Member Info for ToffAppleton1

ADR is $34.45 to sell
$34.48 to buy

Information that’s available to all real traders.

Glaxo ADR is actually marginally higher today
Whereas the Glaxo in the Permabear has plumbed a new low.

Glaxo ADR is currently 9 percent ABOVE its 52 week low.
Whereas Glaxo UK has fallen to yet another 52 week low today.

That’s the cost of belonging to the Permabear.

I called 1188p bottom, right after the full year results. It certainly looks as though the SP will breach £12 tomorrow.

Interesting to see how the SP falls when US markets open in the afternoon bear raids I warned about a couple of weeks ago.

I always knew the dividend would be the catalyst to the next leg down - also predicted in a past post.

1188 is looking a little optimistic now. The broker average for Glaxo is about 1560p but market makers always follow the lowest ones in the UK - which are currently 1150

If it dips below £12 I am fully expecting crédit Suisse to issue another sell recommendation - but with a lower price target of 1075. As I predicted they’d issue a second sell rec with a lower price target right after the results. (It’s all there in my posting history)

I sold a third of my shares for 1285 a couple of days before the toxic dividend but I am not ready to buy any back just yet as I believe they have further to fall.

It should be remembered when stocks fall prey to shorting cartels they becomes toxic and scares buyers away. When a pack of hyenas are feeding even the lions stay away:-)

Glaxo is in a firm downtrend now - totally controlled by bears.

Baffled

“If you truly know the market you realise its fundamental characteristic is capriciousness.”

You are so right in your assessment. If only it was as easy as trading on fundamentals. But a lot of the time, fundamentals don’t factor; sentiment and technical trading take precedence.

And that’s where a lot of retail investors fall down. Their slavish worship to Buffett & co’s investment dogma has led many-a-one into the quicksand. Like many things in life counter- intuitive reasoning beats commonsense.

In an era where growth stocks dominate - technical trading has delivered the best results. Even if the prices are mind-blowingly expensive and nonsensical the market has paid no heed to overvaluation. And the only consequence for those buying into hyper-inflated stocks is profit.

Monte

“You do come across as a rather arrogant tw-t.”

I totally destroyed your argument and you know it. And I did so because the context of your post inferred that only amateurs lose on stock trading. It also alluded to you being a market sage and seasoned pro - when the polar opposite is true.

And you did what all intellectually challenged individuals do when presented with a counter-argument and resorted to personal abuse by referring to me as a t**t.

Well I hope you keep your promise and don’t post again because you have nothing to offer apart from crude rudimentary erroneous clichés.

And those who parrot cliches don’t think for themselves. Unlike...

ToffAppleton :-)

Fats

Was talking about the overall index as a whole not individual stocks.

You can’t argue with the numbers

Which are since 1999...

Ftse about the same
Dax has roughly tripled
Down almost quadrupled

Some of this can be accounted for by the predominance of growth over “Buffett’s” value stocks.

You’re right about one thing tho.
Investors would do much better to invest outside the Permabear 100 if past performance is anything to go by.

Monte

“In the words of
Buffet
Buy value at a decent price.”

I hear so many old Buffet chestnuts from inexperienced amateur investors/traders like yourself. Always a sure sign of an absolute novice. And then you go on to consolidate your ignorance

“People with experience in the 80's during the early days of the ftse, would not have been buying the dotcom bubble“

It’s professional and institutional investors that create bubbles, like dot-com and Bitcoin. There are vast fortunes to be made if you can get your timing right (and pros usually too) it’s amateurs that get left holding the baby when the bubble bursts. If you were only intelligent enough to understand the fortunes people have made from market bubbles.

Then you consolidate your ignorance even more and uphold Woodford as a shining beacon of investment acumen. Someone who lost a billion pounds of amateur investors money and is currently under investigation for wanting to open another investment fund in Jersey.

Is it any wonder why most retail investors get slaughtered with mindsets like yours.

Larry

International.

“British companies that do business internationally would be 40pc more expensive if they were listed in America or Europe. Most of these companies source the majority of their revenue from overseas, so the effect of a domestic economic slowdown is limited,” said Mr Colwell”

That’s the great tragedy of belonging to the Permabear 100. Most of its constituents are undervalued by massive margins even though they make almost all their profits overseas.

Don’t the CEOs know the value of their companies would skyrocket if they listed in regulated markets that valued shares fairly. There’s something fundamentally rotten about an index that is forever trashing its most valuable companies. It’s about time institutional investors started demanding multinationals relist in the EU or US. That would give a huge lift to pension funds and everyone invested in one way or another. Belonging to the world’s worst performing/most undervalued stock market costs ordinary investors billions. Shorting cartels are the only ones who prosper.

Baffled

“We are still 5% below where we were 21 years ago without discounting for inflation.”

And that’s not taking into account the rise of the mining sector. Back then it was just another sector but now it’s the most dominant heavily weighted sector in the index. BHP is now Britain’s biggest company by MC.

If you factor the miners out of the ftse100 it would be trading on about 4500 now. While miners have soared almost all other stocks have gone backwards.

Miners are valued differently from most of the index. I’m not saying they’re overvalued but the MMs do value them higher. And when the ftse100 does rise almost all the gains are allocated to the mining sector. Then when it falls back almost all losses are allocated to the rest of the index.

