We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Neil Woodford makes a comeback
Comments
-
masonic said:Prism said:masonic said:Prism said:The only investing mistake he made was putting illiquid stocks in the main income fund and it sounds like he won't be doing the again. The bigger marketing mistake was continuing to charge a fee when the fund was locked and now not sounding very sorry for the mess. Saying that, some people will access any new proposition on whether they thing he can make them money and that will dictate future success with this new fund idea.
As I said, I didn't invest in this trust because I didn't understand pretty much what any of the companies were doing and didn't see much evidence that Woodford did either but it still doesn't mean he did anything wrong.0 -
Prism said:masonic said:Prism said:masonic said:Prism said:The only investing mistake he made was putting illiquid stocks in the main income fund and it sounds like he won't be doing the again. The bigger marketing mistake was continuing to charge a fee when the fund was locked and now not sounding very sorry for the mess. Saying that, some people will access any new proposition on whether they thing he can make them money and that will dictate future success with this new fund idea.
As I said, I didn't invest in this trust because I didn't understand pretty much what any of the companies were doing and didn't see much evidence that Woodford did either but it still doesn't mean he did anything wrong.It's the sort of "poor investment decision" that should prompt family members to question whether he still has capacity to manage his financial affairs. I've received more convincing investment propositions by email from a Nigerian Prince. I cannot see how it could be labelled other than an investing mistake. Had he evaluated it and concluded (as the rest of the world had) that they had most likely not discovered something that required the laws of physics to be re-written, given nobody else was able to reproduce the work, but he didn't want to rule it out completely, then perhaps a small punt in it could be defended. However, Woodford made it one of the biggest positions in the fund. Which is not how competent fund managers invest in a punt.I think we disagree on whether a fund manager should have a basic understanding of the companies in which they invest. I think at the very least, some basic research should be done, and advice from someone knowledgeable about the sector should be obtained, such that someone has an understanding of the investment before money is handed over. I would characterise it as a mistake not to do so, and that is why I can only view this as an investment mistake.3 -
Prism said:aroominyork said:Prism said:The only investing mistake he made was putting illiquid stocks in the main income fund and it sounds like he won't be doing the again.
In the same article he is quoted saying "I don’t think I’m qualified to do anything else." Well, Neil, there are lots of govt apprenticeships around. Maybe you should start afresh.
Nobody likely knew if the Baillie Gifford team were any good at identifying value in unlisted companies in the first few years either? When I invested in Chrysalis I waited for a year as the managers at Merian had little experience in private equity. In fact one of their holdings has already folded within 2 years of the initial investment and that is to be entirely normal. I wouldn't be surprised if more than half of the holdings collapse or never make it to IPO.
it was at a discount of 11% when I bought it but now stands at a premium of 30% at which point I would normally be thinking of selling and waiting for a lower re-entry point. In this case, I think that the next NAV declaration will close the gap significantly. It’s a long term hold for me.The fascists of the future will call themselves anti-fascists.0 -
EU regulations capped to 10% unlisted holdings in funds like Woodford. Listing companies on the Guernsey stock market to get round that inconvenient rule was an imaginative, enterprising gambit, albeit contrary to the spirit of consumer protection behind the legislation.
And now that we are to be free from the shackles of Brussels bureaucracy and having the head of the FCA (on whose watch the Woodford fiasco unfolded) placed Governor of The Bank Of England, perhaps fund investors can look forward to exciting times.
As Peter Hargreaves said before the referendum: "I’m firmly convinced, that day – hopefully – we decide to leave, that little bit of insecurity, that little bit of unknown will be an absolute fillip to everyone."
1 -
Moe_The_Bartender said:Prism said:aroominyork said:Prism said:The only investing mistake he made was putting illiquid stocks in the main income fund and it sounds like he won't be doing the again.
In the same article he is quoted saying "I don’t think I’m qualified to do anything else." Well, Neil, there are lots of govt apprenticeships around. Maybe you should start afresh.
Nobody likely knew if the Baillie Gifford team were any good at identifying value in unlisted companies in the first few years either? When I invested in Chrysalis I waited for a year as the managers at Merian had little experience in private equity. In fact one of their holdings has already folded within 2 years of the initial investment and that is to be entirely normal. I wouldn't be surprised if more than half of the holdings collapse or never make it to IPO.
it was at a discount of 11% when I bought it but now stands at a premium of 30% at which point I would normally be thinking of selling and waiting for a lower re-entry point. In this case, I think that the next NAV declaration will close the gap significantly. It’s a long term hold for me.
I am also a holder and I am up over 150% since I bought in last year - i plan on it being long term
0 -
Prism said:A VCT which basically this was in all but name is allowed to take punts on lots of these experimental ideas that go nowhere. It doesn't make it wrong if a few of the ideas come off.5
-
ZingPowZing said:Part of Woodford Funds’ success was his lofty reputation, so when he let it be known that he was investing in a small company, the price would rise. Full public disclosure of all investments helped, until the charm reversed.0
-
masonic said:Prism said:masonic said:Prism said:The only investing mistake he made was putting illiquid stocks in the main income fund and it sounds like he won't be doing the again. The bigger marketing mistake was continuing to charge a fee when the fund was locked and now not sounding very sorry for the mess. Saying that, some people will access any new proposition on whether they thing he can make them money and that will dictate future success with this new fund idea.0
-
Thrugelmir said:ZingPowZing said:Part of Woodford Funds’ success was his lofty reputation, so when he let it be known that he was investing in a small company, the price would rise. Full public disclosure of all investments helped, until the charm reversed.
”Woodford had massive holdings of listed companies, 20% or 30% that would take ages to sell. They may appear to be liquid companies but when you’ve got 30%, they’re anything but liquid.•
Sleep attributes a lot of Woodford’s success to the sheer weight of money he had invested in some of the small and mid-cap companies he backed during his career. “When you buy 30% of a company, you’re going to push the share price up, and then when you start to sell it, you’re going to take a lot of air out of the stock price,” says Sleep.0 -
Thrugelmir said:masonic said:Prism said:masonic said:Prism said:The only investing mistake he made was putting illiquid stocks in the main income fund and it sounds like he won't be doing the again. The bigger marketing mistake was continuing to charge a fee when the fund was locked and now not sounding very sorry for the mess. Saying that, some people will access any new proposition on whether they thing he can make them money and that will dictate future success with this new fund idea.
0
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 351.8K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454K Spending & Discounts
- 244.7K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.3K Life & Family
- 258.4K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards