We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register to chat with like-minded investors on our interactive forums.
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Stock Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cambium Global Timberland Limited | TREE | London | Ordinary Share |
| Price Change | Price Change % | Share Price | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.00% | 6.75 | 01:00:00 |
| Open Price | Low Price | High Price | Close Price | Previous Close |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6.75 | 6.75 |
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 07/1/2015 10:23 by praipus View: if you hold the NAV should rise as a result of the tender.Vulnerability to the underlying is increased for better or worse. I'm tendering some because I need the money. I followed a value arbitrage investor in (see WAM thread). |
Posted at 07/12/2012 15:08 by praipus Noting the arrival of funds managed by Weiss Asset Management:For those interested I track as far as possible the activities of Weiss and other systematic value investors on the WAM thread: |
Posted at 06/4/2011 07:42 by grahamburn From Digital Look "Tips" alert - no link to paper:Timber does not feature in the portfolio of a typical investor but, as an asset class, it does have some interesting properties. Cambium Global Timberland (CGT) is Aim-quoted and invests in forests that can be managed on an environmentally and socially-sustainable basis. The shares are "cheap" and have the potential to be re-rated higher. Buy, says the Scotsman. |
Posted at 31/10/2007 08:28 by grupo guitarlumber Russian Timber Group sets IPO price range 90-110p/share for AIM listing Date : 31/10/2007 @ 08:02 Source : TFN Russian Timber Group sets IPO price range 90-110p/share for AIM listing LONDON (Thomson Financial) - Russian Timber Group Ltd has set the price for its proposed initial public offering on AIM at 90-110 pence per share. The total offer size is up to 125 mln stg, implying a market capitalisation of about 370 mln stg at the midpoint of the offer price range before any exercise of the over-allotment option, the company said in a statement. On Oct 19, Russian Timber Group said it is proposing to raise 100 mln stg via an initial public offering to institutional investors ahead of a listing on AIM. TFN.newsdesk@thomson kkb/ajb |
Posted at 07/5/2007 20:37 by cambium Cambium Global Timberland Limited will seek to invest primarily in forestry assets or operations which are or can be managed on an environmentally and socially sustainable basis. The Company will seek out opportunities to gain value from certification of its forest management systems, from the commercial development of environmental products and services, and from the reduction of risk by community engagement and workforce development. Investments may be managed for timber production, environmental credit production or both. The Company will not invest in processing facilities. The Company will be a long-term investor in the countries and regions in which it invests and will therefore strive to ensure good community relations. The Company aims to establish effective policies and procedures to ensure all its investments make a positive contribution to the regions in which they are operating. The Company will seek out opportunities for enhanced environmental performance and will actively seek commercial opportunities in emerging environmental markets. The Manager believes such developments can play a role in enhanced conservation efforts for forests in a regional context and can provide new and diversified sources of revenue to investments. Returns from timberland are influenced by three factors: (i) biological tree growth; (ii) timber price changes; and (iii) changes in the value of the underlying land asset. The Company aims to establish a portfolio comprising geographically diverse assets located both in mature markets and in developing markets where potentially higher returns may be generated but with commensurately higher risk. The Company will initially target investments in North and South America and the Asia-Pacific region (including Australia and New Zealand), but may invest in other regions on an opportunistic basis, as determined by the Manager with the approval of the Board. The Company's strategy is to achieve a balance between generating income and producing superior total returns to investors by establishing an optimised portfolio of timberland properties and timberland related investments diversified by location, age class and species. Different age classes of tree will provide harvestable timber over time and diversification by region and species will provide exposure to different growth rates and different market segments. The Manager believes that this approach will maximise returns and help to control volatility and risk exposure. |
Posted at 14/11/2005 07:10 by waldron OR something like that.Syngenta to plant trees RNS Number:0601U Syngenta AG 14 November 2005 Media Release Syngenta to plant forty thousand trees to celebrate its 5-year anniversary Basel, Switzerland, 14 November 2005 Syngenta announced today it was celebrating its fifth anniversary by planting tens of thousands of trees around the world. To launch the program, the company will plant a tree for every employee, some 20,000 trees in all, in Africa. Building on this national business units will also plant a tree for every employee in support of specific environmental and social initiatives in their country. In total, as many as 40,000 trees will be planted worldwide through the anniversary recognition. "Since our formation in 2000, Syngenta has flourished and our fifth anniversary is an opportunity to celebrate," said Michael Pragnell, Syngenta Chief Executive Officer. "This is our way of paying tribute to our employees who built the company, and to symbolize our commitment to sustainable agriculture. It is also a reminder of the meaning of the name Syngenta, derived from Greek and Latin origins: together with people." Syngenta was formed on 13 November 2000 from the merger of Novartis Agribusiness and Zeneca Agrochemicals. It has been pioneering corporate social responsibility programs particularly in the field of sustainable agriculture, soil conservation, water quality, employee well-being and community involvement; all of these are reflected in this initiative. Syngenta is a world-leading agribusiness committed to sustainable agriculture through innovative research and technology. The company is a leader in crop protection, and ranks third in the high-value commercial seeds market. Sales in 2004 were approximately $7.3 billion. Syngenta employs some 20,000 people in over 90 countries. Syngenta is listed on the Swiss stock exchange (SYNN) and in New York (SYT). Further information is available at HTUwww.syngenta.comU Media Enquiries: Switzerland: Guy Wolff Tel: +41 (61) 323 2323 USA: Sarah Hull Tel: +1 (202) 628 2372 UK: Andrew Coker Tel: +44 (1483) 26 0014 Analysts/Investors: Switzerland: Jonathan Seabrook Tel: +41 (61) 323 7502 Jennifer Gough Tel: +41 (61) 323 5059 USA: Rhonda Chiger Tel: +1 (917) 322 2569 Welcome to eTree, a proud sponsor of the Woodland Trust's Tree for All campaign. If you are an eTree member company shareholder, please register and help us to help our environment. By choosing to receive your shareholder communications by email, such as annual reports, you are: Reducing the amount of paper that companies have to use Reducing harmful greenhouse gases caused by printing and delivery of paper communications Getting what you want, when you want it, wherever you are in the world And if that's not enough... For each person that registers to receive their communications by email, we will buy a sapling to be used in the Woodland Trust's Tree for All campaign - a national campaign combining the planting of 12m trees with the education of our children to understand the importance of working in harmony with the environment - now and in the future. We're proud of protecting our environment, to make it a greener place for generations to come. What are you proud of? Proudly launched in association with the founder members https://www.etreeuk. |
Posted at 18/6/2003 19:46 by briarberry Ape... i'm inclined to think that foreign investors are the more important variable to us traders right now, even Financial Sense mentioned it.if the US$ & stocks both go down at the same time, then as you know, foreign investors take a double hit of course, to a country with so much foreign debt, it's important to try to prevent foreign investors doing a runner but when the $ goes up, the Fed may let stocks fall ??? also with the increase in CPI they may have no chose but to pump less ??? edit... summary ... in theory i'd expect stocks to rally if the $ rallies but in practice if the ppt stand aside it could go down... plus we are due a correction soon, before end of month ??? i cannot imagine the ppt letting, $ + stocks + bonds, all fall at the same time, if they can help it |
Posted at 11/6/2003 22:02 by thameshead SAN FRANCISCO (CBS.MW) -- The primary question on U.S. investors' minds these days is a simple one: "Are stocks too richly valued to sustain the bull market now under way?"Few investors considered that question leading up to the market's collapse. Now we're transfixed by it, overcompensating for our past disregard. As a result, many have become paralyzed by profound skepticism -- clinging to the self-defense mechanism we lacked not long ago. Market gurus argue over this question with blue-faced blather for one reason -- value is relative. Yet history is also. Since past is prologue, it's time to consider what it can teach us. If we look back to the early stage of the 1990-2000 bull market, the answer to the question is: "By no means." And here's why. Market bears who now refuse to return to their caves for an overdue slumber harp on the fact that the S&P 500's price-to-earnings ratio stands at a hefty 32.5. Yet their argument is disingenuous, for that ratio of how many dollars investors spend for a dollar of annual profit is based on trailing 12-month earnings. No one of sound mind buys stocks based on past earnings. What matters today, as it always has, is projected earnings for the year ahead. On that score, stocks have plenty of room to run. Consider these comparisons to two key indexes during like periods into the last bull market -- the S&P 500 group of large-company stocks and the Russell 2000 Index of small-company shares. The S&P 500 While the P/E ratio for the S&P 500 is 32.5 for the 12 months ended March 31, Standard & Poors' projected P/E ratio is 22.8 for the year ending March 31, 2004. Flash back to March 31, 1991 -- also six months into a bull market -- and the trailing P/E was a far leaner 17.9. Yet by the end of that year, the trailing P/E jumped to 26.1. That was unfathomably high to investors back then, far more so than 32.5 today, but that didn't stop the market from taking off on the longest bull run in history. Russell 2000 Like the S&P 500, the trailing P/E on the Russell 2000 is a still lofty 24.6 for the year ended March 31. But the projected P/E for the year ending March 31, 2004 stands at 13.7. In March 1991 -- the same time frame into the last bull market -- the Russell 2000's projected P/E stood at an almost identical 