Suggestions for a speculative punt?

mazibee

Thanks @Thrugelmir and @bowlhead99

I have calculated as follows

BP Current Price  = 274.80

BP 52 W High = 508.43

Sorry I have written it wrong that its 85 % below its 52 week high

(508.43-274.80)/274.80 = 85%

I meant to say that that from current price to its 52 W high the margin of going up is  85% and similarly for RDSB its 77%

Shocking_Blue

bowlhead99 said:

mazibee said:

Thrugelmir said:

mazibee said:

adindas said:

mazibee said:

Yesterday I  was planning to buy either of BP. or RDSB but unfortunately both were up.

SO still indecisive, whether I shall go for them today or wait.

Also please can someone explain me  me whats the difference between RDSA and RDSB?

Long Explanation. But simple explanation if you are based in the UK using UK trading Platform you will need RDSB.

http://www.differencebetween.net/business/difference-between-rdsa-and-rdsb

"RDSA is listed in the Netherlands with a withholding tax on dividends of 15-25 per cent while RDSB is a U.K.-sourced dividend under the company's Divide Access Mechanism."

Both RDSA RDSB are traded in UK, NL, NY. Just be aware the RDS stocks are highly effected by the price of crude oil.

I used to have RDSB but I sold it as I wanted to divert where my money could work harder. It is a good stock as in the past they were already closed to botttom. They are too big to fail, so the chance it is going under administation is very low.

If you are waiting RDSB to go back to 865p, I wish you luck with that. Everyone want to buy the stock where the price at rock bottom. If we could now exactly whthe the rock botttom is we all already become a multi billionaires.

If one has to make a choice between BP and RDSB,  which one is a better choice?

Why these particular companies, what's the attraction? The developed markets are full of oil and energy companies. 

BP 85% below its 52 W High , RDSB 77% below its 52 W high, Oil prices moving upward.

Sorry for my ignorance, please can you elaborate a bit more.

Or a smaller UK listed company with potential to grow, or some business that can be more nimble than the FTSE behemoths when refocussing its business to cope with the long term changing world economy and sentiment.

Would be interesting to know of any examples here. Thanks.

bowlhead99

mazibee said:

Thanks @Thrugelmir and @bowlhead99

I have calculated as follows

BP Current Price  = 274.80

BP 52 W High = 508.43

Sorry I have written it wrong that its 85 % below its 52 week high

(508.43-274.80)/274.80 = 85%

I meant to say that that from current price to its 52 W high the margin of going up is  85% and similarly for RDSB its 77%

That's not how people would conventionally explain 'x% below it's high'.  RDSB is 46% below its 52wk high.

Clearly if you're an investor who just lost 50% you will need to make 100% profit to get back to where you started, but that doesn't necessarily mean you are going to make the 100% any time soon. Since RDSB was at 500p, the world discovered it didn't need commuting, air travel volumes were taken off the menu, and Trump lost his election replacing with someone more moderate who will sign back up to the global climate change conventions and perhaps rekindle the relationship with Iran whose agreements Trump chose to break, perhaps allowing them to sell oil again and depressing the price further.  RDSB and BP already rose 40% in the last three weeks, no reason to expect them to do the same in the next three weeks. 

This is not to say don't buy them (I hold both, including BP.A bought in the first market crisis), but you should probably have some opinion about which is best and why they are better than something else, other than "Oil prices moving upward". You could just bet on the price of oil if you wanted to have a speculative punt on the price of oil, without needing to buy any shares at all. Whereas if you buy into the company shares, you are buying ownership of a business, which you should try to understand to a greater extent than "which one should I get, thanks".

DireEmblem

Yeah that's an odd way to do it, although you are saying if it 'was' to recover back to its previous level, then that could be an 85% gain.

Back on topic, but BABA, or Rolls Royce right now would be my suggestion.  Stay away from oil stocks is my view.

adindas

BrockStoker said:

csgohan4 said:

BrockStoker said:

csgohan4 said:

Although I take what 'Fool' says with a pinch of salt, they said not to buy IAG a few months back, then say buy and now say don't buy.

If that's a reference to the link I posted, I only posted it for the transcript of the earnings call. I would not listen to anything those fool fools say!

ARWR down 12% why is that?

Negative earnings "surprise". As I said in my post earlier:

"Today looks like a good buying opportunity. Uninformed investors/traders selling it off when they should be buying, after yesterdays earnings/CC - they don't understand that negative earnings mean little for a non-commercial stage bio-pharma company"

I ended up buying another 200+ shares as I could not resist that kind of discount!

The price is still above 50 SMA (Simple moving Avarage). There is high probability (not 100% accurate though) they might still go down below the 50 sma.11.45% drop in one day is scary for some people. The contrarian investors will give the chance to these people to do panic selling and that is the time where they will enter. But it migt not happen to this stock as the trade volume seems to be low this time.

adindas

DireEmblem said:

Yeah that's an odd way to do it, although you are saying if it 'was' to recover back to its previous level, then that could be an 85% gain.

Back on topic, but BABA, or Rolls Royce right now would be my suggestion.  Stay away from oil stocks is my view.

I mentioned both of these stocks back a few weeks ago.  If you decide to invest, please do your own due diligence and make your own decision. You take the gain, you take the pain (loss).

Moe_The_Bartender

BrockStoker said:

Moe_The_Bartender said:

BrockStoker said:

csgohan4 said:

BrockStoker said:

csgohan4 said:

Although I take what 'Fool' says with a pinch of salt, they said not to buy IAG a few months back, then say buy and now say don't buy.

If that's a reference to the link I posted, I only posted it for the transcript of the earnings call. I would not listen to anything those fool fools say!

ARWR down 12% why is that?

Negative earnings "surprise". As I said in my post earlier:

"Today looks like a good buying opportunity. Uninformed investors/traders selling it off when they should be buying, after yesterdays earnings/CC - they don't understand that negative earnings mean little for a non-commercial stage bio-pharma company"

I ended up buying another 200+ shares as I could not resist that kind of discount!

It could be that the markets don’t like the sudden and unexplained disappearance of Curt Bradshaw, the Chief Scientific Officer. Looks like trouble at t'mill.

That might certainly be part of it, but I think it's more to do with the earnings and investors who do not know what they are doing.

I suspect that the majority of investors who put money into companies like this don’t know what they are doing. Personally, I would run a mile from a company that is burning through cash at a colossal rate and doesn’t have a product.

csgohan4

Moe_The_Bartender said:

BrockStoker said:

Moe_The_Bartender said:

BrockStoker said:

csgohan4 said:

BrockStoker said:

csgohan4 said:

Although I take what 'Fool' says with a pinch of salt, they said not to buy IAG a few months back, then say buy and now say don't buy.

If that's a reference to the link I posted, I only posted it for the transcript of the earnings call. I would not listen to anything those fool fools say!

ARWR down 12% why is that?

Negative earnings "surprise". As I said in my post earlier:

"Today looks like a good buying opportunity. Uninformed investors/traders selling it off when they should be buying, after yesterdays earnings/CC - they don't understand that negative earnings mean little for a non-commercial stage bio-pharma company"

I ended up buying another 200+ shares as I could not resist that kind of discount!

It could be that the markets don’t like the sudden and unexplained disappearance of Curt Bradshaw, the Chief Scientific Officer. Looks like trouble at t'mill.

That might certainly be part of it, but I think it's more to do with the earnings and investors who do not know what they are doing.

I suspect that the majority of investors who put money into companies like this don’t know what they are doing. Personally, I would run a mile from a company that is burning through cash at a colossal rate and doesn’t have a product.

You could argue the same for IAG, RR, CINE to a greater extent.

But as with investing with stocks, it is risky and one must be informed.

In hindsight CINE was probably a bit more riskier than I was comfortable with, but I stuck with it and in  profit, hopefully they won't go bankrupt

adindas

Moe_The_Bartender said:

BrockStoker said:

Moe_The_Bartender said:

BrockStoker said:

csgohan4 said:

BrockStoker said:

csgohan4 said:

Although I take what 'Fool' says with a pinch of salt, they said not to buy IAG a few months back, then say buy and now say don't buy.

If that's a reference to the link I posted, I only posted it for the transcript of the earnings call. I would not listen to anything those fool fools say!

ARWR down 12% why is that?

Negative earnings "surprise". As I said in my post earlier:

"Today looks like a good buying opportunity. Uninformed investors/traders selling it off when they should be buying, after yesterdays earnings/CC - they don't understand that negative earnings mean little for a non-commercial stage bio-pharma company"

I ended up buying another 200+ shares as I could not resist that kind of discount!

