Baillie Gifford Us Growth Share Discussion Threads

[nocrapversion4] 14/6/2018 08:31

and if you ever wondered why individual stocks go up 20% then fall back down 5% the repeat,even though no earnings news etc has been reported etc,

it isnt always based on fear/greed, that is markets general longterm risk/reward ratio and trend over months even years..

but the short term is basically, which fund can manipulate the share price the most.

ie which fund can sell up first at the peak and buy in first at the low.

the one that has the most money has the power to do this.!!

if a fund sells £millions in a transaction and hence then lowers the stock price, the smaller funds then join in followed by the poor pi, with his/her few grand holding.

then when the big rich fund decides to buy back in, thus here comes the poorer funds/pi that comes back in next and so on and so on.the game starts and stops.

but this trust wont play that game, they only sell if they see a better stock or they made a mistake in their initial choice or they feel the maximum gains are slowing in the stock and hence buy a new one.

if you want to see it in action look up a nanocap stock on AIM and watch the manipulation that goes on!!

I have a theory that ex manager peter lynch got his outperformance that way, he owned at one point over 200 stocks, but they were mostly nano/microcaps, he would buy in, let stock rise 50% then sell up, constantly, looking for the next 50% stock he could own, perhaps it was his constant buying in that raised the stock price!!!!!!!(then he bailed constantly)

his fund started at $20 mill and finished at $1.4 bill, thus he could target those nano/microcaps but got harder as his fund grew, thus he sold up after a 14 year run( which was in a bull market anyway)


the way to judge a manager is not the short term performance of his fund/trust, that is just how popular he/she is this month, year, but judge them by the amount of profits their stocks make and are the profits of the companiers growing.

but sadly sometimes stocks wont be as popular compared to cash/bonds,regardless how much money the companies make, and so folk rotate out of them based on risk/reward, but that doesnt mean the stocks arent still making good profits, it just means stocks arent the main wanted asset class. at that time.imo

[nocrapversion4] 14/6/2018 07:58

in the book the Buffett portfolio, edition one, it states somethings i have thought about and agree with that focus (concentrated holding)investing and low turnover wins longterm.(tempted to send a copy to baillie gifford)

there is no point owning 200 stocks, it just dilutes winners,( like a football team of 200 average players) the best is around 15 stocks and turnover must be 20% or less.( this trust owns its top 10 making 51% of portfolio.

as say a general fund or tracker it will hold far far too many stocks all in equal portion,

the problem with this is some companies/stocks will be below average/some above average in return of equity and earnings per share.but a good trust wont follow that thinking and will only choose the best of the best, thus have a concentrated best ideas portfolio, until an even better stock comes along.

as this reduces tax bill for you or the fund. big big difference if you let it run for say 10 yrs and then sell, rather than sell every year. the american fund has a turnover of 13%, suggesting the stocks are kept for a period of 8 years before rotation of complete holdings.

there is a pattern that shows that holding a concentrated portfolio with heavier weighting to your best ideas gives the best results but produces higher volatilty.

this volatility is what scares the average PI. so fund managers buy/sell/buy/sell far too much , a self fullfilling prophency in order to buy what they think will rise over next 6 /12 months. this gives them a high ranking in league tables, which then attracts new punters to their fund. whilst trying to hug the benchmark in order not to scare investors or get sacked.

now baille gifford dont want this, they know it is the economic return of the companies they hold that ultimately decides the price of the stock, not the short term popularity of a manager.( eg if the stock earnings grow 20% a year, expect the fund/trust to grow 20%, some year maybe more, some less, thus proving the efficient market theory is wrong as folk buy/sell on greed /fear not via mathematical calculations of earnings of said stocks.

as if a manager doesnt perform over 12 months he is normally sacked, read literature from the trust website, they agree with this and arent interested in that thinking.they are longterm holders, so expect years below and years above benchmark, but over 5 yrs plus, preferably 10yrs, they should outperform.

so we must realise as buffett/munger said short term the market is a voting machine, longterm its a weighing machine.

with these points above, and the thinking that buffett said he couldnt care less if he didnt get a price on his stocks today, next week, next month, next year cos thats just daily punters emotions pricing a stock, as he would prefer the stock market to close for 10 yrs and still own his companies,( he says we get on fine on a sat/sun when its closed lol)

hence this links us to the trusts private stocks, as these cant be madly traded on main market thus use that thinking cant be sold for 7 to 10 yrs and it joins together the trusts thinking that private stocks want no daily price, no daily/hourly/weekly/monthly trading , just a release price in 7 yrs approx on the selling at IPO date,

and with up to 50% potentially in private stocks, it basically means the underlying economics of these stocks decides the price not MR markets daily trading mentality.

[nocrapversion4] 12/6/2018 01:47

another question to think about, bottom up or top down investing??

which is best.

baillie gifford are bottom up, they look for the best stocks to hold, based on the research that only 4% of stocks actually produce the postive overall gains in the stockmarket indexes over time.

but according to the book im reading "plan your prosperity" by Ken Fisher says average investors should not stock pick and decide if its bonds, cash or stocks to own and what % of each decides the best overall longterm outcome.(eg top down)

but baillie gifford must be also slightly top down as they choose america as the best location for unicorns to be grown.

this short report below does say a combination of both works, but longterm it maybe the stock picking that wins.

www.thebalance.com/bottom-up-vs-top-down-investing-comparison-4154879

But according to my book, it doesnt matter whether you own a stock that has found a cure to cancer or whatever, IF the overall market has a fear of stocks or better risk /reward can be found in cash/moneymarkets/bonds,

then the stock market will fall. and you cant prevent that.

you decide to go cash/bonds or short an index for that period or do what the buy and hold companies/trusts/funds do and say hold,

but as i said before the PI is nimble and doesnt need to HOLD.

But the day interest rates hit 6% or we have big deflation, stocks will still be the true place to be for growth until that happens, but i always say have cash also, depending on your lifestyle and need for nearterm withdrawals or not.

own cash if you see any bargains in stocks or have cash if you refuse to sell up and are adamant buy and holder, cos you need to avoid selling falling stocks to pay bills, hence use your cash first. normally 18 months to 3 yrs in cash is enough, to ride out falls imo, always run with that float IMO !!

[nocrapversion4] 11/6/2018 18:32

yes, at present reading

common stocks and uncommon profits,

plan your prosperity, zero to one,(notes on start ups or how to build the future),

the warren buffett portfolio:mastering the powering of the focus investment strategy,

stein weinsteins secrets for profits for bull and bear markets

[nocrapversion4] 11/6/2018 11:28

finally, traders love volatile stocks,high beta, cos they can make money from every up and down spike.

investors love non volatile stocks.low beta

plus institutes like stocks where their buying/selling doesnt cause big movements in the stock price. thats why i like the fact that this trust owns larger main market stocks, less manipulation.

but its unicorns(private stocks) (which are only owned via invitation to institiutes only)are very thinly traded and hence arent manipulated, compared to microcaps in the AIM stock market.(hyping private amatuer investors,(really are traders that trade almost hourly IMO and are lifestyle CEO stocks where excited folk bought in at the top of a hype and are now clinging on till they break even and try to get out)

read the section on the above book about those type of stocks and those type of investors!!!

these unicorns make the trust money at their IPO date,but not in the 5 to 7 yrs holding period(non trading spikes etc)

Plus thats why buffett buys low beta stocks, and then applies leverage from his "free" money from premiums paid upfront in Geico insurance he owns.(thats why it is hard for anyone to ever replicate buffett today(the trusts like this one try hard, but they have to borrow, be it a low interest rate in order to apply leverage)


he likes 5 steps forward 1 step back, rather than 10 steps forward, 7 steps back stocks.

he loves dependable solid businesses as he knows he cant just trade in and out with his $billions, he buys and holds mostly, also to avoid capital gains tax in his stocks.

my point is he got 20% a year gains over 50 yrs, but the truth was just over 10% then he applied his free leverage.!!!!!!!!!!!!!( and he started with todays equivalent of £150000 at aged 21 by being a miser and living with his folks, rarely spending any money( (ask if a 21 yr old today has £150000 saved with uni loans and tution fees, high rent etc) read the book , the snowball,------