13.6. Cause for disbelief Of course, skepticism about earnings projections is warranted, given the continuing reasons Corporate America gives us not to trust their earnings reports. And in hindsight, the actual P/Es throughout the 1990-2000 bull market always came in far higher than projections. Yet here's the key point: During the 1990s bull market, the P/E ratio on the S&P 500 rose from a low of 15 when large-company stocks were overlooked in late 1994 to a high of 34.5 in mid-1999 near the close of a five-year run of 20-percent-plus gains. And we were right to flee the market, considering the S&P 500's P/E ratio reached a high 46.5 in March of 2002. As for the Russell 2000, its P/E ratio clocked in from a low of 18.8 to a high of 34.7 -- well above the projection for the coming year. A more telling measurement Since Wall Street's crimes and misdemeanors chastened the analysts it employs, there's fair reason to believe today's earnings estimates are more conservative than in the past, said Richard Geist, head of the Institute of Psychology and Investing near Boston. Geist contends the best measure of the market is the so-called Fed Model -- the valuation gauge that the Federal Reserve is said to use. It's the same formula that determined stocks were 50 percent overvalued when the bubble burst in 2000 and 34 percent overvalued before the 1987 crash. Here's how the calculation works: Take the projected operating earnings per share for the S&P 500 for a 12-month period, divide it by the interest rate on the 10-year Treasury note, and then multiply by 100 to come up with the fair value for the S&P 500 Index. As of Tuesday, the projected earnings per share for all S&P 500 companies was $56.13, and the yield on the 10-year Treasury stood at a 45-year-low of 3.13 percent. The division works out to 17.93, which would put the S&P 500's fair value at 1,793. It closed Tuesday at 984.84, suggesting it's 45 percent undervalued. The Fed model is considered a better gauge of the market's value because it takes into account relative returns on bonds. As the economy improves, investors will be forced to flee the bond market and move more assets into stocks. The demand factor Naysayers note that we've never started a bull run with the S&P 500's trailing P/E at 32.5. Indeed, when the market started upward in 1990, its trailing P/E was just 15. But that raises a critical issue: The as-yet incalculable degree to which the massive spike in demand for stocks in the last two decades has permanently driven up the market's P/E ratios, rendering comparisons to historical norms based on pre-1980 data far less relevant. The huge jump in Americans' life expectancy is leading millions of people to keep assets in stocks rather than in fixed-income securities to finance much longer retirement periods. And the systematic shift of retirement assets from fixed-income-leaning traditional pensions to largely stock-based 401(k)s and IRAs also is propelling demand. "New Paradigm" promoters noted both those trends in the late 1990s to justify P/E ratios reaching into triple digits on many stocks, that is, if companies had profits at all. But unlike long-departed dot-bombs, they are forces warranting serious consideration. The final analysis Regardless of how long this bull market will last, the recent run-up in stock prices should be a wake-up call to investors who're still heavily invested in bonds and cash equivalents, said Paul Greenwood, director of U.S. equities for the Frank Russel Co. "A lot of people may be in for a rude awakening if interest rates go back up," Greenwood said. "Hopefully people will realize the risk of not having adequate exposure to equities. "If people are lucky enough to get out of stocks in time, they seldom if ever get in in time," Greenwood said. "They always wait for more confirmation and before you know it, the market is up 30 to 40 percent. They should bring their stock exposure up to a long-term level and stop chasing their tails." |
Posted at 02/6/2003 18:04 by baa No wonder all the US retail investors are chasing this market - with comments like these. Tend to the view that we'll get a pull back of a few hundred or maybe more and then another shot at the 9000 level. All my puts are way out of the money and will only add further when the trend has turned - falling knifes come to mind....."Despite hardly impressive numbers from the ISM and construction spending reports, investors were jumping into the market this morning," said John Forelli, "It's just another sign that investors have become content with, rather than disappointed by, the prospects of a long slow recovery." He continued: "The market's been moving up more on momentum than fundamentals. As long as we continue to have incremental economic improvement, the market can hold these gains and even creep up a bit from here. We'll need the economic fundamentals set in place before we see the next big move up." Forelli cautioned that a slip in the economic numbers could prompt a sell-off, and he believes Friday's employment report "will be telling." Check economic calendar and forecasts. Merrill's McCabe sees stampede on Wall Street The bull case was also being made by Richard McCabe, chief market analyst at Merrill Lynch, who sees a historical basis for the argument that the bear market of the past few years is over. He told clients he believes the stock market should make "substantial further upside progress" through the end of this year and into the next. McCabe noted that over 80 percent of the NYSE-listed stocks are now trading above their 200-day moving averages, versus less than 20 percent during the July to October lows of 2002. "In the last 30 years, such swings from under 20 percent to over 80 percent have tended to characterize bull markets rather than bear market rallies," McCabe told clients in a research note. He added, however, that short-term momentum indicators are currently in overbought territory, which could foreshadow a temporary setback during the month of June. First Albany's Johnson won't be surprised by pullback First Albany's Hugh Johnson also cautioned that, while it's important to recognize that this is now a bull market, investors should still be aware of the risks. "There's no question that it's come very far, very fast," said Johnson, who serves as chief investment officer. "And some might argue it's ahead of itself, or somewhat overvalued and a little bit overdue for a rest, possibly a pullback of as much as 25 percent of the rally, but I wouldn't try to time that." He did concur though that, a "very strong message has been sent," that "the bear market is behind us." Johnson said the earnings performance would be a key in the second quarter, more so than the economic numbers, which he believes will eventually come around. He also believes investors should start to change their mindset to buying on weakness from selling on strength. |
Posted at 23/12/2002 10:28 by yarer Our very own friends at ADVFN have it on their site. Pity you missed it seeing you use their site. A Background to the Market and Market Makers A Market Maker runs a 'shop' and you buy shares from him or sell them back to him. The Market Makers act as retailers of shares and display their prices during working hours. The prices may vary (sometimes considerably) during the day, depending on a number of influences. For example, if holders of very large amounts of a share decide to sell (or a combination of a lot of holders of small amounts), then the Market Makers will reduce the price that they are prepared to pay for the share. The converse is true also; if there is a consistent and large enough demand for a share, then the Market Makers will increase the price. Market Makers make money from buying shares at a lower price to which they sell them. This is the bid/offer spread. The more actively a share is traded the more money a Market Maker makes. It is often felt that the Market Makers manipulate the prices. "Market Manipulation" is an emotive term, and conjurers images of shady deals and exploitation. Market Makers are not elusive companies that appear then vanish overnight. Market Makers are duty bound to make a market and to meet the needs of those they are responsible, to this end they may try to influence the market. Market Makers are however known to lower prices to "panic" investors into selling, sometimes called "shaking the tree"? Moving the price up, encourages sells, moving it down also encourage sell, hence also the term dead cat bounce when a Market Maker will mark a falling stock up to encourage buyers in thinking they have reached the bottom. A good pricing system such as Level 2 will give you an indication which Market Makers are keenly priced. Your broker using the same systems as you now have can sometimes get a better price than those on the screen. This is because Market Makers compete with one another for business. When your broker calls the Market Maker he is giving them the opportunity to 'bid' for the business, the Market Maker may well improve on the price on offer via the screens. The Market Maker only makes money when they are buying and selling, so the Market Maker will prefer to see the business go through their books at a reduce margin than allow it to go to another Market Maker. When you buy and sell shares in most circumstances (SEAQ/AIM) your broker has to go through a Market Maker. The Market Maker works for an institution that makes a market (will buy and sell) that particular stock. They provide the market with liquidity - i.e. there will always be a price you can sell your stock at, there will always be a price you can buy some stock at (unless the share is suspended). Market Makers obviously have a degree of risk. If there is a flood of sellers, because the Market Maker's job is to provide liquidity, he has to buy those shares even though the rest of the market may want to sell. If the price continues to fall he could be left with a lot of stock on his hands that he paid considerably higher prices for than he can sell for now. And vice versa - if a share is rising sharply the Market Maker has to continue selling the stock to the buyers - he could end up "short" of stock. In this situation he has sold stock he has not got, to fulfill all the buy requests, and he has to buy this stock in to balance his books, but at higher prices and makes a loss. The Market Makers are effectively in competition with each other. With the example of IMG above, why would a seller want to sell shares to UBSW at 380, when the seller can deal with MLSB or AITK and receive 385p per shares? If UBSW wants to purchase shares, the Market Maker has to raise its bid price. If Market Makers want to buy shares because they may think the stock is heading up or they are short of stock they have to raise their bid price if theirs is not the best bid on the screen. This can cause the spread to narrow. If Market Makers are keen to sell stock they may want to lower their offer price to tempt buyers in. If all Market Makers start moving their offer prices lower to tempt in buyers and offload stock, certain traders could view this as negative for the short term. If Market Makers need or want to take in more stock they will raise their bid prices - certain traders again could see this as a sign of a short-term upswing in prices. If a Market