are a headwind for airlines. Yes, war risk hits sentiment. Yes, the FTSE has had a poor run. That is all obvious. But Rolls-Royce is not priced solely on today’s Brent move. It is priced on long-term engine flying hours, defence, services, free cash flow, margins, buybacks, balance sheet strength, future guidance, and capital return.

If your entire model is “oil up, RR down,” then you are not analysing Rolls-Royce, you are watching one input and pretending it explains the whole machine.

Also, spare me the insults. They do not strengthen your case; they advertise its weakness.

A falling share price can be a risk, an opportunity, or both. The difference is whether you understand the business underneath it. I am not buying because the sea is calm. I am holding because the ship remains sound, the engines are still turning, and the market is currently throwing a tantrum over the weather.

So yes, 20% down from the high matters. But it still does not prove you are right. It only proves the price has moved. Those are not the same thing.

Crossroads @ 1111 > time to fly north unless we stall here..

Retirment,

Oil up, SP down, therefore “don’t buy”?

By that logic, nobody would ever buy anything unless it had already gone up nicely first, which is usually how folk end up buying the top and calling it “confirmation.”

Yes, rising oil is a headwind. No argument there. But RR is not just an airline fuel bill in a trench coat. It is engines, defence, power systems, services, cash flow, buybacks, SMR optionality, and a market that tends to overreact in both directions.

A 1.8% daily wobble is not a thesis. It is the weather.

The Captain does not buy because the sea is flat; he buys when the ship is sound, and the crew are panicking over a splash on deck. ⚓🚀

Fair play > and same here.

The banter may get a bit lively on deck now and again, but it would be a dull old voyage if half the crew weren’t shouting from the rigging.

Good luck with the presentation. Tough rooms are usually the ones worth winning over.

And don’t worry > the Captain’s hat, telescope, and questionable cartoon credentials remain firmly on station. ☀️⚓

Presentation to aerospace leaders tomorrow? Splendid. I assume that’s at Filton, Bristol, then > unless the venue is the mirror in the downstairs loo. Either way, safe landing.

Funny that > giving a presentation to aerospace leaders tomorrow, yet spending today on a share bulletin board laughing at cartoon captains.

That is either impressive time management or the most niche form of professional development I’ve ever seen.

But yes, this BB is comedy at times. The punchline is usually someone trying to sound above it while still queuing up for the next episode.

Anyway, safe flight with the presentation. I’ll stay here with the telescope, the charts, and the cartoon hat > still holding RR. 🚀

The irony is delicious.

Apparently, being an “engineering professional” now includes diagnosing cartoon characters and narcissism on a share forum — remarkable cross-training.

But fair play, we’ve finally reached common ground: you can’t go wrong with RR — buy and hold. 👊🚀

So whether one arrives in overalls, a hard hat, or a captain’s coat, the destination is the same.

The only difference is some of us brought a map, a telescope, and a ship’s cat.

ShaunCod, welcome aboard. We hope you have a great journey on the Rycey voyage, which is now firmly in the final stages of preparation to take off into the SMR Nuclear energy sector, along with Turbo's re-entry into short-haul markets via the Ultrafan platform, as they say:

'https://www.google.com/search?q=star+trekkin+across+the+universe+lyrics+english&sca_esv=90dd81efd5a0f8db&rlz=1C1ONGR_en-GB__1193__1194&sxsrf=ANbL-n5a-1gevvfQf9w4mhCJWZMnpn_jpQ%3A1777405442790&ei=Ag7xacb6L_24hbIP0ZPIgQc&biw=1884&bih=849&oq=%27starreck+to+the+moon&gs_lp=Egxnd3Mtd2l6LXNlcnAiFSdzdGFycmVjayB0byB0aGUgbW9vbioCCAQyBRAAGO8FMgUQABjvBTIFEAAY7wUyCBAAGIAEGKIEMgUQABjvBUiazAJQ2jVY2egBcAF4AZABAJgB1AGgAZgaqgEGNDMuMS4xuAEByAEA-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_gQwgcIMC40LjIyLjLIB4MBgAgB&sclient=gws-wiz-serp#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:1357bec6,vid:kYQ0Oa-alWQ,st:0''

Followed by Rycey to the Moon:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tx_9i5BpQs0

Enjoy the Voyage IV🙌🚀

The plotted course to ports 13, 14 and 15 has been temporarily altered, and the ship has had to swing back toward port 12 for another pass.

The voyage is taking a little longer than first charted, not because the destination has changed, but because the Middle East peace-deal winds are still shifting across the bow. Once those diplomatic waters settle, the sails can be reset for the next leg north. Enjoy the voyage IV 🙌🚀

Smokeytime, he just throws out empty ponches like bingo numbers, literally a big🤡

SP > The next ports of call are planned as follows: departure from 333, then onto 444, 555, 666 and 777, whilst the shorts get toasted and squeezed following additional buybacks, hopefully commencing in May. IMOO DYOR