Member Info for Velo

Although I didn't know what to expect today, I was expecting it to at the very least close up.

I did privately hold hopes of (pivot points) a close on 225+ would be more than sufficient to maintain this bull run.

I also held privately that if it went further and could close on 228+ then a continuation of this bull run and would be confirmation of that being more than just probable.

Well blow me socks off! It only went and closed on 229p! You'll have to go back months and months for that much market bullish sentiment towards BT.

Market sentiment has changed towards BT! Enjoy it. Luxuriate in it. Revel in it. Long time holders are entitled to at least that much.

Fair enough DC - All opinions are worth listening to for further consideration.

"...I researched BT a few months ago and thought it overpriced..."

Tell me, in your research what did you make of the remainder of the balance sheet, after allowing for the obvious debt and static revenue/net profit?

And when you say: "My conclusion was that medium term it'll drop under 200p".

Is that a typo I see in the middle there? "..it'll..." which of course is a contraction of "IT WILL". That's very, very, definite. No if's or but's there - IT WILL!

- Surely though that's a typo and you really meant: "it might or "it may", or "it could", no???

Fair enough DC - All opinions are worth listening to for further consideration.

"...I researched BT a few months ago and thought it overpriced..."

Tell me, in your research what did you make of the remainder of the balance sheet, after allowing for the obvious debt and static revenue/net profit?

And when you say: "My conclusion was that medium term it'll drop under 200p".

Is that a typo I see in the middle there? "..it'll..." which of course is a contraction of "IT WILL". That's very, very, definite. No if's or but's there - IT WILL!

- Surely though that's a typo and you really meant: "it might or "it may", or "it could", no???

....would be disposed of quite quickly - but in two days flat?

From 216 close on Monday to last night's 223 close it's now intradaying at 229p! Now that's going some, for BT.

... and in proportion.

A good day and no mistake, so every expectation of further bullish trending price action in the short term.

I'm confident of 230's in the short term, thereafter I will draw breath to reconsider.

The longer term"nasty" down trend is unmoved as of tonight, and hangs there like the Death Star in Star Wars, so if this trend continues unabated past the 230's and onwards it will proportionately be into new territory never ever seen before since the demise of the SP that commenced at the beginning of 2016.

And still no new CEO, so until that is sorted I will reassess by the high 230's.

The ii's favourite that has them scrambling en masse to get in, is the 200 day ma that currently lies at approx 243-ish always just lazily and comfortably out of reach of each spike and rally peak and never breached apart from just before the early 2017 Italian scandal broke, which ended any recovery of breaching the 200 day ma from that day to this.

So until a new CEO is in place I welcome all attempts to break-out, but surely logic dictates not without a decent CEO at the helm, first?

Don't confuse this post as pessimism. I am bullish - in appropriate measurements as fits the needs at the appropriate time, that's all.

Well yes, a stonking good day however you look at it, but I feel quite robbed by the last 45 minutes.

At approx 3:45pm an almighty bearish selling volume crashed through proceediings to such an extent that the day's volume (well under average at that point) immediately increased the day's total volume so much, it not only exceeded the long term average volume for today, but exceeded it by some 50%, and rendered the other half dozen or so bullish 'above average' volumes almost invisible to the naked eye as the screen automatically engaged logarythmic adjustment to fit in the huge monster into some sort of proportion.

- Strange thing is the SP was just under 223 after coming off 224 earlier, and this only produced a fall to 222p.

Can only assume that there were plenty of bulls in that time frame too, so the volume went to red as bears were the bigger of the two. After that, there were small insignificant volumes to the end of day, with no big selling volumes seen again whatsoever, and that left enough bulls to run the price back up to close at 223p.

Good enough, considering 224p was in the frame at THREE junctures today. The last occasion at of 224p was at 2:45pm and was perhaps responsible for the appearance of that almighty bearish volume in retaliation to prevent any further reoccurance.

Cleary, 224 triggerred the big funds sellers/algo's as up to this point the bears were quite weak. That humongous 3:45pm selling volume shows plenty of bearish action in the background and raises questions of Black Rock holding all of DT's 12 or 13% holding in BT using some kind of arbitrage to make some money on the side.

In recent months it was revealed DT all of a sudden no longer are concerned at their poorly performing shareholding in BT and said to the media they have happily wriiten off each year's loss in their accounts and are now "unconcerned". Unconcerned?!? My Rrrs! That's a bit too happy-clappy for me - as there's only one reason you hand over billions of £££'s worth of shares to a hedge fund for "safe keeping" as DT publicly called the handover at the time, and it's not to put them in a lockable display cabinet to admire from afar!

Did think though that low 220's is a hiccup point in readiness for breaking past that last big gap-down, which fell from 239-ish - to low 222's-ish overnight back in early May.

Now you either believe in gaps must be filled or not. It's not an issue. If it does "fill that gap" some will say it's just trending bullishly and was bound to happen, others that the gap just had to be filled. If it does get filled I expect it to happen with some speed. At tonight's close it sits proud of that entrance to the gap up - so I say here comes the high 230's.

Personally I think the whole of the 220's could vanish with relatrive ease and quite quickly - we'll see.

Never going to get any work done. Bulls are back and holding 224!
If it can close on 224p I think I'd be quite lost for words.

Coming up to 2pm and tiny, tiny volume by both sides, smallest volume run of the day, Anybody With a decent sized walletr could move this price on their own - LOL!

However, it's just ever so slightly favouring the bears. Wonder if they're all waiting for direction cues from the US opening - or buggered off for their lunch?

Well, that's quite unexpected. If it can hold and go on to 224-ish, today, in the coming days, or sooner, I would expect a gusher soon after all the way to VERY high 230's. (Of course Sod's Law dictates that now I've mentioned it in a post nothing of the sort will occur, at least in not in that manner :)

Just had to stop work and take a peek at the intraday price action to see what's happening at close range. It's clear when there is sustained moomentum in either direction that it's ii's - not pi's that are responsible for driving the price, so let's go a-hunting....

And I can count 6 or more institutional big buys.

From the first, the SP took off like a scalded cat , on unimpressive volume, but enough to be just above the longer term intraday average. (2 of them, so make that 7 or 8 big ii buys). In fact that SP move in the first 10 minutes represents the largest move all day so far.

It continues rising on more or less average volume indicating a lack of any fierce selling, so the price rises further to 219/220 by approx 8:45am - and then there it is - ship ahoy - the biggest ii volume buy so far today, taking the price to 220.odd. Way above average volume and clearly an ii.

Met by above average selling just after it, so the sellers were flocking and mobbing around that big one, limiting it to the 220.

And although volume was then bog standard in line with the average, the price continues rising on a sea of blue to an hour later at 9:45pam approx to 223, spiking past 224 at one point! Hardly any sellers to be seen. Where are they?

- Regrouping that's where, as bang on that 9:45am another big ii volume buy. Way, way above average volume but no where near as large as that 8:45am volume buy. And it fizzles out at 223-ish as regrouping sellers appear for the next hour driving the price down to 222 by 11:00am.

- But here's the thing, from the resting low of 12 noon (222) the price has continued rising on well BELOW average volume. It can only do that on low volume in the absence of sellers to oppose the buyers.

I think I counted over half a dozen ii buys - the last decent sized one at 11:45am - and they have yet to return, since then. Have they "killed off" the sellers for the day, or are those bears regrouping for the normal mode of attack - right on the close?

Maybe not. at this rate I can't see the day reaching the long term average volume for the day by close - let alone exceed it. So all this on a below average volume day? Usually a warning sign. but maybe it means firece sellers have gone for the foreseeable?

Well your luck could be in Chestec - keep close tabs on the SP this week, could be that entry point you're hoping for, hoves into view.

Bogged down with jobs so a quick in and out post. I'm just a teensy weensy perturbed by tonight's close, so just want to share some thoughts. Won't bore you with the reasons why, just that I am.

First off, the SP is still firmly in a wide and strongly bullish uptrend on medium term outlook. (When I ignore these trendlines or invest contrary to them - I ALWAYS pay for my folly - always! So bear that in mnd, as I now talk prematurely contrary to them.

If they could speak, they would still register as positive as of tonight and say - This is in the middle of a committed strong bull run.

