Member Info for TheTrotsky

You might still get a chance (if the "gap" theory has any legs). The MMs are feasting on the unwitting PIs who jumped in first thing this morning who are now panick selling and who'll probably be choking by the end of the week. I fully expect to see the share price touching, if not exceeding, £4 in the coming days. This share has been a rollercoaster for the last 2+ years with sharp price rises being followed by sharp price falls (the MMs love to shake the tree on this one) but the share price has inexorably recovered and moved on up. I still think there's still plenty of gas in the tank yet. The love-in with all things space related is only just starting and we still haven't had the SpaceX IPO.

I should add I didn't see what volume was traded post close, so it may have simply been an outlier

I saw that the US price fell to $4.88 post close, so we'll have to see

What price limit did you set, out of interest?

Well, if that's the case then I stand corrected (I did wonder what the F was about).

I'd also be very wary of any significant "gap up" (a significant increase in the opening price compared to the previous closing price) at tomorrow's open if the price action on the OTC does indeed transfer across to the LSE. I'm not a chartist but I do take note when they start talking about "filling the gap" (essentially a retrace in the share price once all of the initial hullabaloo has died down before the share price moves back up to its new, higher level). It happens too often to ignore and opens up the possibility for a bit of arbitrage.

I think people need to calm down and see what tomorrow brings. The US OTC market is unofficial (it's not a secondary market) and, as far as I am aware, it does not trade either FTC shares or ADRs (it's more akin to an index). In my past experience there's isn't always a correlation between price movements on the OTC market and the LSE.; the OTC might follow price movements on the LSE but rarely the other way round. If the share price is going to rise tomorrow it will be driven by the potential ramifications of the FCC announcement on Friday after the markets closed and/or the possibility of further orders (whether or not any are announced tomorrow), not the price action on the OTC.

A little perspective. Kelso was obliged to make the disclosure because FTC had risen to 10% of its investment portfolio. In their disclosure they say that they now currently hold c500,000 shares in FTC. At c£3, that would value their FTC holding at c£1.5m which, in turn, would value their fund at c£15m.

I'm not pooh-poohing their investment, or the rationale for their investment, but they are hardly market movers and shakers.

I suggest that you re-read my post and take note of the contracted neagtive "don't".

Check out some other space related shares; they're all starting to fly off the back of the excitement being created by the pending SpaceX IPO e.g. SSIT. People have got space-itis! I'd expect Concurrent Technogies (it hasn't got its mojo fully back since the start of the conflict in Iran but it will) and Ensilica (check out recent RNS) to join the party too. It's starting to look like the dot.com boom all over again (FTC rode that wave too). Sometimes people look too hard at the specifics and ignore the round (I did the same during the dot.com boom; information was a lot more sparse then, the internet was still in its infancy, and I got spooked when shares that I bought reached my 2-3 year targets in 1-3 months - I panicked and sold before the phrase "dot.com" had even been coined).

I don't think FTC is just a fly in the night operation (like a lot of dot.com companies were); I think FTC has got legs and is set to grow substantially over the coming years but it's quite possible that the current share price momentum could catapult the short-term share price to silly multiples/valuations.

It's a myth that Musk/SpaceX is vertical manufacturer. If it was, it would already be bidding for a speciality Korean metals business which has contracted to supply SpaceX with $500m+ of materials to date plus a myriad of other niche manufacturers around the globe. Personally, I think SpaceX benefits from FTC being an independent manufacturer with no conflicts of interest (if SpaceX was to acquire FTC It would probably shut the door on any further orders from other satellite manufacturers). SpaceX has a minority stake which may give it some preference in the supply chain but beyond that SpaceX will benefit from FTC servicing the widest possible customer base. It helps to spread development costs whilst helping to pus new product development.

A takeover by SpaceX would shut more doors than it opens. I still think that if there is to be a takeover the likes of BAE would make a much better fit; they both operate in the same sectors, don't have any conflicts of interest and are more likely to get UK government approval.

As usual the devil will be in the detail but, in the circumstances, the H1 results don't sound too bad. Unfortunately both macro events beyond their control (conflict in the Middle East) and US specific issues (the demise of science under the Trump administration) are creating tailwinds. Despite the successful launch of Artemis, the Trump administration has recently announced a 25%+ reduction in NASA's science budge! Don't know whether that will have any direct impact on OMG but it is a sign of how the wind is currently blowing in the US (I wouldn't be surprised if they started re-introducing Creationism to the academic curriculum the way things are currently going). As regards the Middle East and the outcome of Trump's latest "peace" exercise, who knows!

Sheltie, I think you may have missed the two 1m share sales reported at 12:20. I suspect that those had a lot more to do with the sudden price drop than the director sells.

If you Google SMIF RNS you'll find the London Stock Exchange announcements for SMIF.

There doesn't appear to be any announcements for SMIF (as yet) today

*yield should have read dividend.

Storage rates in Texas are through the floor and the market has become totally shambolic. You need storage to balance the market to be able to match peak production with peak demand. Fail to balance production and demand and a lot of your renewable production ends up being wasted. The grid has been mismanaged and for much of last winter the price of electricity was based on gas prices and price of gas was often verging on the price of production. Nobody was making any money. Customers love it, oodles of cheap electricity, but ultimately producers and/or suppliers will be forced to withdraw.

Texas may love renewables but gas still dictates prices and it has unforeseen consequences.

Here in the UK gas prices tend to be significantly higher than renewable electricity and we struggle to pass that benefit to the consumer because of the way the wholesale price is calculated (all producers are paid the same price regardless to avoid producers trying to rig the market). In the US, we're seeing the opposite effect.

I always tend to pay more attention to the skin they have left in the game rather than what they've sold and he still has a fair wedge.

As investors we are always advised to have a diversified portfolio and never have all our eggs in one basket, so it never ceases to amaze me that we think what's good for the goose is never good for the gander! Directors are PIs too and have exactly the same responsibilities as the rest of us. Diversification is important for all of us because in life there's rarely if ever a sure thing, however much we want to believe it.

I think FTC still has a long way to go on it's independent journey (forget about a takeover by Musk; it may come but I think there'd be a lot of regulatory hurdles and ultimately it would destroy value for the existing shareholders) but I accept that I might prove long. When are British PIs going to get some cojones and accept that a takeover by a larger foreign company isn't always the best solution.

I think that FTC has found a good niche and could easily become a multi-£billion company in the fullness of time if is left to its own devices.

It's not a delay. As I say, every 6/7 years it's quite normal for the announcement date to be reset and if you look at prior years you'll clearly see that the announcement date has been getting progressively earlier. At some point that has to reset. Just happens to be this year. No need to issue an RNS over a non-issue. RNSs cost money and companies do not issue them or notify the market in another manner unless there's actually something to report.

Although I think revenues are likely to start improving from here on, I suspect that GSF will need to sell assets to sustain the current yield. Time will tell.

I'm not "having a go" at SEIT investors just pointing out that the location of ones assets has now become critically important in Trump's America. Some states are "friendlier" than others and Texas is definitely not on the friends list.