Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Strategic Equity Capital LSE:SEC London Ordinary Share GB00B0BDCB21 ORD 10P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  +0.375p +0.19% 201.125p 199.00p 203.25p 202.00p 201.25p 201.25p 103,976.00 16:35:22
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Equity Investment Instruments 0.0 0.4 0.4 457.1 139.90

Strategic Equity Capital Share Discussion Threads

Showing 176 to 198 of 200 messages
Chat Pages: 8  7  6  5  4  3  2  1
DateSubjectAuthorDiscuss
21/3/2017
15:24
All gone quiet, at least in terms of RNS or newspaper "drops".
spectoacc
03/3/2017
08:17
Thanks @MF. Guess I'm just a bit disappointed that the Board's judgement isn't my judgement.
spectoacc
03/3/2017
08:03
That is interesting thank you MF
bigwilly1986
03/3/2017
07:24
So absolutely no change to what we know already. ie the Board are sticking with SW's junior (& he really is junior!) & show no interest in engaging with SW or major shareholders. How can they not know what SW "..Is doing and when" - it's been in the press!
spectoacc
03/3/2017
07:09
The chairman did make it clear that the investments were high quality, long term holdings and that while SW was important, he was backed by a strong team at GVQ. I got the feeling that they were disappointed SW has left GVQ, don't know what he is doing or when, and so are reserving judgment until the picture becomes clearer. It was also made clear that the board appoint the investment manager and will do what they think is best for shareholders. Although he didn't say it, any of the board hold significant amounts of SEC, so there is additional comfort from that. Personally, I would like to see one of the portfolio companies start motoring - the NAV seems to have been static for a long time.
mad foetus
02/3/2017
21:41
That's very helpful. I wonder if the next step is sacking GVQ.
peter27
02/3/2017
20:43
Well, I got a response and it was very well written and reassuring. I don't want to break any confidences but clearly the board are truly independent and mindful of their duty to act in the interest of all shareholders.Of course the board can't do anything about the relationship between GVQ and Stuart Widdowson, and if he has non-competition clauses which GVQ don't want to waive (and to be honest, why should they), then really he is out of the investment management game for some time.Interesting share price movement and volume today.
mad foetus
02/3/2017
12:04
Just written to the chairman: [email protected].net encourage you all to do the same
mad foetus
22/2/2017
10:09
A good read, thanks - exactly as we thought. I particularly noted the reference to solicitors: "'It is disappointing that [trust chairman Richard] Hills has declined or ignored on more than one occasion an invitation to discuss with us, or our solicitors, a way forward for SEC which would enable shareholders to decide which fund manager they would wish to look after their money by splitting the trust into two new entities pro rata to shareholder election.'"
spectoacc
22/2/2017
10:05
hxxp://citywire.co.uk/money/chris-mills-attempts-to-pinch-strategic-equity-capital/a994223
mad foetus
21/2/2017
06:51
Completely agree that an amicable solution is needed - likewise that the major shareholders ought to be able to hold sway. The surprise is that the RNS implies the opposite. Benefits no one if it ends up in litigation, though the falling out clearly happened before SW quit.
spectoacc
20/2/2017
17:31
I think I'm going to drop the board a line asking that an amicable solution be found. Most investors want SW to continue managing the fund. He obviously wants to get back to work as soon as possible. What I would like to know is what role Lord R is playing and whether SW was a key person who, if he left, would give SEC the right to terminate GVQs appointment. Given the quality of the board I would be surprised if that was not the case.
mad foetus
20/2/2017
17:15
The 18 month ban only holds good if GVQ enforces it. Harwood could take over management if the major shareholders decide they want to keep Stuart's expertise. Money always talks!
peter27
20/2/2017
17:05
I'm not even sure what that RNS means - seems to be saying that nothing can be allowed to happen for 18 months, due to his association with Harwood & employment contract? Seemed a bad split before, but seems even worse now. Presumably the major shareholders will put pressure on the Board as a result.
spectoacc
20/2/2017
16:09
Well, interesting RNS. As I suggested before, SW is likely to want meaningful stakes in some of SECs underlying investments. It is no surprise Harwood are talking to SECs shareholders.I personally think that SEC now needs to be wound up, and part of the winding up process could involve a sale of assets to Harwood new fund at close to NAV. If it wasn't for the fact that Lord Rothschild owns GVQ then I am sure this would be under discussion. As far as I see it, there is little reason to stick with the current manager.
mad foetus
17/2/2017
22:51
Weekly candles: Before the 10 bag top: 30 White 6 Black 5:1 After the top: 29 White 50 Black 0.58:1 That's a change in ratio by a factor of ten - so yeah I reckon someone's been getting out - interesting to see if there's meaningful bite at the neckline
luckymouse
15/2/2017
14:03
No issues with the NAV RNS, but wouldn't mind seeing a "Holdings in..", or perhaps some block trades go through.
spectoacc
15/2/2017
08:38
don't know about 'hand of god" but Ian armitage, widdowsons ex boss at Hg capital, was a steady acquirer of SEC shares at sametime as he ran down his very sizeabe holding in HG. I think he owns circ a 5% of SEC. He is now ba king widdowsons new venture somake sense if he sells downhis SEC stake to fund widdowson.
bottomfisher
10/2/2017
07:19
Yes, though GVQ do have a decent track record with their other fund and Lord Rothschild can presumably afford to buy in experience. I think they are going to have to look strongly at discount control here, 20% discount feels about right, though if the underlying investments perform, and they should, that will be of secondary importance.My feeling is that SW is going to raise 200m for his new fund and will want to take a big slug of some of the companies in the SEC portfolio. But they are too illiquid for that to be easily achievable. It's a right mess!
mad foetus
10/2/2017
07:13
Indeed - mainly the last point re the overhang. Also: "Our new Lead Manager, Jeff Harris, is well acquainted with all the investments held in our portfolio and has earned his position through his major contribution to the Company over a period of several years. We are confident that Jeff will enable the Company to continue delivering strong performance, which should be reflected in a narrowing of the discount in due course." They've talked him up several times but "..A period of several years" does not a star manager make. And however you look at it, the team's just halved, even if you assume SW & JH were equal in their contributions. Once again, a reminder how green he is: "Assistant Manager: Jeff Harris Jeff joined GVQ Investment Management in 2012 as an Analyst. He was appointed Assistant Fund Manager of both Strategic Equity Capital and the GVQ UK Focus Fund in May 2014. Prior to joining he worked at PricewaterhouseCoopers within the Transaction Services Team on a number of private equity and corporate transactions. Jeff holds the ACA qualification. Jeff owns 17,163 shares in Strategic Equity Capital1. "
spectoacc
10/2/2017
07:06
Half year report not proofed before publication, which is shoddy, but looks like GVQ are remaining as managers. Interesting to see how they control the discount and deal with major shareholders wanting out.
mad foetus
09/2/2017
10:03
Make sense it may do; happen it hasn't. Also get the impression SW wants to go much smaller, which is possibly outside of his mandate with SEC. Hard not to get the impression that he's left under a cloud - the RNS didn't even mention his new venture. I agree that many SEC holders will want to follow him - hence I think it's going a lot lower, perhaps to c.25% discount, which wouldn't be unreasonable for the reasons mentioned in posts above. If I were SEC board, I'd be looking to move to a new - but well-respected - manager ASAP. Feels like bridges have been burned with SW, and isn't as if his recent performance was too great anyway.
spectoacc
09/2/2017
09:20
Yes but the difference here is that SW is aiming to set up his own fund doing what SEC does. He will likely want to invest in many of the same stocks, most of the investors in SEC want him to manage their assets, there is the overhang you mention. It just makes sense for everyone to allow SW to move to Harwood and take the management of SEC with him. If Lord R didn't own GVQ I'm sure it would already have happened.
mad foetus
Chat Pages: 8  7  6  5  4  3  2  1
Your Recent History
LSE
GKP
Gulf Keyst..
LSE
QPP
Quindell
FTSE
UKX
FTSE 100
LSE
IOF
Iofina
FX
GBPUSD
UK Sterlin..
Stocks you've viewed will appear in this box, letting you easily return to quotes you've seen previously.

Register now to create your own custom streaming stock watchlist.

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

P:42 V: D:20170326 22:57:14