Woodford Concerns

Options
1…4950525455…172

Comments

  • Fatbritabroad
    Fatbritabroad Posts: 573 Forumite
    First Anniversary First Post
    Options
    bowlhead99 wrote: »
    Not a lot less than 60p though, so not substantially different from what we were paying last week. As I mentioned in an earlier post, if it falls to 55 or 50p I might have some more. 50p would be a quarter less than I paid last Tuesday.

    But as Reaper implied, to pay ballpark the same amount per share as I already paid, would just increase my exposure to a risky holding that I already decided I was happy with. If the price is lower it might be worth looking at again, and I do have some spare 'risk' money - because having money for opportunities is one reason not to be fully invested at all times.
    Speaking of opportunities and purely as a punt I'm considering hl after their shares being down 20% over the last month
  • EdGasketTheSecond
    EdGasketTheSecond Posts: 2,558 Forumite
    First Anniversary Photogenic Name Dropper First Post
    Options
    Fatbritabroad wrote: »
    Speaking of opportunities and purely as a punt I'm considering hl after their shares being down 20% over the last month


    If they are found to have been selling their own holdings in Woodford while at the same time promoting Woodford to PI's, that might not be such a good idea. Could be the next mis-selling scam.
  • aberlyfid_2000
    aberlyfid_2000 Posts: 72 Forumite
    Options
    PCT: i dont think that its a case of catching falling knives, its more apt to say that you are trying to catch an Exocet missile.
  • dividendhero
    dividendhero Posts: 2,417 Forumite
    Options
    EdGasketTheSecond wrote: »
    If they are found to have been selling their own holdings in Woodford while at the same time promoting Woodford to PI's, that might not be such a good idea. Could be the next mis-selling scam.

    If it's two different departments with a "Chinese wall" between them it's legal.
  • dividendhero
    dividendhero Posts: 2,417 Forumite
    Options
    DennisTenus wrote: »

    I have over 30% of my portfolio in Fundsmith, that too much/too risky?

    I believe Terry Smith has a lot more skin in the Fundsmith game than that ;)
  • fun4everyone
    fun4everyone Posts: 2,340 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper Photogenic First Post
    edited 10 June 2019 at 10:55PM
    Options
    Now the FCA are being asked to explain themselves by MP's.

    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2019/jun/10/neil-woodford-fund-patient-capital-trust-equity-income

    Like all regulation in the UK, the FCA are another scam. Simply there to provide jobs for the boys, collect fees and give everyone the pretence things are looked after.

    It will simply end up in yet another "lessons have been learned" statement type of outcome imo. Truth is it was blatantly obvious to anyone paying attention where this fund was headed. Even the name "Woodford Equity Income" was a misrepresentation.
  • DennisTenus
    DennisTenus Posts: 483 Forumite
    First Anniversary First Post
    Options
    dividendhero wrote: »
    I believe Terry Smith has a lot more skin in the Fundsmith game than that ;)

    You mean his own money?
  • AnotherJoe
    AnotherJoe Posts: 19,622 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post Photogenic
    Options
    MaxiRobriguez wrote: »
    That is the game we're going to be playing. Currently trading a 32% discount on previously quoted NAV.

    At some point people are going to take the plunge with a small amount of their capital.


    At some point people are going to wake up to the fact the NAV is fiction.
    A substantial amount is worthless.
    The rest is on a spectrum from overvalued to fair to undervalued, but likely highly skewed to over, given the cowboys who've been doing the valuing.

    All the non worthless are having their prices depressed due to the firesale.
    Based on that, halve the NAV to allow for all the above plus the uncertainty and time factor for the non worthless remaining after the fire sale to rise back to fair value. Which means its still valued more than the "real" NAV and "should" fall to mid 30's.
  • Prism
    Prism Posts: 3,804 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post
    Options
    DennisTenus wrote: »
    You mean his own money?

    Yes. For what its worth I have about 50% of my equities with Fundsmith. It doesn't worry me at all
  • Fatbritabroad
    Fatbritabroad Posts: 573 Forumite
    First Anniversary First Post
    Options
    fun4everyone wrote: »
    Now the FCA are being asked to explain themselves by MP's.

    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2019/jun/10/neil-woodford-fund-patient-capital-trust-equity-income

    Like all regulation in the UK, the FCA are another scam. Simply there to provide jobs for the boys, collect fees and give everyone the pretence things are looked after.

    It will simply end up in yet another "lessons have been learned" statement type of outcome imo. Truth is it was blatantly obvious to anyone paying attention where this fund was headed. Even the name "Woodford Equity Income" was a misrepresentation.
    For me this is the biggest potential issue. I bought Woodford when he set up as I used to hold his funds at invesco and before I had any clue what I was doing when I first started investing (edit I still don't know but at least I now know I have no idea which is why I buy index funds as my core holding and have a couple of punts on some satellites). Yes I should have read the prospectus but there will be alot of people buying this on reputation and because income funds are normally safe vanilla products
★ ★ ★ Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 343.6K Banking & Borrowing
  • 250.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.9K Spending & Discounts
  • 235.8K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 608.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 173.3K Life & Family
  • 248.4K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards