Woodford Concerns

Brian65

Malthusian wrote: »

Well, who saw that coming.



Only if you count lazily regurgitated press releases as promotion. There will be thousands of readers of every broadsheet invested in Woodford. That's what a huge marketing operation and a tie-up with Hardcheese Pantsdown gets you.

When did the Daily Mail become a broadsheet?

Brian65

bowlhead99 wrote: »

The Link investor letter has more detail than the article:
https://woodford.linkfundsolutions.co.uk/media/yr2dbqm2/15th-october-2019-investor-letter-regarding-the-winding-up-of-the-lf-woodford-equity-income-fund.pdf

Prior to the winding up process starting, BlackRock will take over the process to dispose of the listed assets and gradually move them into a mixture of cash and FTSE index products so that investors are not entirely out of the market while waiting for the cash.

So basically the plan has changed. Because Woodford has been fired. Because he was spinning the job out claiming more fees.

Malthusian

Brian65 wrote: »

When did the Daily Mail become a broadsheet?

Good point, although it was a broadsheet until 1971, and as most "broadsheets" have now converted to tabloid / Berliner format, the distinction is now purely one of class rather than format.

I was grouping the Mail with other papers whose readerships might stereotypically be expected to have enough money and enough financial awareness to invest in Woodford (though not enough to not invest in him). The Times, Torygraph, Grauniad, Indy, FT, etc.

eskbanker

It is a bit broad for its most useful purpose, for which there is an alternative of narrower sheets in perforated rolls....

Moe_The_Bartender

And Woody's view on the winding up:


“This was Link’s decision and one I cannot accept, nor believe is in the long-term interests of LF Woodford Equity Income Fund investors.”

Speechless.

AnotherJoe

I dont have access to it, its behind a paywall, but apparently theres an analysis out there from a "proper" broker that says that the realisable NAV of WPCT is 3p :eek: and no i haven't missed a zero off that! My fag packet estimate was 10x that but I think that was predicated on many of the unquoteds having some value, but if that value is dependent on a cash investment from a bankrupt company I guess that might do it, eg the value "might" be say £1 a share for a company but if that is dependent upon capital from someone who hasnt got any that becomes very binary either its worth £1/share or nothing


I see, as I semi-predicted, that Woodford didnt wind WEIF up, its been forced on him so he can say "not the right decision, not my fault"


Next step, WPCT ? Whether thats behind the 8% drop in WPCT today or thats just fallout from EIF who knows. Maybe investors are frightened he'll focus in on WPCT now (slight pun intended)

Moe_The_Bartender

And WPCT is down nearly 8 per cent today. Presumably because the unlisted stuff will finally have to be valued. I bet they can't give IH away.

Prism

Seems like the right decision. Surely most investors want to be out of this fund at this point and its better as a managed sale rather than a mad dash for the door upon a re-open of the fund.

Better to get what you can from this and reinvest elsewhere than be stuck in Limbo for another 6 months. However I have a feeling that at least some of those investors who made a bad call with to much exposure to Woodford will be put off from investing for a while.

[Deleted User]

Hargreaves Lansdown have a lot to answer for.

"We will be updating clients with further information as soon as possible."

Prism

ZingPowZing wrote: »

Hargreaves Lansdown have a lot to answer for.

I disagree. Individuals make their own decisions. If you invest based on marketing or recommendations then its your own responsibility. Unless someone invested a high percentage of their cash in Woodford then this is just a blip on their long term investment plan. People shouldn't expect investing to be always positive returns.