Woodford Patient Capital Trust
Options
Comments
-
Woodford has made some bad choices of late; he's as fallable as anyone else. I prefer buying shares where directors have been buying as they are unlikely to chuck their own money away on a dog. I think Shares magazine found a definite improvement in share returns where directors had bought against the general market returns.0
-
The so-called laws of physics have a habit of changing over the years, so just possibly this company is set to benefit from the next change. And quite probably not, but if it is it would have a very good hope of being a good investment.Merely that a company that claims its product defies the laws of physics has no hope of being a good investment, however much or little cash you put into it.Eco Miser
Saving money for well over half a century0 -
The "Patient Capital" label is utter Horlicks. You knew it was flim-flam when the Chancellor of the Exchequer started using it.
It seems to be based on the idea that venture capital firms make their money by investing in acorns and waiting patiently for them to grow into oak trees. But venture capital firms are in reality the least patient investors in existence. All they care about is achieving an exit - selling their promising firm to a larger rival (e.g. Instagram to Facebook), selling it to the public market via IPO, or failing that, selling it to a greater fool in another VC.
For all its drawbacks, this laser-like focus on the exit, the pressure put on their companies to get scale quickly and become attractive to a buyer, means that VC firms do at least stand a fighting chance of making some money - enough to compensate for the losses. Woodford has no track record of making money in that way.
"Patient capital" seems to be just a get-out clause, as Plus said.0 -
The so-called laws of physics have a habit of changing over the years, so just possibly this company is set to benefit from the next change. And quite probably not, but if it is it would have a very good hope of being a good investment.
As a physicist I'd like to point out that the laws don't change, it's our understanding of them that changes.“So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.”0 -
Thrugelmir wrote: »Why isn't it a selling opportunity?
Buy because it's cheap or sell to limit losses? I don't know. Look at the numbers, momentum, derivatives of curves, maybe hold a wet finger in the air? Do you just have faith in the Divine Woodford? Without a well reasoned asset allocation and a guiding plan that is strategic rather than tactical people can easily lose lots of money.“So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.”0 -
bostonerimus wrote: »As a physicist I'd like to point out that the laws don't change
This is correct. Scotty said it on Star Trek!
On the subject of the Patient Capital Trust, I got out. Waited until it moved to a couple of percentage points up in July and sold. No idea why I thought I had any patience and you'll certainly need some for this one.0 -
Merely that a company that claims its product defies the laws of physics has no hope of being a good investment, however much or little cash you put into it.
There's a huge amount of due diligence that goes on before even offering to make an investment into a venture. Let alone agreeing acceptable terms with the existing business owners.0 -
No need to worry about the science side of things... the Woodford investment team includes someone with a PhD in Pharmacology, job done.0
-
No need to worry about the science side of things... the Woodford investment team includes someone with a PhD in Pharmacology, job done.
Some very complex mathematics is used in pharmacology and molecular biology. I worked on the GLUT4 receptor and PIP3 getting basic data for the mathematical models of the insulin pathway and the pharmacologists and molecular biologists I worked with were brilliant. So the pharmacology PhD might be useful in assessing early stage life science companies, but it's also probably very useful in just being analytical about everything else too.“So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.”0 -
Thrugelmir wrote: »There's a huge amount of due diligence that goes on before even offering to make an investment into a venture. Let alone agreeing acceptable terms with the existing business owners.
Which is why it's very surprising that he invested in Industrial Heat. IH is a company that claims to have invented Cold Fusion (ie nuclear fusion reactions at temperatures of a few hundred degrees, not millions of degrees like the Sun), and is in the process of commercialising the technology. But they have not demonstrated that cold fusion actually exists, a field which is full of snake oil and driven by 'true believers'. There is little due diligence that can be done because there is basically no justification as to why it is possible within our current understanding of the laws of physics (or where our model of those laws might be incorrect).
Mr Woodford might be a true believer, but this is not the kind of investment a mainstream fund should go anywhere near.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.1K Life & Family
- 247.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards