Member Info for Walp

So I am overcomplicating it and missing the simple basics am I F96?

Funny...

Saying SMT is a fail and offering statistical argument to back it up that (shall we say) fails isn't complicating things?

With all the respect, time for me to press the eject button on this.

So ATT fails on a shorter term perspective of around 3 years and so does PCT? Of course SMT fails on a shorter term perspective as a great many other have given the spectre of high inflation.

I'm still buying the 5 year argument as a very good one (although one that will likely be tested somewhat from Nov 26)...

We shall see ...

Your argument is; "SMT is a failing trust.. Correct?"...

That says to me either to encourage discussion for someone holding who is trying to better visualise the future profitability (all good stuff for discussion and very natural), or someone who is convinced it is a loser.

However the 5 year loss argument is presented, simply looking at the graph doesn't actually show a single period in which a 5 year loss has actually yet occurred. It may well do so in a couple of years comparitive to the ridiculous froth at the height of Nov 2021, but that might be seen as reasonable..

We all knew these trusts were getting frothy in 2021, and none more than SMT being the obvious best choice for the more casual investor to chuck into given (I did the maths at the time) it offered the best returns over the previous 18 months...

Cue the rush for the door for those treating it as a buck generating safe haven.

I'm not bitter now as the hyperinflation was temporary and didn't view it as the true worth of what I was already invested in.

That's another perspective into the magnified extent of losses right there.

If you aren't seeking reassurance and believe in your argument then why are you holding?

Are you being a devils advocate or simply presenting negative argument to draw the perspective of others?

Interested...

Fela96, you say "SMT fails on the 5 year time scale"?? How? Today it's 796 and 5 years ago to the day it was 535? In November 2026 you may be proven correct given the slide from Nov 21, but down to universal factors others may well be in the same boat ..

Having said that, I wouldn't be surprised if you are proven wrong there also...

Whatever.. I'll probably still own them at that time and be happy to do so.

Ok Fela96.. Fair enough.

I was convinced by your arguments that you were sold out. I take it therefore you are seeking reassurance that it isn't a turkey and to continue irrevocably on its recent path...?

Completely understandable and it has been a fantastically rough 2 years for holders...

It isn't my largest holding but I still have £100k plus and this current moment I actually see as the possibly most insane point to sell in the trust's history.

I am probably the weakest analyst on this discussion forum but sometimes just the basics are enough.

We know the presiding reasons for the exceptional losses above other investment trusts such as pct/att (Bilde, media, unlisted/doubt etc). You now have to ask yourself as the light at the end of fhe hyperinflationary tunnel increases whether the great many excellent companies within the trust are liable to continue losing?

The wheel will not stop turning and man will not stop wanting the best in any world situation and so these companies will profit.

I am more concerned as goes China and Putin right at the moment, but it is difficult to extricate yourself from those crystal ball pitfalls in any investment scenario.

Simplistic and obvious stuff granted, but sometimes I believe things can be overthought.

..as in my mind you have conveniently left out other periods in which SMT has successfully made a great deal for it's investors.

SMT simply does not at this moment represent a 5 year loss and is also in very good company indeed as goes other losers who bought into around a year following November 21.

It doesn't.

Your arguments remind me to the commercial effectiveness of research bias. Concentrate on the aspects of "fact" that lend themselves to your particular argument and you can "prove" just about anything...

Yes Fela96, SMT must therefore be a failing investment.

Correct.

Let me to be the first to congratulate you and censure your fine judgement.

You win the cuddly toy.

Might we just see if SMT is a failing investment and for the time being accept that the trust has not recently performed well?

I have found human beings and their actions to be somewhat complex, and despite respecting maths, graphs statistics not all mysteries can be solved by it.

I was hoping thinking LLL's "lies, damn lies and statistics" might have tempered the abject pessimism to some degree as in my mind...

You are talking of an extraordinary period in our history there Fela96. I offer a differing perspective in that I have never sold any of my SMT holdings in the last 25 years + but was still up over 100% (not sure how much) at their recent lowest point.

I sleep well at night yet have my retirement on a plate along with the belief that SMT stand to gain now and for the next many years to a far greater likelihood than to lose.

Its a matter of perspective and so I do appreciate yours.

That's a fair enough comment, Fela96. But your comment underlines you as a slightly differing fish to many remaining invested in SMT and disregards the entire strategy and discipline that has always underlined smt.

Buy well and hold through thin in order to reward through thick.

SMTs relationship to the Nasdaq is coincidental yes, but I still believe appreciable. Given the variety of SMT of course it's different, it's always going to be difficult to stick it there.

In my mind the recent disparity between SMT and the Nasdaq actually underlines my perception of SMTs "underperformance" down to human issues rather than realistic issues.

There are either glaring holes in SMT holdings for the future or there aren't. The unlisted argument is done for me and so I'm not sure what that leaves.

Fair enough Fela96, but is this a true reflection of future value or one of perception? I've often posted of my opinion of the sway of the financial media, most here believing in that influence far less than I.

The main wild card I perceive is the increased weight of unlisted companies that amounts to an admittedly riskier strategy than of old. Having said that, I personally accept SMTs reasoning for doing so and feel the POS arguments outweigh the neg.