Maker does not want to trade in the stock he is making a market in he may make his bid/ask spread so wide to discourage anyone to trade with him. If all the Market Makers do this the stock can become illiquid temporarily as no trades are going through - buyers do not want to buy, sellers do not want to sell their stock at what they envisage is a poor bid price. Market Manipulation or doing their job? a. Do Market Makers manipulate the market? i. “Market Manipulation” is an emotive term, and conjurors images of shady deals and exploitation. Market Makers are not elusive companies that appear then vanish overnight. Market Makers are duty bound to make a market and to meet the needs of those they are responsible to (See 1d.) to this end they may try to influence the market. b. How Do Market Makers make their money? i. Market Makers make money from buying shares at a lower price to which they sell them. This is the bid/offer spread. (See 4.) The more actively a share is traded the more money a Market Maker makes. c. Surely a Market Maker raising/lowering the price on news/rumour without any buying or selling is manipulating the market? i. No, not really. If the Market Maker was to keep the price steady on the release of news they would find themselves with lots of buys or sells which they had no choice but to fulfil at the screen price but before they could find matching orders (buys for sells, sells for buys) they would have to change the price and they would then loose money through market exposure. This is bad for them and for us. (See 3.) d. Why do Market Makers raise prices on Monday morning for shares tipped in the Sunday press? i. This is the same as question 2c, because the Market Maker needs to ensure that there are enough sellers to fulfil the needs of the buyers responding to the tips. e. Suppose my screen shows all sells and the price is increasing, what is the Market Maker doing? i. An explanation of this phenomenon is given for Tadpole, which very briefly shot up to 73p before settling back comfortably to the 50p support level. The likeliest explanation is that the Market Maker had an Institutional order to fill and no stock to fill it with (this trade would not have shown up on peoples screen until somewhat later), under thier obligations to create liquidity in the share the Market Maker is obliged to gather a stock holding, only possible if they can encourage people to sell, which can be achieved by raising the price. The order is likely to have been large enough to be significantly outside the NMS thus allowing the Market Maker to gather a fairly significant premium on the price (probably being some-where between 50p and 73p allowing the Market Maker to offset gains against losses and still profit). Once the order is filled and the market volumes return to thier "normal" levels, so does the share price. f. Do Market Makers ever lower prices to “panic” investors into selling, sometimes called “shaking the tree”? i. Yes, moving the price up, encourages sells, moving it down also encourage sells, take another look at Tadpole, in the first instance, the price was hiked way up despite the 50p support level, but at 50p few of the people who got in between 20p and 45p are going to sell (and look how many buyers there were still at 50p), the rise was meteoric, smart money just ignored it as it only lasted about 2 hours, but what was probably caught was huge investors who were in way before 20p and had forgotten about it, now they want out. The Market Makers order gets filled, the price settles back to a smart support level and volumes decrease, however the Market Makers gets another order to fill, maybe not so big, maybe not so prepared to pay the premium, but you also know that there are a lot of people out there waiting to see if it's going to shoot up past the 50p support level again or dip and if it dips they're going to sell now before it dips back past their 100% profit level. g. Surely delaying the posting of trades is Market Manipulation? i. This was allowed as part of the SETS trading system when institutional investors pointed out that with 100% transparency, any other institutional investor would be able to trade against that position which would put their client holdings in jeopardy. Further, with 100% transparency, if it could be seen that an institutional investor was (for whatever reason) adjusting a large holding in a particular company it could also scare private investors into selling or alternatively encourage them to invest without doing thier own research. Both scenarios lead to either over- or under-selling and an inaccurate reflection of the company in the share price as a direct result. h. Do Market Makers try to reduce volatility? i. Sometimes, usually at the request of the client (see 1e), this is mostly done by increasing the bid/offer spread therefore discouraging trading especially by day traders and also by marketing the clients shares to institutions in the hope they will take up long term positions. ii. By asking their client to reduce the number of news releases. i. Do Market Makers encourage liquidity? i. Yes, partly because they have a duty to their client to ensure an active marking in their clients shares, and partly because they have a duty to their shareholders, it is only through trading/liquidity that Market Makers make money. j. How do Market Makers encourage liquidity? i. Partly just by being there, by being the enabler to liquidity, they will always buy or sell shares if you want to. ii. By narrowing spreads. iii. By encouraging their client to produce news releases |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions
Hot Features
Premium