However, I didn't like the look of tonight's close, so ran a pair of ultra short term, v volatile, trend lines, which at that level, register every sneeze, cough and tick, too much really, and they gave me a bit of a start!

So wanted to put it in perspective.

Should the SP retrace from here (not saying it will) - it can do so without major damage with one caveat. It must not drift back to v low 202/203's etc., Repeat: Must not!

It can retrace to 211p or high 200 single digits etc without cause for complaint and is still good to go, IMO as it would be just 'market noise'.

The reason I mention that, is that there's an old maxim that always haunts me when a recovery is being attempted and it goes like this - a price can return to it's previous support floor after trending up and away, but do it more than a couple of times - and it will eventually break through to new lower ground. It hasn't been back once yet, so plenty of cat's lives left in the bag yet.

I've checked back on 10 year visuals, and yep this little run up to 218/216p's is visible from outer space so to speak, so it qualifies as a genuine breaking away from the low 202-ish floor of a few weeks back. That area 202/203 was rangebound and coiling up, building strength (and not visible from outer space because of that very rangeboundness:)
- and was my preffered state of existence until the new CEO was installed, but you can't have everything.

Whilst some posters had their eye on 220's mine was always on the top side of low 220's+ and if breaking that, thence on straight through to a v fast, and v high 230's.

It's just a concern at the moment, with nothing really to back up that concern, but should it retrace alarmingly it's perfectly alright in my view just as long as it doesn't go as far as the 202's old rangebopund support area.

206-209 = no problemo. But it's doubtful if would retrace even that far if it did go all sulky - 211-ish might be it's limits. Not saying I expect a retrace, but plannning out all eventualities so can't be caught off guard, that's all.

All above speculation is IMO only.

Tymers - Yes, it is trending bearishly at the moment, and has been since approx the end of the first week in June and has continued so, to date.

However the pair of trendlines I choose as weapons of choice are noticebly narrowing as if hunting for a floor - after they previously bulged wide to "maximum" like a python does in the middle after swallowing a goat or similar. I've seen this countless times, and my hope is that if the narrowing continues it will do as is often the case in the past, that after narrowing the trend lines kiss each other, cross, and then set off on a trending bull run - which I would stick my neck out and say initially up to 20p-ish. After that, who knows etc., etc.,

I will give you that though - it is trending bearishly currently, and there are no guarantees that it will cease anytime soon, but everyone has an opinion, and trends are just that - known for changing direction. The fun is in plotting when.

You're welcome Hergest. Just remember I have nil knowledge of PFG in general. Whatever, don't ask about the balance sheet as several pages of posts would fly past (basically looking very poor - of course due to 2017's figures).

Actually at the end of it all, brokers and Company forecasts for full year 2019 look quite ace. But there's 2018 to get through first, but again forecasts look encouraging, so any interim updates need to confirm the veracity of those forecasts as on track/in line with expectations etc.,.

I'm going to cut back on all posting as much as possible, shortly, as work piling up for me - but one further thing
- On average all profit warning hit shares have a brief renaissance, or a delayed very noticeable dead cat bounce, 6 months after the profit warning. With PFG that would have been December 2017.

I find it difficult to make PFG "fit" with the average, but can possibly cobble together a case from after 1 or 2 days into December, as the SP retraced to just below 800p by early Decemberr, yet by the end of December it had climbed to approx 925p approx.

If you take just one or two dasys earlierand take Dec 1st as the start point that case falls apart as it entered December at approx at 900p. However the 6 month dead cat bounce is not written in stone - it's an averaging to make for easier reference. Just monitoring another p/warning share and it appears to have had a decent bounce at the 5 month period (May just gone). Afterwards, they all retrace back down to the lower, long term average though, and thence trudge on to the full 12 month distance, and into the commencement of some remission - but whatever the climb back, even though some may not get back to former glories the % gain in the second year, in most cases, is usually better than the whole market average.

Lol! Just pulling your leg on Brexit/shmegsit :)
I make no distinctions.

