Member Info for usually_right

the father and son make the business model unique. not because its father and son obviously but for what both bring to the table and how its drives two key segments fo the business. so it would be detrimental to the company and anyone that suggests its a real option, either doesn't understand the business model or is letting emotions cloud their judgement.

those kinds of links are impossible to prove and the onus is on the side of the accusing party. so its safe to assume they aren't drinking buddies. however as i have said before it is often give a dog a bone, it often just takes a simply idea or in a conversation in passing. this goes for both long and short side. making money for a lot of hedgies is all about using relationships. part of the process for shorts is getting stories out to the media and using them as a tool to reach your objectives.

shorters use journalists just as those long do. its all about relationships. sometimes they need a push sometimes they dont. sometimes yoy give the dog a bone and he will play all day. its all connected and a very murky world. money is a wh*res business. accept these things are part of trading and use them to your advantage.

"I guess we can expect a weekend of this - especially from the Sunday Times!"

nah that'll be the guardian! but as long as the company continues along the lines of the recommendations of the report, any over doing it will eventaully backfire as it will begin to look like discrimination at best.

https://www.investegate.co.uk/boohoo-group-plc--boo-/rns/publication-of-and-response-to-independent-review/202009250700021166A/

they are a long way from being top of the esg pile but, essentially, they do not need to be, they only need to be ensure that the question as to whether they are breaking laws no longer exists. i think they are on their way to doing that if the recs of the report are carried out. of course this wont be enough for some (lefties, guardian readers, etc), but that won't stop the general trend for the shares as long as the company continues to meet or beat growth f/c of course. the resulting downside from any such comments or articles would then clearly only be deemed buying opportunities. but i stress as long as there are no more hidden surprises and they are seen to be keeping within the spirit of the investigation recs.

335-359 gap to be filled

remember what i said before about how the shorters use their sources at newspapers to help them out. lets see the guardians take on this news. it may offer a buying opportunity again.

it may be better to travel than arrive on this one. those that have bought much lower 200-300 may be tempted to take profits now that the gap has been filled and another gap opened 335-359. also it will only take one article with a negative slant on todays findings to get us down to that zone.

But shareholders don't own the EV! And debt is not what the business is worth, it a measure of what would be needed to be paid to buy the business outright. It's not a price the business is worth. If you look at the levels the debt is trading at, you will see there is not much faith in the debt being paid back.

the business may recover in the future but shareholders may no longer be in the game. debt holders will be running the show.

too much debt and s stuggle to raise enough money to move the needle. imo its going into admin for certain if theres another lockdown. the only reason creditors haven't taken over already is that nobody believes they can do a better job than is currently being done ie. there is no real way to influence revenues, only costs and here one can only do so much.

8 billion net debt and could be over 10 billion after markdowns. market cap 500m. how can this be cheap? the shares are a ultra high risk gamble.

there are billions in debt, whoever wants to buy needs to cover this. hence no takeover this side of administration.

the lower the shares fall, the smaller the market cap and the ability to raise money. even to raise just 100 million means dilution of 20-25% at current levels. if they want 200m its 50%. and also remember it means you need to take part to avoid dilution.

ratings changes can be obtained from a good news feed and most broker accounts have an online newsfeed which will provide you with those headlines too. the contents of the broker ratings are for clients of those brokers only, but some of it gets leaked out for all eyes to see.

its not no news, its ratings based. what makes it significant is that jpmorgan starts coverage with overweight. so close to results, they will have seen at least anecdotal evidence to back their call. im not suggesting they will have seen anything, but they may have come across certain things as the research side tends to dig deep and reaches far and wide.

i dont think they can fill the gap to mid 380's before results. i possible they may test 360p before then if all stars align. the most important issue going forward will be the sweatshops and you they deal with that. if they are proactive the shares will move to 500p on a 12 month time horizon. if they are not seen to deal with it in a manner that is these days demanded, then the shares may trade between 250 and 350p over the next 12 months.

jpmorgan upgrade to overweight 415p target

as libro suggests, its really not a bad thing in the long run and ironically could lead to cough cough pricing fixing at a higher level in time. the shares had performed quite well and in a correction folks will take profits where they can. with further lockdowns to come in the uk and also brexit worries, the main market may have further to fall and these may go in the same direction, but that doesn't stop it being a well run company and a good buy a bit lower down for those that want to time it.