Member Info for TakingMyTime

"this is still in my view a great long term investment but for now its a traders stock and I will re enter if it goes stupidly low again and im sure it will....."

Don't count on it. Very volatile and will jump around but the stupid lows were based on fears we might not be flying until autumn or even next year, and that fear is receding.

No, the company is not making money yet, but share prices are always more forward looking (NOT "what have you done for me recently?" It's "what are you going to do for me in the future?").

Right now the market is looking forward and saying, "You're going to do a lot better for me in the future than a 165 SP." It would take a second wave, and a very bad one, to take us back to those days, I think.

We might revisit 210 or 220, but we might not, too. If you want the long-term upside you are playing with fire to stay out of it right now.

"Don’t forget everybody there are 17.5m Gervaise Heddle shares hitting the market tomorrow and a further 6m From an employee on jun 1st."

"Hitting the market" usually implies he'll be selling them. I'd bet not.

I'll fly at least twice within the next 12 months. Once for business, a meeting I was supposed to go to in April, postponed, remote / video just doesn't work for some meetings. I'll quarantine and work from home if necessary when I get back.

Once for family. Even if it means I need to quarantine afterwards.

All going well, I'll fly for holiday, too. That one isn't as certain.

So that's 2 and probably 3 flights. Two long-haul.

It may take 2-3 years to get back to normal flying routines. Pessimistically it could take five. I can wait ten years for my investment here to pay off. I'd expect it to at least double within that time frame, possibly more, plus pay some dividends. Doubling in ten years would be a little better than 7% annually, compounded. Add in dividends and you're getting close to 10% a year, maybe. Not too bad.

And I think it will double faster than that.

If you need your money in a year, don't buy this. Bad stuff could happen, a second wave of the virus could set us back badly. If you need your money in two years, much more likely you'd turn a profit but I still wouldn't take the risk, personally. If you can wait five years, it's likely to come very good in that time, very good indeed. If you can wait ten, it's almost dead certain to come good before then.

That's my view. If it hits 6-700 in the next 2-3 years, I'm taking profits. if it doesn't, I can wait until it does. I think it will happen.

Pity you didn't get in last week. I got in too soon, have only just made up my losses now. You got in too late, if you get in now you'll be right about the price I got in. I still like that price, if I had spare cash I'd be strongly tempted to put more in here.

Today's market moves are sentiment / hope. No one is actually using much oil yet. We may not see much move in the SP until that actually happens. Once it does, this will go.

"Hi again TakingMyTime."
Hi, again. You're saying the same thing over and over and even if your argument were compelling (it isn't) it would be pointless anyway, as I said in my last post. I've run out of time for the discussion. Your posts are long and don't say anything new, so filtered.

@SB
I hate to break it to you, but if GH decides to sell GGP's share of Hav, it doesn't matter what you think. If he decides to recommend that GGP shareholders accept an offer from NCM it also doesn't matter what you think, it will go through. And if he decides to recommend that GGP shareholders reject an offer, it also almost certainly doesn't matter what you think. Because most PIs are going to assume that he's got a better feel for what the company is worth than they do, and they'll go with his recommendation.

If he recommended an offer of 20p, I'd accept it. If he recommended that I reject an offer of 30p because he thought it was too low, I'd reject it.

"It would be silly to accept a one of payment, based on gold in the ground."

This statement, in isolation, is a nonsense. You haven't said how much the one-off payment is.

What if they offer £2 billion, up front, as a one-off payment? Not enough? What if they offer £20 billion? What if they offer £1 billion plus 2% royalties? Not enough? 3%? What if it's only £500 million plus 5% royalties?

What's the CAPEX required going to be? How much? Do we know? What's the cost of financing it? Do we know? What's the 5% worth? Do we know?

How can you possibly say it would be silly to accept a one-off payment when you don't even know how much it would be, whether or not it comes with a royalty, or fairly firm estimates on the costs associated with the alternative?

Until you know what's on the table you can't possibly say this.

"Somewhere and at somehow, I have clearly failed as a father."

Too many shrooms, no doubt.

In a short while you will be rich and he will learn to listen to Father.

"That said, if this did prove to be a Mechanical Failure, the A320 fleet would have to be grounded…"

Yes, if it was shown to be a manufacturing defect. If, in fact, it was mechanical failure due to neglected maintenance, then it has nothing to do with other airlines.

If it's a manufacturing defect, however, in the short term it's a gift to IAG. Right now they have to pay for planes being grounded. In a month they hope to be flying half their fleet, maybe. Well, if Airbus has made a deficient plane, then obviously, they have the burden of putting it right, IAG will get relief on lease payments while the planes are withdrawn from service, and IAG can still fly the other half of their fleet.

And if the A320s were to end up completely withdrawn, I expect IAG can find someone who has extra planes they'd want to offload, at a cheap price.

