Gordon Stein, CFO of CleanTech Lithium, explains why CTL acquired the 23 Laguna Verde licenses. Watch the video here.
As you say, Canaccord do not mention that, according to Simply Wall Steet, Future is good value based on its Price-To-Earnings Ratio (8.5x) compared to the peer average (10.7x).
Also, using their discounted cash flow model, Future is trading at 73.4% below their estimate of its fair value, where fair value = £31.77, compared to current market price (£8.46 at time of review).
Link: https://simplywall.st/stocks/gb/media/lse-futr/future-shares
As you say it looks like a weighted opinion to me that is aimed at benefiting companies that hold short positions. I wonder how much illegal activity is going on below the radar: should the FCA be looking into this, I wonder. After all, this is not the first time that they appear to have done this.
On Thursday Future should simply confirm the position that they have already disclosed to the market and any positive news on top of that will be a bonus. Any substantial negative news should already have been disclosed by the Directors.
Furthermore, Canaccord's "thin air" speculation doesn't give any air to the possibility that the company may be outperforming its peers.
Barrel of rotten apples, I think, the lot of them.
(all imho!).
Don't forget that they've managed to do all this without going bust and that is no small feat in itself.
Give Callum credit for the work that he's put in on this.
Yes, there was no need to look at issues over a period of time, the people responsible are so clever that they were able to do it all at one fell swoop. This had nothing to do with marketing gloss at all. It was just down to the extraordinary skills of the management team in being able to identify immediately where people just weren't needed at all. This will not cause any issues relating to people being overworked or missing from work due to stress. I am sure that the skilled management team have considered this and found it to be irrelevant. There is a plan in place anyway to help anyone that is feeling stressed and this is guaranteed to work I imagine. So there is no risk of finding that the company cannot deliver in time because they will be easily able to get the people back that they have purged. I mean it's not like they will find alternative employment elsewhere and no longer be available when you need them back. They will just be there at the touch of an imaginary marketing button.
OK I'm a bit disappointed.
I went to register on the site but there is no option to register unless you get a quote. The other two sites let you register without taking out a quote. Take note Future: YOU NEED TO CHANGE THIS!!!
Also the other two sites let you choose which cookies to accept: GoCo do not. You have to accept all cookies without any choice. Take note Future: YOU NEED TO CHANGE THIS!!!
As it stands, I won't be setting up an account with them, and I am a share holder!!!
Very disappointed. May reduce my share holding as a result of this poor experience.
This will obviously have a negative effect on anyone wanting to simply register with them with a view to going back for a quote at a later date. I'm very concerned about their approach with both these issues. The man with the t'ach is at considerable risk of wasting his breath.
AHL short down by 0.1%, Qube up by 0.1%. I expect AHL will continue to reduce if the share price approaches their opening position. Qube are in for a penny, in for a pound, no doubt. Big gamble?
I've never used GoCo to date because I've always remembered the other two big names from previous advertising on TV. However I think that I'll register with GoCo as well. Easier to remember the short name: it may stick with people following their TV advertising campaign. Looking forward to seeing further capture of market share? Seems like a reasonable expectation to me.
It looks like this was a glitch on the lse web site which has now been changed. The shorts appear to be still open.
Lesson learned: don't believe everything you see on the internet.
The FCA data will be updated by tomorrow, I would think.
Apparently all shorts have now closed, although this is not recorded on today's UK government report. Prompted ahead of the UK government Autumn statement, perhaps,
I believe that AHL Partners made a good profit on their dealings, but I think that Qube might have been caught "with their shorts up" so to speak. Navigating muddy waters is always a risk.
Cancel that last post, I got the decimal point in the wrong place again! It's a bit more complicated than I suggested.
I think that it's just a restatement of position due to the reduction of the number of shares in issue following the share buybacks. They have a higher percentage stake now. So do I come to that!
Careful guys, don't be seen to be ramping the share or you might get flamed by the enthusiasm police :)
Just to follow up, "Qube Research & Technologies Limited" opened a new short position on the 25th October at 0.51%.
Maybe they are expecting a fall back in price on no news. Not seeing it at the moment.
A couple of large trades went through this morning at just after 9am GMT. Marked here as purchases but could be sales? Might see a movement of share price following this. If it is someone topping up on the dip or someone getting favourable terms, then I would expect a big rise tomorrow. As I mentioned before, I have now seen a 20% rise in a day on this share. Now seen it twice. Could go either direction depending on the nature of these trades, perhaps? Wish I had a magic ball.
Up and down on the whiff of a färt for now
If you have an endemic issue with "work shy" staff, that puts a different slant on it. However, are they really "work-shy" or are they victims of over-working/stress?
Quote from RR:
"The new structure will create a more agile business that is better able to serve customers and continue to create and maintain world-class products. It will help Rolls-Royce build enhanced capabilities in key areas such as procurement and supply chain management, ensuring they are as strong as the company's engineering and technical excellence."
And you achieve this by getting rid of some of the people who help deliver this?
Nah, I don't think so. Its just marketing gloss to hide the fact that they just want to pay themselves more money. IMHO.
Just to add, when I say that this relates only to a small number of people, I'm referring to the people who are being made redundant, not the overall workforce.
Also, as you say, (and apart from these just mentioned), they will already have decided which roles are to be targetted for redundancy. The vast majority of the people involved will not be under-performing, in fact, probably just the opposite.
Knivey: it is true that companies use these occasions to get rid of under-performing staff. From experience, I would say that this only relates to a small number of people. I think that most of these will recognise that they've been found out and leave peacefully. However, in my opinion, this is not the correct way to deal with under-performing staff: they should be dealt with under the disciplinary system and given the opportunity to improve. There are suitable means to deal with this, and making them redundant in this way I would think is illegal. But the big boys just bully their way through this. This is part of the dark side of Capitalism.
As I predicted previously, the hatchet men arrive.
There is a risk of inadvertently losing staff with specialised experience and then this comes back to bite you further down the line. There is also an increased risk of mental health issues due to overloading staff with work duties that would previously have been done by the staff who have been fired.
This will all be covered with a thick coat of marketing gloss, no doubt.
Do they mention what the massive cost of making these redundancies will be?
Is that a possible £4m loss, or have I got the decimal point in the wrong place again?