Woodford Concerns

Thrugelmir

Moe_The_Bartender wrote: »

I have no personal interest in Woodford funds but would probably feel a sense of relief if I got 80p in the £ on these investments.

Vultures circling picking the meat off the bones. No sentiment when it comes to buying illiquid investments.

AnotherJoe

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Vultures circling picking the meat off the bones. No sentiment when it comes to buying illiquid investments.

80p in the pound for something Woodford has valued sounds like too much to me. Not so much vultures, more parrots.

ffacoffipawb

AnotherJoe wrote: »

80p in the pound for something Woodford has valued sounds like too much to me. Not so much vultures, more parrots.

More like lemmings perhaps?

Brian65

AnotherJoe wrote: »

80p in the pound for something Woodford has valued sounds like too much to me.

Indeed. I wish I could multiply the paper valuation of loss-making companies and charge increased fees on them like Woodford did.
I heard the latest devaluation has put WPCT above its debt ceiling, and their overdraft expires in January.

Reaper

It's Link Fund Solutions who do the valuations and I think they ought to be answering some serious questions.

Sep 2018 Industrial Heat valuation increased 357% because of technological progress and more funding
Nov 2019 Industrial Heat valuation slashed for the 2nd time because of a "delay in operational progress".

So in just over a year they went from making great progress to lack of progress.

I guess when you are trying to get pigs to fly its hard to judge how much closer you are to your objective.

AnotherJoe

No one there had the cojones to value it at zero when Woodford brought it back from his US travels. And to be fair I suspect that would have been a sackable offence and they had a mortgage to pay.
So I guess the long term plan was to upvalue and then gradually revalue down to zero as if it had promise but didn't work out, "just bad luck", " some of these companies don't pan out", " worth the risk" - insert your own cliche
The alternative is they are so stupid they shouldn't be in charge of valuing anything. These isn't a way round this. Corrupt or utterly gullible. Take your pick.

Thrugelmir

AnotherJoe wrote: »

80p in the pound for something Woodford has valued sounds like too much to me. Not so much vultures, more parrots.

You are obviously far better informed than many.

AnotherJoe

I have the same information as you.
Multiple companies gone bust. Some just weeks after injecting millions.
Multiple companies drastically reduced in value.
Multiple companies needing cash infusions to stay solvent.
At least one company valued at millions when it's clearly worthless.
Given all that, 80% of what's left seems generous, unless you know more than I do and know all the bad news is out of the way, all the devaluations are in the past.

Brian65

AnotherJoe wrote: »

So I guess the long term plan was to upvalue

My understanding is Woodford & sidekick wouldn't have got their £60 million dividend if they hadn't inflated the valuation as their fees are based on it?

Thrugelmir

AnotherJoe wrote: »

Multiple companies needing cash infusions to stay solvent.

That's the nature of early stage companies. The earlier one invests the greater slice of the potential pie. As funding rounds go forward a value is placed on the R&D to date. If early stage investors were diluted in terms of their share holding no one would ever be an angel investor. There would be no benefit.