Like others on here I do agree that Nvidia is looking frothy right now, so appreciate the argument that SMT could do worse than to reduce holdings in that...

Having said that buying well and holding has resulted in net benefits as goes my portfolio, notwithstanding even the heavy losses seen with the inflationary issue and so I personally understand SMT not reacting in a kneejerk fashion which underlines their general strategy.

Was SMT to buy and sell in a kneejerk fashion to the sway of market tides generally I believe it would be a very different type of investment with it's own concerns.

In good times buying and holding seems to have stood it in good stead, and I still cannot see that general strategy going awry in more normal fair winded times.

My viewpoint is still therefore that the "problem" with SMT is in the main human perception (the basic human instincts for instant gratification and fast tracked wealth) & media sway that creates money by encouraging buying and selling reinforcing that.

I admit it's not all of the story by a long shot, but being a far greater student of human psychology than financial analyst I invite this perspective in the absence of other clear indicators.

Just scratching my head re the fact SMT drew red today whilst similar trusts gained appreciably.

I not a new surge in recent neg media activity re Bilde, plus anticipation for a bit of a bun fight at the SMT annual meeting at the end of June (reflecting on the last year's performance).

A rehashing of concerns re unlisted stocks also appears to be rekindled to some degree in recent media (2 to 3 days also)... Same old, in short, which has been discussed here in detail.

Can't see anything else to precipitate a loss today, but wonder if anyone else has any thoughts?

USA seems a good bet to me and for the same reasons as SMT I would lean towards it being as low risk as you can get given the greater immediate future likelihood of inflation easing rather than potentially worsening.

All things are of course possible.

I'd actually happily buy into some but am loathe to pull any of my investments right now as they are all more likely to make steadfast medium term gains than not.

Had I spare cash I'd extend my portfolio & go for USA right now.

despite thinking we have caught the crest of the wave before i'd like to feel optimistic here.

fingers therefore crossed for no new hideous world events, economic pessimism or further media *******s.

smt appears to be rather popular right now comparatively to other similar investment trusts (pct and att both on losses so far today contrasting smt current gain).

the swing in financial media "advice" has to have a great deal to do with this. how wonderfully manipulative the herd really are...

hopefully (finally) recognised as woefully underbought and the landslide of desertion will remediate somewhat over the coming many months (subject to chickens being fully hatched given the false flags and returns to volatility following the rare surges of the past 2 years).

And I work in the NHS in intensive care, and * could rant 9n all day about what the current govt have done to the nhs. No apology required Dontshootme.

I agree it's a digression on both of our parts, but justifiable given the circumstances and how astonishingly insular the given viewpoint (imho of course).

I'd go slightly farther in saying that if indeed the "left wing propaganda machine" got away with lies, please allow us to focus on the far more efficient Conservative propaganda machine, given the glut of media is actually Tory controlled.

As investors our interests are indubitably served better by the Tories, but please let's not allow personal gain to completely trump truth and ethics, no matter what our personal politics of favour..

Totally agreed Dontshootme. "Austerity" was a mild term applied by the Tories for what was in fact a clamp on public spending that went way beyond actual necessity and hurt those most vulnerable above all.

All whilst those who needed less continued to gain.

It is no secret that the rich have always got richer and the poor poorer under them, and Im not just talking about cash but public services, health, education the lot.

Apologies for becoming political on here (we all have our beliefs on that score).

LLL, Apologies. I missed your reply earlier.

Your right of course but I always seek to inject some positivity on here when it is scant, as you have probably noticed :).

I would contest your point as goes small time speculative investors not owning any SMT. I know a lot who held FB, Amazon, Tesla (etc) when they were flying high (it being am obvious gains sector when others were struggling) only to ditch when the nosedive was noted.

Admittedly, I don't know of many of these type of investors who have the good sense to buy a managed multi concern trust such as SMT, although the effect in valuation will amount to the same.

I believe this really has to account for a lot more than you think given the increasing trend in small time dealing and the numbers of Joe public out there.

My point was that as serious investors we on here know the dangers of reacting emotionally, which contrasts starkly to the swathes of investors out there who typically buy into a single entity holding and ditch the minute a serious downturn occurs to shove it elsewhere. Well... I would certainly like to think so, but we are all often guilty of reacting emotionally at the thought of wealth flowing down the drain, which I believe reflects ingrained sense of "money" as a fixed quotient (which of course it isn't as concerns investing).

I've no doubt a lot of more serious investors did the same (either holding a collective trust or otherwise), although I guess it all amounts to the same regardless..

The point I was trying to make was that regardless of what is causing it, I believe the effect to be grossly unfair and simply not reflective of the future value that SMT realistically retains for those who hold on.

SMT is anyway full of global companies...

My point is that all industries and businesses are looking for an edge either to stay in the forefront or exceed that. Technology will therefore remain profitable

Sure there will be swings of popularity, the current one being due to high 8nflation in the main, but it aint ever going to dry up and there will always be a thirst for it.

Paying companies to develop future ideas when 10% of possible future returns are trashed due to the devaluing influence of inflation is a big downer at the moment.

Its not permanent.