Woodford to leave Invesco

A_Flock_Of_Sheep

dunstonh wrote: »

That isnt down to management.

No. But it appears to be down to the fact that the managing person decides to leave.

Cheap ETF trackers as far as I know don't have a fund manager and thus the issue of share prices falling as a result of their departure are unlikely.

That said EDIN might run at a discount for a while if all the Woodford followers desert it. I must admit to being one of those but liked EDIN because of the 1/4 income and growth potential. The share list disclosure was in my mind a sound basket.

Perhaps in the same way Woodford steered away from tech stocks and financials its possibly best to steer away from "star managers".

Linton

A_Flock_Of_Sheep wrote: »

No. But it appears to be down to the fact that the managing person decides to leave.

Cheap ETF trackers as far as I know don't have a fund manager and thus the issue of share prices falling as a result of their departure are unlikely.

You dont invest in funds for what happens on a day to day basis. Daily ups and downs for whatever reason are just noise and are irrelevant. Funds are for the long term.

I dont understand how one can invest in an Income fund and then happily suggest a tracker as an alternative. What are you proposing to track? Does it matter? Would anything do?

Trackers have had a pretty poor record in trying to emulate a managed income fund. Do they go for highest dividend yields and come a cropper when a share is high yielding because its value is collapsing or if the high yield is obviously not sustainable? If not what criterion do they use? In my view income is a sector where human assessment is essential to identify the solid and steady performers and to ensure that a high degree of diversification is achieved. A simple index wont give you that.

barak

A_Flock_Of_Sheep wrote: »

.....Perhaps in the same way Woodford steered away from tech stocks and financials its possibly best to steer away from "star managers".

I don't think those that 'steered away' from 'star' active managers during the first decade of this century did very well.

talexuser

A_Flock_Of_Sheep wrote: »

Perhaps in the same way Woodford steered away from tech stocks and financials its possibly best to steer away from "star managers".

If I'd "steered away" from "star managers" for the past 20 years and had trackers I'd be poorer today. But everyone to their own route. And frankly making decisions based on one days' (not much of a) fall is extremely foolish.

talexuser

barak wrote: »

I'm disappointed that you ended that sentence with "...yet". [Don't do it!]

I measure my choices against a tracker (where suitable) to make sure the charges are worthwhile and so far I'm not convinced the tracker would be better. But each to their own.

A_Flock_Of_Sheep

talexuser wrote: »

If I'd "steered away" from "star managers" for the past 20 years and had trackers I'd be poorer today. But everyone to their own route. And frankly making decisions based on one days' (not much of a) fall is extremely foolish.

The cheap tracker seems to be an investment style advocated on here quite strongly.

Totton

What's the problem? Barnett takes over and has been performing better for several years. The issue for Mark is whether he can handle the inability to use IP Income and High Income for the smaller stuff due to fund size but he has been doing very well with his own funds. I imagine EDIN will settle down from its premium rather than the NAV suffering unduly, why not wait and buy EDIN on a discount when you may even end up staying with Neil Woodford if his new company get the mandate for EDIN.

The panic today seems a little unnecessary.

Linton

A_Flock_Of_Sheep wrote: »

The cheap tracker seems to be an investment style advocated on here quite strongly.

By some. In my view its a reasonable choice for some sectors if you want to invest in whatever your chosen tracker happens to invest in. "A cheap tracker" isnt an investment style any more than "I shop at Lidls" is an answer to "what type of food do you like".

A_Flock_Of_Sheep

Totton wrote: »

What's the problem? Barnett takes over and has been performing better for several years. The issue for Mark is whether he can handle the inability to use IP Income and High Income for the smaller stuff due to fund size but he has been doing very well with his own funds. I imagine EDIN will settle down from its premium rather than the NAV suffering unduly, why not wait and buy EDIN on a discount when you may even end up staying with Neil Woodford if his new company get the mandate for EDIN.

The panic today seems a little unnecessary.

You misunderstand me a tad. My hope is EDIN will trade at par or maybe even a discount so I can buy in later. Today's activities have really shown me how much a "name" or fund manager seems to have on share price influence. Apparently even Invesco's own share price in the USA took a tumble at Woodford's announcement. I was comparing this happening with the more passive nature of the cheap tracker route that i frequently heralded on here.

TH1878

This is the danger of buying Investment Trusts rather than Unit Trusts / OEICs. Don't buy ITs if you're not prepared for this (inevitable) outcome. The good news is that I think he's carrying on with the other non-Invesco funds.

My own gut feeling is that Woodford realised that the size of his funds were too big and it was becoming harder and harder to deliver returns (Buffett said something similar recently) and decided to jump ship. Woodford manages £30bn of investments - when he decides to buy or sell, he quite literally moves the markets on his own.

I don't blame him, Woodford made Invesco; they didn't make him.

Burnett is going to have exactly the problem despite his superior performance in recent years.