North Atlantic Smaller C... Share Discussion Threads

[mw8156] 28/9/2010 17:44

ft quotes a discount of 33.7 per cent
looks like bionostics is still doing well orthoproducts and assetco abu dhabi have dropped a little though the latter may just represent a currency change;
was hoping that they would buy back more shares or CULS or invest the cash in OIG or a sensible smaller co portfolio--always a bit of a worry that the cash would be unwisely invested though their record is excellent.

[deswalker] 28/9/2010 13:52

Interims out. Strip out the £49.27 mill in cash and T-bills and the remaining portfolio is on a 32.7% discount to NAV on a fully diluted basis. Plenty of upside remaining here IMO.

[deswalker] 23/8/2010 17:45

Decent buyback at OIG which is now our biggest holding. Obviously NAV enhancing for NAS.

[deswalker] 06/7/2010 16:37

Nice buyback today.

[deswalker] 15/4/2010 14:16

Finally this is starting to move. 30% discount with some interesting unquoteds that hopefully need revaluing upwards (esp the second largest holding).

[mangal] 24/3/2010 21:26

Thanks for the info. baggywrinkle & DesWalker.
So, not much difference between the ords & CUL. I guess the culs trade at a slightly higher price than the ords because of their yield(yes, minuscule) & probably because they have priority over the ords on a winding up of the company.

[baggywrinkle] 24/3/2010 15:28

one for one into ordinaries
miniscule yield

[deswalker] 24/3/2010 15:28

The conversion terms are one Ord per CUL with a zero strike (essentially swapping one for the other at any time). Not sure about the yield though.

I think there is value here and that at some point Mr Mills is going to want to retire and cash out. I've bought 2000 Ords for the long term waiting for such an event. At least we can be sure that the manager has enough skin in the game.

[mangal] 24/3/2010 14:57

A director bought 90,000 CULs at 817p yesterday.
He obviously sees value in them. Does anyone know what the CULS' yield & conversion terms are?

[merrifieldscross] 04/1/2010 20:23

old thread....

[don muang] 17/1/2008 20:57

well, I guess my answer to the previous question (over 11 months ago) is a No.... it's been a good short recently !!!

[don muang] 06/2/2007 17:13

anyone out there trade Nas 100 via spread betting on a regular basis?

[energyi] 15/11/2006 20:35

Could be a top in here

[frank spencer] 02/11/2006 06:49

Wow. Up 20% in 36 years. Must be your best ever tip ?

[energyi] 29/8/2006 05:09

Posted by: HoneyChild
In reply to: Zeev Hed who wrote msg# 495249 Date:8/28/2006 2:14:00 PM / Post #of 495346

Zeev, when do you expect the Nassacre to begin?


/2
Posted by: Zeev Hed
In reply to: HoneyChild who wrote msg# 495256 Date:8/28/2006 2:17:11 PM /Post #of 495346

We will not know about the occurrence of the nassacre until 2060 is taken, that is 100 Naz points below current prices.

Zeev

@:

3/ Next Day:
Posted by: MSGI
In reply to: Zeev Hed who wrote msg# 495406 Date:8/29/2006 10:43:05 AM /Post #of 495451

Zeev, you put out a market sell a week or two ago. You also said that you might be a little early with your call by a couple of weeks. With consumer confidance numbers out today, do you expect the market to now start a decline? Are you still sticking to your earlier call for a market drop?

4/
Posted by: Zeev Hed
In reply to: MSGI who wrote msg# 495415 Date:8/29/2006 10:45:13 AM / Post #of 495452

Still sticking to that call, though for now I have only a retest of the 2060 or so, failure of that level should precipitate a real nassacre.

Zeev





Roach-man
Global: Global Fallout from America's Post-Bubble Shakeout

Stephen Roach (New York)
August 28, 2006

It's hard to imagine that a US-centric global economy wouldn't be at risk in the aftermath of a bursting of the US housing bubble. Lacking in internal support from private consumption, the non-US world remains heavily reliant on selling exports to wealth-dependent American consumers. As the United States now comes to grips with the aftershocks of another post-bubble shakeout, so, too, must the rest of the world.

There's no consumer in the world like the American consumer. In 2005, US personal consumption expenditures totaled $8.7 trillion. At market exchange rates, that was about 20% higher than consumption in Europe, a little more than three times that in Japan, nine times that in China, and fully 17 times consumption levels in India. The comparisons are equally striking when private consumption is expressed as home-currency shares of each economy's respective GDP -- 70% for the US in 2005, 54% in Europe, 57% in Japan, 38% in China, and 64% in India. Putting it another way, one measure of America's "excess consumption" -- defined in this case as the difference between growth in consumer outlays and disposable personal income -- was about $210 billion in 2005, or almost half of total consumption in India.

In the first installment of this essay, I concluded that over-extended US consumers would be quite exposed to the correction in the US residential property market that now seems to be unfolding (see my 25 August dispatch, "Another Post-Bubble Shakeout"). Downside adjustments to US consumption stem from three macro forces -- a negative wealth effect traceable to a flattening out of home prices, multiplier effects attributable to the employment cutbacks in construction activity, and possible increases in income-based saving to compensate for the loss of asset-based saving. During the ascendancy of the Asset Economy over the past 10 years, average growth in real consumption (3.7%) exceeded that of real disposable personal income (3.2%) by 0.5 percentage point per year. In light of the post-housing bubble headwinds noted above, I could easily see a reversal in this relationship, with consumption growth falling short of real income growth over a protracted period of time. Moreover, to the extent that the direct and indirect effects of weaker construction activity depress baseline income generation, the consumption outcome could be under even greater pressure. All in all, I wouldn't be surprised if real consumption growth in the US averages 2.0% to 2.5% over the next couple of years -- about 1.5 percentage points slower than the vigorous asset-dependent growth trend of the past decade.

@:

[energyi] 16/8/2006 20:32

In reply to: Zeev Hed who wrote msg# 493266 Date:8/16/2006 3:11:29 PM
Post #of 493325

LOL. Zeev, we bears are powerless on a day like this Bulls are in control, so go long with them, but don't hold overnight

2/
In reply to: butterfly111 who wrote msg# 493315 Date:8/16/2006 3:22:27 PM
Post #of 493323

As a bear, I am always "powerless" since I have an aversion to the dark side, I find myself now with three dark side positions (all slightly under water here), a very unusual situation for me. In edit, My AAPL bop is now "marginally green" (g).
Zeev

[geologic] 28/7/2006 20:24

VXN ...

VIX ...

SPX

[substantial wealth] 25/5/2006 10:33

orvil - 25 May'06 - 10:18 - 1042 of 1042


There is a lot of buying going on but there must be a big sell in the background otherwise the price would have risen as in the past


Orvil, Its HB selling the shares they got @0.50...short term the shares will fall back

[substantial wealth] 13/3/2006 08:33

Sun 12 NXS 0.425 Edelin - Chairman Boris Adlam said: "Nexus Management is now a stable, profitable business operating in a growth market. 48k H1 FY ends 30th march.100k+ profit/new contracts.during the first six months of the year, and are confident of a successful outcome to the year

[maestro.] 01/11/2002 22:32

after hours nasdaq surging due to microsoft news and increase in semi conducters

[rupert bare] 01/11/2002 20:43

Great thread Maestro?

Poor you.

Rupert