". . . is my logic so far off I’m making fool out of myself? (Again) "

- Of course not Aus - only when you mention the "B" word

Night night.:) :) :)

Whatever, I will try and look under the bonnet of this little algo and pretend I understand it's blather - tomorrow and post what it says is bad. But I'm warning you - it's in English Aus, but it's not English as we know it..

Got to be up at 4:00am Sunday so a quickie then I'm turning in.

Dividend cover for the year ending 2019 in Vod is 0.75
Yes Aus, that's diabolical - it means Vod is in such bad shape it can no longer afford to pay dividends from earnings - IT'S BORROWING MONEY TO PAY shareholders their dividend!

The new guy just won't cancel it - he'll phone from his car on the way to work on the very first day and threaten to fire the the whole bod if they haven't cancelled dividends by the time he arrives for work, so they have 45 minutes to get it done. LOL!

I mean 0.75 it just isn't on, borrowing money to pay out dividends is crazy! Of course BT shareholders can turn their noses up and sniff snootily in superiority on hearing of such poor control.

Yes Vod's net debt is twice that of BT's - but then again their revenue and net profit AND M Cap is twice that of BT's, so it's not about net debt - as that's more or less a draw.

"...but so much of what you are suggesting doesn’t add up from what I’m seeing from Vodafone investments..."

- Don't laugh but I agree. If BT posters don't object I might post the actual areas (tomorrow) that have caused it to get a potential bankruptcy notice slapped on its windscreen.

I've learnt to take these warnings very seriously. They're never errors but sometimes they highlight "irregularities". Found a little AIM olier that was coming up as guilty of get this - "high risk of manipulatuing earnings" Hmm Fraud?

Everything else was fine- just that. That metric never chamged all this year, then the final results came out and it contained an accounting correction update. They "found" £12.6 million not booked in properly in previous years. So decided to book it all in this year - which buggers up calculations going forward. But guess what? Overnight that particular professors little metric cleared the charge of high risk of manipulating earnimgs and with out so much as a bye or leave was giving the all clear now that the books IN ITS EYES were correct. It could see trouble where all the analysts could not - but the market must have known something was adrift as they're punishing the SP to kingdom come!

Similar thing happened with Air Partner the other month when they announced they had "found" £3 million that had been "lost" for 3 years. On contacting a former accounts employee who was spared prosecution if he told the truth, he admitted that previous bosses had told him to move it from account to account to cover up an embarrassment in the finances. So there's ALWAYS a reason, and these algo's know it, but when they try informing dullards like me - I look straight to the answer and don't bother trying to untangle the actual fault in the engine.

Maybe it's something like that which maybe a their new CEO might uncover and put it right which would then fit in with your analysis Aus.

Whatever, I will try and look underr the bonnet of this little algo and pretend I understand it's blather - tomorrow.

Thanks for that very illuminating explanation Fleccy.

I stand by my assertion though. If I were asked to prove with figures, why I believe so,

A) It wouild fill up 3 or 4 posts of complex calculations and even more complex explanations

and

B) It would make my eyes bleed and anyone else's bleed too, who read it. It's a tortourous arrival to the conclusion that Vod will hit the buffers within the next 2 years unless it takes strong action in that time to avert disaster. I barely understand the maths involved myself.

Of course if there's a huge error in there, your post might offer an explanation of why that it is, so I'll just play safe with - all in my opinion only :)

PS.

Sorry, about that mention of buying Liberty's £19 billion cable operations as it's now old news. Apologies.

Should have ommitted that to, and just stayed on the latest - which is Vodafone (IMO) is in bad shape financially so instead of a merger it may be possible for Liberty to pick up Vod far, far, cheaper in a fire sale anytime over the next two years. Might have inadvertantly given the impression it was conditional on Vod spending £19 Biliion, it isn't.

Vod has to act far quicker than BT to sort it's mess out. That's not to say BT gets off Scott free - both are a cause for concern financially. But the clock is ticking far faster against Vod than it is for BT. Vod has just 2 years left to sort itself out - or it's the knackers yard.

Oh .... IMO only of course :)

Aus - In my reply to you, a little bit fell of the very end -

"....That may be the first sign - shareholders asked to cough up more for devalued shares as Vod issues bits of paper to shareholders in a bid to raise cash."