"I did,nt see the " he would probably no longer be CEO and the BOD would have to evolve," part... I don't think GGP would be as good without GH"

Just to say, "no longer be CEO" does not necessarily mean he'd actually leave. He might step down as CEO, putting a miner in place, to become head of the exploration division of GGP.

This is all speculation. Past statements were from before anyone knew what Hav was going to be (as if we know now, we really don't). His world has changed, there are so many possibilities open to him now that he perhaps never considered as possibilities and certainly never would have felt it was appropriate to discuss them if he had.

"I would never buy a yacht." Well, no, but hand me a billion pounds and I might, thank you very much. Who knows what he might decide now that it looks like almost anything is possible?

"I bet you wouldn't say that to your wife"
My wife says it to me with cleaner language.

Lots of companies are wildly successful by sticking to what they do and doing it well. And lots of companies are wildly successful by branching out into related endeavours. But I'm sure no company is successful branching out unless the board and executives absolutely believe in it and want to do it.

If SocialistB is actually GH in disguise, wanting to become a miner and sounding out some of his shareholders with his posts here, then I'd say go for it. If he believes in it, there is certainly the potential for it. It's an expensive proposition but it appears Hav has made it a very viable one and potentially a wildly successful one. If that's what they want to do, go for it.

But if SB isn't GH, and he wants to own the mining company that is going to harvest Hav and likely Scal (if it's as good as hoped), I'd just he buy some shares in NCM. That way, he's got both bases covered.

Meh. The lockdown is now killing more people than the virus, undoubtedly. Cancelled ops, suicides, skyrocketing substance abuse, lifelong poverty for some now, resulting in reduced lifespans for hundreds of thousands, at least.

The longer it lasts the worse it will be.

LOL.

The options cause minor dilution and the recipient may sell some of them with a minor impact on price. But employee options are a good thing.

It means the employees have a strong incentive to help the company succeed. And it means they can be compensated at very little cost initially, which is beneficial to the company, and yet be compensated quite well if the company succeeds.

So no one should really object to the options, they are beneficial to the company and reflect the fact that the company has been structured to save costs initially in the hopes of long term success, and long term compensation.

Obviously, options can be excessive but it certainly does not appear that way to me. It's one of the things I always want to check before buying a share.

"If that decline is later used to extract ore, it may reduce the CAPEX to build a mine and so reduce the amount that GGP have to contribute."

I am quite sure that if any such thing were to happen that it is either already reflected in the agreement or the agreement would be modified to reflect it. NCM isn't going to accidentally or out of generosity reduce GGP's contribution. The chances are high they will be interested in acquiring GGP's share, they aren't going to do things to make it harder for them to acquire it by reducing GGP's cost.

"Not seen any RNS relating to the massive buys yesterday. Wonder if it’s an investment company topping up or something bigger?"
Probably Warren Buffett taking advantage of bargain prices after talking it down.

Moody's, S&P, Fitch, the three major ratings services, all rate IAG / BA at the lowest investment grade rating with a negative outlook. That's not great but it isn't junk, junk ratings are BB/Ba and below.

"Why are so many people fixated on a transaction all executives with options do at a point that best suits their own tax position!!! Leave GH and move on!"
Because most executives would exercise the options that expire sooner at a lower price, rather than the later expiring ones at a higher price. GH did the opposite. And the tax advantage of exercising the later expiring ones, even if the rules in Oz are the same as here, does not outweigh the higher price GH has to pay for them.

But that's my last word on it, even though there are things that have not been answered, because it's obvious this board in the main has no desire to explore it further. I'll do my own research.

Thanks for that, launder, very helpful!

@dodgemeister
"My 5 year old niece is better at joining dots than some of the hand-wringers on this board."

I'll try to explain this simply.
A. There is no hand-wringing.
B. No one has expressed any worries about the transaction. I didn't see any, anyway.

That is not the reason we are discussing it. The reasons:
1. Unless there's a tax reason, there's no obvious reason why he exercised that particular option.
2. Maybe I'm slow but the tax reason isn't particularly obvious to me.
3. There MIGHT be a reason for him to exercise that particular option if he thinks a hostile buyout attempt might be in the works and he wants a greater say.
4. If that is what is going on I would obviously like to increase our investment here.

It's not "worry". It's wondering if it is a clue to an opportunity I wouldn't want to miss. Obviously that's not the way you approach your investing, and that's fine. When I (or in this case my wife) invest in anything, I want to start learning absolutely everything I can about everything about it, and everything that happens. So far, it works pretty well for me. I realise not everyone is that way. Maybe there's a touch of OCD in me.

For me, I'm going to be looking into Oz tax rules on director share options and see if it makes more sense to me then. If it doesn't, I'll be thinking it was strategic rather than financial or tax-related, and will probably buy more shares now, rather than later, so I don't miss out on what might be coming soon.