Member Info for ToTheMoon1

Depends, administrators are best for shareholders as they can stop a prepack that would see shareholders wiped out.

But, if the bonds are collateralised- what with? If the Russian subsidiaries are guarantors of debt issued by PLC, then yes, UMMC could -try- to take action in Russia against those subsidiaries. Maybe direct the question at the Administrators, they’d have access to all the info and know one way or another.

“ The creditor is GPM”

No they are not.

They sold the debt.

Idk, Imagine if Strukov buys the underlying POG assets. That company has no debt, but owns some nice assets, sanctions end and they list on the LSE,
Tempting to buy the stock?

Not really, you and others seem to resort to personal insults where someone posts something that disputes a view.

I mean this is a forum, if someone see obvious horse****, you seem to think anyone with a differing view doesn’t have the right to reply.

You may not like it, but they do. Nobody’s view is invalid because you disagree with it.

Now where do we stand? I seem to remember Tomski being the only one saying the SP was headed to zero.

Where is the SP now? Oh, it’s suspended. Seems, at least for now, he was a lot more accurate that you and quite a few others posting.

https://www.moex.com/en/issue.aspx?code=POGR

Doesn’t seem to show a price.

Poly had 50% of assets in Kazakhstan. In theory it could ‘give up’ on the bits inside Russia.

“ think people need to look up what an administrator does. ”

True, but there is also, according to the report:

“The grounds for the bankruptcy of the subsidiaries are most likely their guarantees for the parent company’s loan”

The question would be could the creditor force that through in a Russian court.

“ this would mean they would need to buy back our shares”

No, basically two interested parties want to buy the underlying assets not the plc. At the moment it looks like the PLC is finished. Return to shareholders would be based on what the Auditors could achieve.

“ According to Kommersant, UMMC and the main shareholder of Petropavlovsk Konstantin Strukov are interested in acquiring the assets.”

Major shareholder buying assets out of administration would seem to be the most likely outcome at the moment it would seem.

The article suggests the underlying companies have local legalities to navigate, which could complicate things.

Best ask the auditor when appointed that one.
I would imagine they will sort out what the assets are, what the market for those assets is, what the depreciation is, etc etc should imagine it will take them a bit of time to get up to speed.

Reasonable questions, looks like it will be up to the Administrators to try to get what they can for the assets.

“… far from gone ...”

‘Tis but a scratch

“Secondly, index funds don't work in a bear market or bearish times; and Michael Burry thinks eventually they will collapse due to change in the way people invest.”

Index funds work perfectly well during bear market. You average down expensive purchases. Which is why, over a pension lifetime they outperform total return strategies.
Plenty outperform the index for subsets of times, but very few consistently outperform the index over the long run.

Re:Michael Berry
1. Stopped clock, his 100 predictions of a bear market have been spot on all 3 times.
2. Diversify also means asset class. So own commodity itself etc. invest in re-insurance, cat-bonds etc etc

“you go by Warren Buffet or Charlie Munger who call it diworsification, that they will only buy 1 stock and look after it well if they are confident, then there are holes in your thesis.”

Buffet won the one million bet. The bet was that over a decade an SP500 would beat a hedge fund willing to take up the bet.

Take a look at the number of stocks in BRKB portfolio, even if it is weighted toward Apple.

Buffet would agree that 90% are better off buying a tracker rather than picking their own shares.

Pick your own shares means doing the work that Benjamin Graham did, that’s a full time job for a full portfolio, it isn’t plucking a figure out of thin air and calling people a—swipes if they disagree with it - which some on this board do.

“was LTH here, so it is a hard loss. Where does it stop??? One rule for them, one rule for us???”

Same rules for everyone.

First thing anyone would tell you buying stocks - diversify your risk. Goes to the fact that 90% of people investing would be best place to use index funds.
Those that build their own portfolio should benchmark returns against SP500 tracker. A lot would give up and buy the tracker if they did.

“which case you have 'NO FREE MARKET,' and stocks are all gambling.”

No. But if investing in particular stocks you should understand risks.
Regulatory risk is one of them.
Hence most sensible people for example would not create a portfolio that consists of POG, POLY and EVR.

No need to calculate XVAs to see that anyone with that portfolio would have concentrated risk, which would be their lookout.

“don't agree it is normal, the war is not normal”

The war isn’t normal. Governments changing regulations is normal though. You may not like it,
But I suspect if you bring legal action against the government, it may prove to be both futile and costly.

“ NOT Normal, Not normal market risk”

Normal, regulatory risk.

Market risk strictly defined would be say price of gold. People dealing with POG - counterparty, counterparty credit risk etc.

“ Would you consider it normal market risk if they decided to block Coca Cola selling regular coke next week because it is causing obesity or tooth decay???”

Yes, regulatory risk.
KO though minimises this by,
1. Offering a diverse set of products, though ‘Coke’ is obviously a main stay.
2. Being geographically diverse, so mitigating the risk of an issue in one country.

See point 2, POG was clearly exposed to risks being small and operating in one particular country.

“ How do you know there is no value?
Stop speculating!”

Because the latest RNS repeated the warnings from the BoD, that it is ‘highly unlikely’ that the process will result in any return to shareholders, given the level of debt.

They’ve stated this in about 3 different RNS.