It could be that the markets don’t like the sudden and unexplained disappearance of Curt Bradshaw, the Chief Scientific Officer. Looks like trouble at t'mill.

That might certainly be part of it, but I think it's more to do with the earnings and investors who do not know what they are doing.

.. Personally, I would run a mile from a company that is burning through cash at a colossal rate and doesn’t have a product.

Wise decision for Value investor. But very low chance to beat the market significantly in this way.

Using this view, you will never invest in Biotech, Innovation, and in disruptive technology. Most of these companies will have the characteristics you mention in their infancy, they burn cash at a colossal rate and yet to have a product. Think about Tesla, Virgin Galactic, (SPCE), Nio, Amazon, Alibaba  etc. Even in biotech or vaccine companies like Moderna. Before they produce the COVID-19 vaccine Moderna keep burning cash and they are yet to produce vaccine.

With arrowhead there is currently a significant drop in price but this is still much higher than a few months ago.

With value investing you will need to be Warren Buffet to beat the market. But he never beats the market significantly anyway, like few new fund managers have done. Keep in mind he sold his Airlines Stock and Banks stocks early this year when the pandemic start to hit the world with multi billions of US$ loss. Time has proven is he right in this particular case? He lost multi billions making the wrong decision, but he still one of the best investor legends in the world.

Each to their own view, by the end of the day the people invest in individual stock to beat the market significantly. If this goal could not be achieved by pick up individual stocks why bother taking more risk rather than stay in the safer option, a well diversified index fund.

Moe_The_Bartender

adindas said:

Moe_The_Bartender said:

BrockStoker said:

Moe_The_Bartender said:

BrockStoker said:

csgohan4 said:

BrockStoker said:

csgohan4 said:

Although I take what 'Fool' says with a pinch of salt, they said not to buy IAG a few months back, then say buy and now say don't buy.

If that's a reference to the link I posted, I only posted it for the transcript of the earnings call. I would not listen to anything those fool fools say!

ARWR down 12% why is that?

Negative earnings "surprise". As I said in my post earlier:

"Today looks like a good buying opportunity. Uninformed investors/traders selling it off when they should be buying, after yesterdays earnings/CC - they don't understand that negative earnings mean little for a non-commercial stage bio-pharma company"

I ended up buying another 200+ shares as I could not resist that kind of discount!

It could be that the markets don’t like the sudden and unexplained disappearance of Curt Bradshaw, the Chief Scientific Officer. Looks like trouble at t'mill.

That might certainly be part of it, but I think it's more to do with the earnings and investors who do not know what they are doing.

.. Personally, I would run a mile from a company that is burning through cash at a colossal rate and doesn’t have a product.

Wise decision for Value investor. But very low chance to beat the market significantly in this way.

Using this view, you will never invest in Biotech, Innovation, and in disruptive technology. Most of these companies will have the characteristics you mention in their infancy, they burn cash at a colossal rate and yet to have a product. Think about Tesla, Virgin Galactic, (SPCE), Nio, Amazon, Alibaba  etc. Even in biotech or vaccine companies like Moderna. Before they produce the COVID-19 vaccine Moderna keep burning cash and they are yet to produce vaccine.

With arrowhead there is currently a significant drop in price but this is still much higher than a few months ago.

With value investing you will need to be Warren Buffet to beat the market. But he never beats the market significantly anyway, like few new fund managers have done. Keep in mind he sold his Airlines Stock and Banks stocks early this year when the pandemic start to hit the world with multi billions of US$ loss. Time has proven is he right in this particular case? He lost multi billions making the wrong decision, but he still one of the best investor legends in the world.

Each to their own view, by the end of the day the people invest in individual stock to beat the market significantly. If this goal could not be achieved by pick up individual stocks why bother taking more risk rather than stay in the safer option, the index fund.

I'm at the stage of my investing life where I don’t need to beat the market but I do have smallish holdings in GAM Star Disruptive Growth, Blackrock Next Generation Technology and Smith and Williamson Artificial Intelligence. These are run by managers who do seem to know what they are doing and I'm happy to leave stock picking to them. One of the very few individual stocks that I own is Sea Limited which has never made a profit but it does have a very popular product in SE Asia and could well become a behemoth.

I really doubt that the same can be said of most biotech startups.