Woodford Patient Capital

AnotherJoe

Brian65 wrote: »

Yes, but as NAV falls, and more of these start ups make cash calls, leverage is increasing above what was agreed with the lenders. So the Trust has to raise cash and AFAIK can only do that by selling the stuff that looks promising?

Indeed. Hence, a death spiral concentrating the dross, unless they can find a Great Fool to sell BenAI and IH to. Id say why would anyone by those but then people are buying WPCT at 45p so there are still some about

atush

As I saw elsewhere when a similar question was asked;
"have you ever invested in a cold fusion startup? If the answer is "no", then congratulations, you are a better investor than NW."

Well someone needs to invest in it- governments maybe? It is important that someone works out how to do it.

masonic

atush wrote: »

Well someone needs to invest in it- governments maybe? It is important that someone works out how to do it.

There's no reason for governments to take any interest specifically in IH, though. There are plenty of others doing the research, and not mired in the same controversy over dubious claims.

AnotherJoe

atush wrote: »

Well someone needs to invest in it- governments maybe? It is important that someone works out how to do it.

Are you avin a giraffe? Someone needs to invest in it the same way as someone needs to invest in perpetual motion or the NHS needs to spend money on homeopathy.

LHW99

Well someone needs to invest in it- governments maybe? It is important that someone works out how to do it.

You're not going to get cold fusion - there are a lot of good physics theories why you won't. Just getting "hot" fusion that was commercially viable would be good.

masonic

AnotherJoe wrote: »

Are you avin a giraffe? Someone needs to invest in it the same way as someone needs to invest in perpetual motion or the NHS needs to spend money on homeopathy.

LHW99 wrote: »

You're not going to get cold fusion - there are a lot of good physics theories why you won't. Just getting "hot" fusion that was commercially viable would be good.

There are many forms of non-thermal nuclear fusion currently being researched. Those other than the muon catalysed fusion, which works, but has not been developed into something that could even theoretically be energetically feasible. For any of them to be successful, they would need to break current theory. Such a feat would require the new phenomenon to be repeatedly and reproducibly observed, in which case theory and fact must be brought into closer alignment. Such events do happen, but 99+% of the time research that leads to a new and unexplained phenomenon is flawed or otherwise irreproducible and leads nowhere.

For the above reasons, I have no issue with such research continuing and continuing to be funded by governments. Though I agree, hot fusion seems just as worthy of such funding, if not more worthy. Researching this sort of stuff is the only way we can make major advances, and it's impossibly hard to predict which lines of enquiry will be fruitful. But perhaps I am biased because I was trained using government money thrown speculatively into the sciences

In contrast, there isn't any need to invest in homeopathy, because we understand why it works (the placebo effect), while I have no doubt further research into perpetual motion could be funded if this phenomenon was ever actually observed, but it's all been tried before.

LHW99

For the above reasons, I have no issue with such research continuing and continuing to be funded by governments. Though I agree, hot fusion seems just as worthy of such funding, if not more worthy. Researching this sort of stuff is the only way we can make major advances, and it's impossibly hard to predict which lines of enquiry will be fruitful. But perhaps I am biased because I was trained using government money thrown speculatively into the sciences

I agree, but think cold fusion is still in the "Blue Sky Research" category, and is not yet ready for any commercialisation to be launched. Hot fusion, on the other hand has been shown to work, both as a concept, and in (very brief) practical trials. various research groups around the world have been working with different configurations since at least the 1950's, and there is now some hope a reactor can be made that could generate more energy than is required to be put in. Cold fusion will need a development cycle at least as long IMO

AnotherJoe

Blue sky? It's in rainbow with unicorns sky territory !
Theres a shed load of things that could have government research aimed at them before this junk science.
At least I see where the Greater Fools are who are still buying WPCT are coming from.
The fact that "if it worked it would be very valuable" is no more excuse for wasting money on it than on perpetual motion machines, if they worked they would be very valuable. That doesn't mean government should start a research process on it

iglad

StellaN wrote: »

Poor old Neil has had terrible press over the past 18 months or so but he obviously believes in his strategy. I am keeping my small holding in his trust over the long term so I suppose it's wait and see...

Wait and see it disappear more like

iglad

masonic wrote: »

It's been in and out of the FTSE250 a couple of times prior to this promotion. It may be removed again after a short time. It doesn't seem to have had much impact previously.

It seems, despite the name, this fund is for short-term investors to buy and a short while later sell at a loss citing poor performance. I bought a tiny slice at launch and topped up a couple of times during the worst of the dips. I'll judge it in 10-15 years.

The fund won't exist in 10-15 years