--£150000 times 20% yearly compounded times 50 yrs plus make a huge amount !!
take the fact that baillie gifford has to pay for leverage, eg the scottish mortgage investment trust has outperformed buffett when you consider that added cost fact, and you would have done even better than the trust/buffett if you sold up fast in 2008 in the first instance of fear. unlike trusts or funds cant do!! but as a pi you can do.and bought in again when QE took place.

final final thought, i believe value investing is dead and today growth investing wins. ( james anderson of SMT calls it growth at a unreasonalbe price)but it is growth with proper fundamentals, not internet bubble growth of yr 2000, ( all pie in the sky earnings forecasts).

remember more money was made in growth stock and selling up at top , than it was waiting for years as a value investor.imo.(some value folk are still waiing years and years for amazon to fall say 80%,like it did 17 years ago, they will have a very long wait ahead of them imo)

they say this time is diff from yr 2000 bubble , i agree stocks, have real proper earnings and winner takes all stocks have been formed.
the rise in stock price is matching the growth in earnings, unlike the interent bubble was.

but the ftse 100 is actually still overvalued from the rise in 2009 to todays price , as earnings growth have been below the stock prices rises.

but in the usa they have matched like for like, thats why the states isnt overvalued.

[nocrapversion4] 11/6/2018 11:10

some things i learned and i dont agree with is that both baillie gifford and warren buffett say you have to experience big losses to be a long term fundmamental investor.

eg experience the fall of stocks in 2008.

no, these falls took almost a year to develop, you had plenty of time to get out IF YOU ARE A PRIVATE INVESTOR.

Buffett and baille gifford and many other institutes CANNOT just sell £ billions in one click of a mouse, but private investors can sell a few £10's of thousands maybe in one click or couple or clicks.

we have that advantage.the fall in 2008 wasnt folk were selling too much, it was there wasnt enough new buyers to keep the market price level or rising.fear took over!!!

of course thats an index or fund or trust,

individual stocks can collapse by50% plus in a minute on some major bad news. thats why you need to be diversified, but not too much imo.even scottish mortgage trust lost 50% in 2008, but as a pi, you had time to get out.!!


as the book in my last post I state, if the headlines in every newspaper/tv is about a forth coming recession etc, then that fear spreads, and then get out of stocks as a PI before the institutes can imo.

now my point is one i read in a report 3 yrs ago, it was a study into the rise of the ftse 100 over last say 30 yrs, its 500% excluding dividends.

but if you missed every little downward drop, your return would be 4 times higher.


that is refering now to technical investing, and folk say technical investing doesnt work, i say it does combined with fundamental investing.

technical is just putting a graph together to show how busy your "shop" is or stock/company at a particular day, week, month or even over a year.

i see it simply as say a pub, busy at night, busy at weekends, busy when it has events, quizes, new owners, new menu, happy hour, etc,

less busy in mornings, weekdays, mid month, bad weather, recessions.



if you only opened your "pub" on those busy times you wouldnt waste valuable variable overheads/ costs, so treat that thinking to your timing of your buying of stocks




combine that knowledge with the rate of profits and debts and future forecast of said pub/shop (stock) and use it to enhance your returns.

so why dont you use that thinking to your buying and selling of your stocks.!!!!

[nocrapversion4] 11/6/2018 09:01

yes the macd ( momentum index)is falling towards zero at mo,and if volume is lowering?, maybe we are heading to postion 3 in the chart( hold)

awaiting whether it will be next round of buying or next short decline position 4

However volume is still one million plus a day, good, and the trust is issuing equity above NAV, good, high demand!!!
wait and watch.

[nocrapversion4] 11/6/2018 07:42

can i point out this very good book summary to use to your advantage, along with fundamentals

its not just is a company a good or bad buy, but when should you buy or sell it.

institutes, investors follow short term fear or greed in weekly and indeed monthly patterns.

learn those to your advantage.


print this off and use it as your bible.imo.

www.atradernotes.com/single-post/2017/06/22/Book-Notes-Stan-Weinsteins-Secrets-for-Profiting-in-Bull-and-Bear-Markets

and /or

hxxps://www.debeurs.nl/Forum/Upload/2012/6160228.pdf

ps, dont let anyone tell you they are annoyed cos you bought in lower than them and sold higher than them, it is simply you did more homework than them and deserve the extra reward!!!!!

[nocrapversion4] 02/6/2018 09:16

basically, the phrase the total stock market averages 8% returns over time, is mainly due performance from these super stocks, these produced individual compounded returns between 10% and 35% every year.

which then cancelled out stocks that went bust or were taken over within the index.

most run of the mill stocks only lasted 7.5 years, But, these super stocks are still in existance many decades later.that is what baille gifford and Philip Fishers rules are aiming to own and find.

and that is why the trust says overall, more money is made in the stock market by compounding over years with the owning of the super stocks, than it is by trading daily,weekly, monthly in hot tips.imo.

i know that baillie gifford has a team of 50 deidacted us stocks researchers and a team of private stock researchers also, plus total. workforce of 1000.

and 44 partners own the company, not including directors and fund managers who will place £20 million personal wealth within this new trust.

[nocrapversion4] 02/6/2018 09:06

hxxps://poseidon01.ssrn.com/delivery.php?ID=967113064118005125115099003106027122030015030047000031018016078096021066028001001106026119119003010032035025084018019107006067121007043047074113002121028036077016073068064031086095021010087001007073001031121083112025121092120030024116094022&EXT=pdf

here is the report that the trust refers to in its prospectus, its in the BG website,that the gains of the us stock market was due to only 4% of the companies in the index.these exceptional stocks are listed in the report.eg exxon mobile,IBM, altria group,, apple, microsoft, wallmart, amazon,johnson and johnson

the summary is that unless you are a skilled stock picker, you will fail, if you only hold a few stocks that you picked yourself,instead of an index tracker, then you will more than likely miss these super stocks.

thus you have 2 choice, imo

1. buy a s&p500 tracker and own all the stocks. and generate slightly postive results over the longterm. compared to treasuries.

2, employ active managers in a trust/fund that have the skill to find these super stocks.but they must not underdiversify, incase they miss some of them.

[luckymouse] 01/6/2018 22:12

Nice one NCV

[nocrapversion4] 31/5/2018 01:47

hxxp://www.freeinvestmentadvice.org/research/general/Common-Stocks/Common-Stocks-Uncommon-Profits.php

here's those 15 points again, but in more detail, this is well worth a read !

[nocrapversion4] 30/5/2018 13:52

scuttlebutt.!!!! explaination., Fishers word

fisher says folk try to find out all they can about a stock, before they buy, just like me or you do, articles on the web etc. but he says you have to go beyond that and visit the premises, talk to the management.

something me or you cant do. if you watch one of the videos of the presentations and aim of this trust on baillie gifford website you will see, one of the managers, Helen Xiong, explain the same theory that they look for information from unique sources, beyond the normal convention and that will include looking at the values, visions and attitiudes of the CEOs of these stocks. and by meeting them in person and questioning them.


"Fisher didn’t have the internet to make his work easier, but even if he lived today, I doubt he would be sitting behind his computer reading news and articles solely as his main source of information.

He’d he out on the streets visiting companies, making calls, talking with management and reading books or textbooks on industries he is interested in".

PS forgive me if i made a few posts recently, its i expect this chatroom to be a lonely place, lol, why cos the gambers will be on aim nanocaps trying to pump n dump imo, as for them, investing is a quick fix hobby, actually gambling,day trading and manipulating as they need an attachment, a place to go, to accesories their hobby, which is a CHATROOM.

in the same way folk that do rambling seem to need expensive walkling poles, i live in the countryside and laugh at them under my breath,

some hobbies, just need the simplest of things, investing should be boring,

I mean some aim stocks ceos actually read these chatrooms !!!
the day Tom burnett or james anderson, waste their time ever reply on a chatroom will be the day hell freezes over. lol. some ramper/manipulator. will tell james anderson or tom or helen, to take his personal £27 mill invested back to his chip shop bedsit in Bolton !!!



but chatrooms and wall street and CNBC make it "exciting" lol.


pps, look at point 5 of the 15 points by fisher, this is my pet hate by folk on nanocaps./microcaps on chatrooms, they say look profit has went up 100% this year, eg revenue say £100 mill profit, £2 mill, this year £4 mill. wow.

then they say that justifies a 100% rise in share price,if they do that next year, and beyond the share price will rise 100% every year, NO it does not.

if a stock makes £100 mill in revenue and £40 mill in profit, then next year £50 mill in profit, then GIVE me that stock every day!!!


one reason tobacco stocks had 23000% share price rises since 1980, until recently, huge profit margin !!!