The chasm grows ever wider.

Papucel

“This is was the best line to keep me going for the next 2 years until the split.
It can not be topped, or couldn't it?”

Only ToffAppleton could top that!
But I wouldn’t want to rain on their parade;-)

Update on shares that went ex-dividend yesterday:

Glaxo down 36.2 on a 23 payout
Imperial down 82.5 on a 48 payout
Shell down 50 on a 12 payout
Bp down 11 on a 3.9 payout.

But it doesn’t stop there...

Uk shares go ex dividend for 3 0r 4 days.
3 or 4 days of carnage - and eye watering losses.
__________________________

Glaxo down another 24p today
Total damage XD - 60p
More to come

Imperial down another - down another 27p
Total damage- 110p
More to come

Shell & BP both rose today
Their dividends fall below the toxic threshold mentioned in an earlier post. <4%

Dividends should be treated as toxic
And come with a warning.

Sell before the dividend
Buy back after the post dividend crash.

Terms & conditions apply:)

Aren’t we allowed to say c-o-c-k tail on this board?

Just for the record an old Fashioned is a ****tail made by muddling sugar with bitters and water, adding whiskey or, less commonly, brandy, and garnishing with orange slice or zest and a ****tail cherry

I believe it was Jesse’s favorite after a day at the bucket shops

Alex

“he “master” Jesse Livermore, after once again losing a fortune from speculation, took a pistol and blew his brains out “

Yes that’s right. I believe he downed an ‘Old Fashioned” (that’s a ****tail) before he committed the deed.

He obviously had wild gambling tendencies because he went bankrupt several times. Hard to believe after making a staggering amount shorting the 1929 crash.

Fats

“From the master Jesse Livermore.buy stocks that are going up
sell stocks that are going down.”

Livermore also said
Never too high to go long
Never too low to short.

Take Bitcoin for example - record high. - do you realize that means everyone who ever bought into the coin is in profit - Livermore called it blue skies at high altitude

Conversely when stock hit record lows - everyone is underwater. I’d imagine Glaxo is approaching that point. I’m not sure what he called that but I’d call it “the depths of despair”

It’s what’s known as Momentum trading - and that’s what made Livermore a legend.

I know many on these boards are woefully unprepared for a career in stock trading.

I notice a lot of them enter the fray armed to the teeth with market cliches from the grand master of investing ( Buffet)

Unfortunately learning a stack of Warren’s old chestnuts does very little to enhance your chances of success.

Buffet is a long term investor not a trader.
His cliches don’t apply to all companies, only the ones he buys.
Buffet is a bottom feeder who picks up companies on the cheap
The fact he bought them is enough to send the price soaring.
He has billions in firepower - the power to move mountains.

If these factors don’t apply to you stop making comparisons with Buffet.

At the risk of making yourselves look like buffoons.

CSD

“Bloody crazy as I've seen IMB fall 50% from my first purchase”

And when you bought Imperial you probably bought in at a new low? Right?
On its descent from £40.

Beware of the buy low sell high dogma spouted by the unenlightened....

Buy low sell lower is more often the case!

TR6

“Share buy backs always show a company as no projects going forward,”

You’re right in what you say to a point. But a lot rests on the type of business and business model.

Banks have historically returned most of their profits to shareholders. Before the financial crisis they paid 20 percent of the ftse100 dividends. Banks don’t have R&D departments- they are all about money.
So with no M&A activity on the horizon it makes sense to buy back shares while the shareprice is trading at an extremely low valuation.

I’m sure Barclays BOD saw that as a preferable option to paying a higher dividend. It benefits the business far more.

I’m all for buybacks over dividends in the current climate.

Firstly I’d say dividends under 4 percent are less effected.
Over that level they come at a cost to the shareprice. (Miners excluded)

Buybacks reduce shorting activity and that is a huge upside. Fewer shares in circulation should equate in SP rise. And EPS rise and overall dividend payout falls.

The £4 billion Glaxo pay out in dividends would have been much better deployed buying shares back at prices that seriously undervalue the company. And it would have decimated the hedge funds who are plaguing this share. It’s a pity the BOD didn’t have the vision to anticipate where the shareprice was heading and kept buyback options open instead of committing to a dividend. That must have been music to the ears of the shorting hedge funds.

Case in point. Barclays yesterday. Only paid a nominal penny dividend and announced a share buyback program. That is a well run business and that was a shrewd decision.

As I posted yesterday. Bought into Barclays at 146.5 on the back of that decision (currently 152) s
Hopefully I’ll recoup the losses I made selling a third of my Glaxo holding on Barclays.

In the Permabear 100 buybacks beat toxic dividends any day.

Poker

“Tesco marched into the USA with shareholder money...and then spent £1 billion to march right out again..”

I believe they’ve just marched out of Thailand/Malaysia with £8 billion for their operations. Believe me that is a good deal for Tesco.

Not all investments work out - as their disastrous US venture shows.

I see Tesco as a solid investment right now. The proceeds from the SE Asian sale will be used to pay down debt and £5 billion is set aside for a special dividend.

Silotar

“I bought my first batch at around £14 and I think this is a good op to average down now. Thoughts?”

Only one - £12