IMO if you want to turn £150000 into say £800000 over the years via compounding, own a unique trust that owns both private unicorns and bigger listed amazing companies and HOLD IT long term.

If you want to turn £2000 into £4000 then to £3000 then £8000, then £4000, then £2000, via playing, trading and gambling on Aim nano/microcaps but not via compounding, then go ahead.!

bye. take care.

[nocrapversion4] 30/5/2018 13:30

I believe this us growth trust are following the principles of Philip Arthur Fisher, growth investor many decades ago,who wrote the book common stocks and uncommon profits, i willprob buythe book and report back.

anyway it seems value investing isnt the way and Philip has 15 points that he uses before he buys and hold a great growth stock and potentially never sells it.

(note this isnt the same as buying internet stocks with no earnings, profits or revenue that caused the internet bubble) these are real great stocks with potential monopolies.


have a look at this link.

or google some on the book and the investor.

a you tube quick answer





hxxps://www.oldschoolvalue.com/blog/investing-perspective/15-points-to-look-for-in-a-common-stock/


"The fact that accounting can’t easily identify business headwinds was a reason he didn’t like the idea of cheap stocks."

thus its the potential huge future of the product/service and the skill and longterm thinking of the management imo are very important or more important than the balance sheet, hence value investing doesnt tell the whole true story of a company.

so it appears Buffett is no long a value investor, he may have been in the past,

why, so he can buy either the whole company outright or be on the board and push/organise change of poorly performing value stock.

he doesnt do that today, he looks for strong companies, he didnt wait for apple to become a value, loss making company before he bought in.

[nocrapversion4] 30/5/2018 13:19

hxxps://www.investors.com/how-to-invest/investors-corner/busting-the-investing-myth-that-you-must-always-buy-low-in-stocks/

interesting at thats james andersons theory in scottish mortgage investment trust, you can buy high and sell higher, quality stocks deserve quality prices.(the same principles imo of this trust, especially with the lsited ones, even tho some have high p/e ratios)

there are some folks out there still waiting since 1997 for Amazon stock to drop , so they can buy in, thats been a 20 year wait lol.

but those that go for the dirt cheap shares are dirt cheap for a good reason and that is why the market doesnt want to buy that stocks.

hxxps://www.investors.com/how-to-invest/investors-corner/crushing-the-investing-myth-of-its-ok-to-buy-on-the-dips/

and dont average down on a single stock, as once its peaked, the excitment, catalyst, maybe gone and folk may move on to a fresh stock ??

but you can average down (pound cost average,long term gradual buying )on an index or trust, folk will be buying in for years and years?

how many times have you seen it in a chatroom a post, "this stock has fallen , yet the market is up ,why"

cos an individual stock has peaks, events, catalysts that drive it , then theyre gone,

but, the general market is a long , long term buying process IMO, different beast.

interesting.

[foot in mouth] 29/5/2018 19:59

Very useful, thanks!

[nocrapversion4] 28/5/2018 10:15

why you should avoid aim listed penny stocks buy and holds, scams and the manipulation.


hxxps://www.investopedia.com/updates/penny-stocks-risks-rewards/



why you should own unlisted stocks instead.

hxxps://www.investopedia.com/articles/basics/11/investing-in-private-companies.asp

Overall, it is important to reiterate that private companies are not liquid and require very long investing time frames. Most investors will need an eventual liquidity event to cash out. This includes when the company goes public, buys out private shareholders, or is bought out by a rival or another private equity firm. And just like with any security, private companies need to be valued to determine if they are fairly valued, overvalued or undervalued.

It is also important to note that investing directly in private firms is usually reserved for wealthy individuals. The motivation is that they can handle the additional illiquidity and risk that goes with private investing. The SEC definition calls these wealthy individuals accredited investors or qualified institutional buyers (QIB) when it is an institution.

investopedia, a very good site imo.

another good site, imo.


hxxps://www.investors.com/how-to-invest/investors-corner/busting-the-investing-myth-that-penny-stocks-can-lead-to-marvelous-riches/

note, where are the most posters on chatrooms, ???

ftse100 stocks, or aim nanocaps??

easy answer, highlights the type of folk that own these and why.

mainly cos, ftse100 are owned by due diligence instititutes, aim nanocpas arent, and are exciting could be, what if stocks, that pumpers target to offload on any spikes as often as the excitement lasts.

seen it before, cloudtag, bahamas oil, ukog, frontera resources,blockchain,advanced oncotherapy,sound energy.

these stocks can have no sales, profits, but have a great story, traders buy in on such a tiny free float, and sheep follow, spiking the sp, traders sell up, price collapses.

these stocks dont hold steady rises, cos of the small free float, the frequent dilution,the temporary excitement, too many short term traders and no longterm buy and hold insitiutes.imo.

[nocrapversion4] 28/5/2018 00:07

why we like closed ended investment trusts, compared to bog standard open ended unit trusts funds

[nocrapversion4] 27/5/2018 18:02

any easy way to find out if most investors(traders, hypers, manipulators,stock addicts, dreamers,gamblers) on b boards are indeed knowledgable and dedicated longterm investors ( more than a week in any one stock lol)is to go onto any very busy nanocap board chatroom( pick one where they use the words, choo, choo,kerching, big buyer in the waiting, someone in the city knows something, takeover portential, whoop, whoop, )

and ask the question,


"what do folk on here think of Abiomed's products previous growth in earnings and its future"


and watch the response, have fun!!!

excpect to get sworn at, blocked, filtered, asked who the hell is abiomed, asked will it be a 100 bagger like this oil spec stock in deepest africa,and many other silly questions.

lol

ps its $392 a share,that is what scares these guys they would rather own amillion shares of something at 1p a share than a few dozen of something costing hundreds, it is what seperates the men from the boys,

the amatuers from the experienced imo.

its to do with with psychology, why they buy miions of junk, rather than a hadfull of quality.

something to do with bragging about the amount of stock held , i am led to believe, to their peers.

even this stock at £1.15 is far too dear for them lol.

now if it was 0.15p, they would buy it in droves.!!

[nocrapversion4] 27/5/2018 17:16

hi foot in mouth this is a trust not a fund, way way big difference, try youtube and key in why trusts are better than funds,

yes tbh, done most of my research away from b boards, yes on some small stocks there are some wise folk on chatrooms, but at end of day, ask yourself where do the very rich, make their money???

b board aim listed nanocaps hype pumps, no, ftse trackers, no,

pre ipo unlisted stocks investors , yes, or become company owners, yes,

how do they keep their money, via hedge funds,once they have sold their businesses or their ipo shares.

ive done the own 2 or 3 stocks only , it can be very very high risk doing that.( no way 33% in an unlisted, maybe 33% in amazon yes)

i like the idea of owning not a huge amount, but more than 3 stocks, but its the proportion you own, eg say 2% in a stock that can go up 30 times, or 10% in one that can double.

im finding all the well known stocks out there are well priced in, and all the listed ones that noones knows about are rubbish or pumped and dumped.


also the unkown good growth stocks maybe in china, japan or more than likely the usa, i dont have the means to research these stocks fully, thus with the trust can by visiting them in person. joe average just picks a uk aim stock to try and make their fortune in!!

show me a UK aim listed stock that has anywhere near the potential a young amazon, illumina, google, tesla has/had.


tbh im seeing things diff now , via the unlisted stocks. but if i could go for it big time, i would own say 10 unlisted (not nanocps tho)that are trully changing the world with their new product/service and just go for it, but baillie gifford cant just own 10 unlisted and go for it, they have rules to follow based on risks and and investing guidelines.

my biggest disgust is folk pumping mining/oil nanocaps that have no sales or findings, as they are pumped by what they could be???, that is selling a stock to the next excited person, to sell to the next excited person, eg conning them whilst they sell up in the rise.

the trust, yes looks at the futre potential of companies, but doesnt say look if this stock finds oil, gas, diamonds its share price will go up, the trust doesnt own mining spec stocks, but newbies do and try make money on hype shortterm.the truth of these could be/may be type stocks will all come out in the wash eventually imo.


in the trust marketaxess and abiomed are looking very good longterm, imo.

i like SMT,but it has been discovered and its getting very big now and have a lot of megacaps plus unlisted tho also.

and may in the future have less room to grow, like the buffett problem now.but usa growth trust is new, hence its just the beginning imo.

the us growth trust really only owns one mega cap amazon, which i think it will hold for 5 years min, but it holds not so larger caps, like abiomed.

but i feel too many folk think oh look theres a £50 mill stock on aim, hence it must rise, NO it wont it will only rise on two things, higher earnings growth and /or hype.
but the truth will come out in the near futurein these stocks.

thats why i feel there are really only two choices, either proven largeish caps,eg abiomed, illumina that can still grow for years, maybe 4 or 5 bag.

or buy unlisted unicorns that are proving their worth and their target market with true profit growth, that can be come 20 baggers.eg go from £500 mill to £10 billion, may take 7 years plus, so be it.

finally most b board chatters go on about funds are rubbish, and just own a few mega bagger aim stocks, that is misleading, why,

cos they tarnish funds as the same as trackers,or trusts, yes most funds closet trckers in disguise and trackers will never make you rich, unless you live to a 100 and started at 18.but trusts that dont clsoet hug, and can leverage, funds, trackers cant, and can access unlisted unicorns, are a diff thing all together.this trust is a very high active share eg very dif f tot he tracker and very low turnover, eg it buys and holds.

also they say own a few aim nanocaps and make money, no no, as these are just hype stocks where most folk can only buy and sell a few £thousand at most, these stocks will spike or collapse if any proper investor or fund tries to invest or withdraw £ hundred of thousands or £ millions.

trust /fund managers try and avoid moving a stock with their purchases or withdrawal,ps , the nasty ones forward sell or their friends the market makers let them in via tricks, shafting the pi. imo.

so the pi jsut tries to do the same thing by targetting nanocap hype stocks, buying and selling on spikes and throughs caused by them.

but this never allows them to compound ALL their money imo or allows to compound large sums,this is just traders, rampers and gamblers playing stocks and shares with their couple of grand, hoping to manipulate a nanocap.it isnt poper wealthy investors COMPOUNDING in great compnaies for years and years with a huge amount of money.

but if a trust owns unlisted and buys a set amount of stock and then holds them for years as they are so illiquid, they only make money on the IPO date, that is fine and combining this with larger good growth liquid stocks makes it a good combination imo.

[foot in mouth] 27/5/2018 14:07

Hi ncv4, good summary/thought process around what you see as one of the big pictures of investing. I've made a decent pile over the last few years and this is my first foray into a fund. It is my attempt to de-risk my portfolio a bit as i normally only hold 2-3 stocks at any one time!!Besides this fund are there any other that have caught your eye? I'm impressed by what i see in BG.

[nocrapversion4] 27/5/2018 12:10

I recommend any investor here logs on to Baillie gifford website and reads EVERY article in the intellectual capital section.

I also think investors should take note of the very important key fact that this trust is closed ended and will own alot of unlisted stocks, unlisted should only be held in closed ended trusts not opended funds,imo

as it avoids a sell off off of underlying holdings,,( it shouldnt happen anyway ,as it isnt a income type trust and it is stated this is a hold for min 5 yrs and (unless interest rates go to 10% making cash more attractive, !! than stocks) as trusts have a NAV but dont have to sell holdings, (woodfords big error IMO, having unlisted in a divided income open ended fund where he has to sell holdings, when folk ran for the hills, impatient and pensioners that need steady income))

my point is i read that the very very wealthly, eg the sophisticated investor makes larger returns than average joe cos they get access to investments average joe doesnt, why , cos these are seen as much higher risk, but huge potential, what are these?

these are pre IPO, unlisted stocks,venture capitalist tiny stocks, and are usually loss making ,poorly funded in balance sheet, nanocaps that can go bankrupt and have wierd products or services, like airport luggage delivery or some crazy idea!!( you also have to prove you are an accredited, sophisticated investor) you dont with this trust even though as it is higher risk, than say a tracker,but not mega high risk,such as the sophisticated investor venture capitalists trusts, but still can produce very worthy gains via a longterm hold imo

unlisted stocks , ones preferably that are actually generating income with huge target markets are how the smartest invest, the founders of these stocks allocated themselves shares and allocate rich investors these shares also to own cheaply, when say 5 to 7 yrs later min they ipo, it is the joe public that does the buying,with much lower upside at that point, whist the rich investors and company directors that do the selling to joe.

now this trust isnt targeting those nanocap,types it will target unlisted companies that already are growing, not 2 men in a shed,but it will be eg at around min $500 mill cap as stated in the prospectus( not some £2 mill crazy unlisted stocks in oxford)but mostly in the san fransisco area imo,. that can IPO at say $10, 15 or even $50 bill

if you google the most common jobs in usa you will see the san fran area is home to computer programmers, however i think this trust will target healthcare technologies in the future, thats where the growth is imo, using computing in healthcare.

it knows the listed dying stocks are stocks like tobacco and heavy engineering,to avoid all old school but it is not targeting internet bubble.com type stocks with no earnings and $1 bill caps with no earnings, that is a nono, they target profitable stocks.with realistic futures

the average investor looks at the price of a stock and the p/e,(plus is it also a hot chatroom stock) then decides to buy in,( fast way IMO to turn £1000 into £3000, if your fast in the 1week pump n dump or 3 month stock promotion farce) but not a great way and an impossible way to turn £100000 into say £500000 and KEEP those gains long term for your pension decumulation period)

the wiser rich dont, they look at the future size of target market of the stock, debt levels,the laws, trends, implications, that could make or break the stock, plus the attitute of the ceo, is he/she longterm, does he/she have huge skin in the game?(is it also unlisted)

that is how alot of folk never bought apple,amazon, google yrs ago, they didnt think years ahead.and that is why alot of folk wrongly buy average joe AIM listed penny stocks, i mean a penny on aim with the intention to sell up once it hits 5p (via a quick stock ramp)and dump it,that is if they can actually sell up on that precise hour/day, plus even if it has no earnings, high debt, ceo has no skin in the game etc, with their £1000 holding(NOT exactly compounding hundreds of thousands of pounds are they?)

now baillie gifford will add low interest leverage in due course, Buffett always added free leverage, clever man,which they will do,as they state, this will imo make it grow faster than equivalent american fund , plus better long term prospects with the unlisted stocks, yes higher risk, but the risk is exponetial and that imo is the secret to how the wealthy get even wealthier imo.

they place small amounts to get huge returns.exponetial risk take.

average joe owns a ftse 100 or 250 tracker and/or buys listed aim penny stocks of 2 men in a shed which is pump n dumped or short term promoted.

ps i am considering myself never to own a tracker or any aim stocks ever again.!!yes i have done, but experience and education in investing is a wonderfull thing.

i also understand the the directors/owners of baillie gifford will always make the most money here, i have no jealousy, thats the perks of using a lot of investors pooled money,and taking in set commission, ( the owners will also place £20 mill of their own money in the trust!!!!!) .If you are jealous, then try starting your own investment broker house !!!

thats what buffett did, he took the paid upfront customer payments of GEICO insurance company he owns and invested that free money as free leverage into stocks, buffett is still well respected and noone say "hey you made huge money out of our upfront commissions!)

baillie gifford have access to unlisted companies that i do not have and very low interest rate leverage and a cummulative team of trusted researchers, that i dont also have..

i also expect not to see chat on here about look its went up 5% or its went down 5%.

i expect to see chat about the stocks that it holds and the prospects, uniqueness, of these stocks as that is far better and that is what makes a company a great longterm company , not look its share price went up or down daily, weekly, monthly.


i think those that own this trust are different breed of the regular, chatroom stock owners.this chatroom will never ever get 500 posts a day, ever!! IMO.


And currently waiting for the trust to publically list what their first unlisted stock is that they bought into recently.if they will do that.