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 | Type | Share ISIN | Share Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Crosby Asset. | LSE:CSB | London | Ordinary Share | KYG2682L1077 | ORD SHS USD0.01 |
| Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.00% | 4.25 | 0.00 | 00:00:00 |
| Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| - |
| Last Trade Time | Trade Type | Trade Size | Trade Price | Currency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | O | 0 | 4.25 | GBX |
Crosby Asset. (CSB) Share Charts1 Year Crosby Asset. Chart |
|
1 Month Crosby Asset. Chart |
Intraday Crosby Asset. Chart |
| Date | Time | Title | Posts |
|---|---|---|---|
| 09/4/2013 | 06:20 | Crosby Capital Partners - 2007 | 1,946 |
| 25/4/2011 | 19:32 | csb | 69 |
| 14/4/2010 | 10:37 | ORCHARD PETROLEUM STAKE +CASH | 97 |
| 22/5/2007 | 16:33 | Crosby Capital Partners - PE of 3 and so undervalued. | 2,074 |
| 26/9/2006 | 23:29 | Crosby Cap - The Knowledge | 6 |
| Trade Time | Trade Price | Trade Size | Trade Value | Trade Type |
|---|
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 30/6/2011 09:55 by howdlep CSB/ZOLOn the 29/6 CSB was changed to ZOL and all portfolio holdings updated to incorporate the new ticker code of ZOL. However, trades are still going through the LSE for CSB and not ZOL today. This effectively means you can buy CSB shares but cannot sell ZOL holdings online. So small buying may push up CSB quicker than otherwise would have been. Excellent buy below 4p (fundraising price) and with Abramovich Junior at the helm, the first big investment wont be too far away |
Posted at 17/6/2011 11:43 by jojo_jo Lack of news and clarification is costing us. I know there's only a few days to go, but being kept in the dark is very unfair on small shareholders when clearly other, major shareholders are fully informed. Abramovich Jr. is after all a shareholder just like me, but obviously knows exactly what is going on. I'm prepared to trust in their good judgement for a few more days, but hope this isn't a foretaste of a future where insiders and major shareholders are privvy to information we aren't. That will be unacceptable, and worthy of complaint to the FSA. I guess Abramovich Jr. will become a director shortly (... be nice to see his dad on the board - that would be worth 10p/share on its own!) I can see this rocketing to an asset value of several hundred million fairly quickly, and subsequently moving to the main market, perhaps within a year. All very positive, with CSB only needing a nav of £15m to justify the current share price (which will multiply up in proportion to the peg potential of those assets). Compare this with the nav PMG needs to justify its £100m valuation - their first investment/asset purchase needs to be spectacular! I'd much rather be here with a reasonably undemanding market cap. Other news will (obviously) be clarification of Viridas holding, any other embargoed investments and (imho) the funded purchases of some of Abramovich's and McKeon's assets. All imho and a lot of educated guesswork here, so please dyor. |
Posted at 12/6/2011 11:01 by jojo_jo Patboy, I don't agree with your 'pump and dump' thesis. Rowan and Lee (the new leaders at VIR) have credentials on a par with McKeon and are clearly respected by him and Abramovich, hence the 9.7% stake. Abramovich is an investor first and foremost and now effectively owns at least 2.5% of VIR, as does McKeon. I respect their (presumably informed) decision to buy into VIR, and was happy to follow their lead. CSB's large stake in VIR means a good performance in the VIR share price is good for all of us at CSB, so don't knock it. Courtesy richyrich on 09/06 we were all made aware of another golden opportunity to get in early on the conversion of a shell into a natural resource co. (much like what happened here and at Parkmead). As a result all of us here had the chance to get in to VIR around the .45p - .55p mark on Friday morning. I managed to buy some at .55p in the middle of the day, and may buy some more on Monday. I can undestand anyone being annoyed with themselves for missing the start of the spike in VIR, but it's not over yet and like here (where after initially doubling in December to around 1p, we went on to 8-bag in January). Looks remarkably familiar at VIR, doesn't it? There will be more of these reversals into cash (or dead-co.) shells, as resource experts follow the example set last year at Parkmead. We just need to watch out for them, and try and get in within the first day or three. This is no ramp of VIR (I own 10 times as much Crosby as I do VIR), but just a summary of some pretty obvious observations. A big thankyou to richyrich, who has proven the value of these boards in allerting fellow PIs to great opportunities. Usual imho/dyor caveats. Good luck t'all, Jo. |
Posted at 11/6/2011 10:49 by jojo_jo It would be nice to see an RNS from CSB re VIR. I don't know why they didn't announce it at the time, but it appeared to have been embargoed (why?). It's in the public domain now, courtesy VIR, so a confirmation RNS from CSB is now a must - especially if they now own more than 9.7%. It is material to earnings if, say, they own 15% of VIR (ie 63m shares) and those shares triple in value, providing an instant £0.5m profit, with more to come from the investments of VIR itself. So it looks like we could soon be on a starting P/E of 35 without doing a fat lot. I'd be very happy to discover CSB now owned 20% or more of VIR. Looking good for both cos. and glad to be in both fairly early. There looks like there's an 'arb' trade here. The only one I can see is a double long: buy CSB on margin, and buy VIR actual. |
Posted at 24/5/2011 08:49 by jojo_jo Mr T. The future share price will depend on the assets and investments we own, but based on holding, say, just £300m worth (at cost) which have appreciated 10% pa they will add over £60m to the nav over two years. Then adding the same again for peg and goodwill, we could see a market cap. around the £120m mark, or approx. 6x where we are now. However I can see much more than £300m worth of investments being made over the next year or two. If we have an average of £1bn invested over that time the mkt.cap would be nearer the £400m mark, which equates to a share price of around 100p. So, at least a 'six-bagger' from here. The very modest £5m or so the market has valued the involvement of Abramovich at is ludicrous in my opinion. This, after all, is a play on the names, and they don't get much better than these, for a natural resource vehicle. All imho of course. |
Posted at 23/5/2011 09:24 by tasciovanus The four major shareholders (including Ambramovich,McKeon and Khan) hold almost 75% of the 375 million shares; leaving just 102 million (25%) for other investors. Interestingly by comparison Parkmead Group has 609 million shares of which 58% are held by the major shareholders, with 260 million (42%) available for other investors. Watchers will have seen PMG rise and fall, but still maintain a healthy share price on speculation rather than substantial news. At 17.75 they have a market capitalisation of £108 million. CSB is now rising at 5.75 it has a market capitalisation of nearly £19 million. With positive news shortly the pointers are that this could rise rapidly. |
Posted at 21/5/2011 17:50 by patboy China's stocks present a great wall that has to be overcomeBy David Stevenson Published: May 20 2011 18:09 | Last updated: May 20 2011 18:09 China is a tough market to invest in. Behind all the hype about a land of opportunity sits an awkward reality: nasty surprises tend to happen too often! So, while I hope Anthony Bolton's China fund will prove a great success, I can't help but feel the omens aren't good. My pessimistic assessment is inspired in part by developments at the London-listed Chinese small-cap fund, Vision Opportunity China (VOC). EDITOR'S CHOICE Adventurous Investor: More columns from David Stevenson - Oct-28 Over the years, I've frequently written about the danger of investing directly in Chinese stocks. I may be adventurous but, to me, the best option is to use funds focused on the only genuinely capitalist part of the economy: private enterprises run by mainland entrepreneurs. VOC seemed to fit this bill. It runs a thorough due diligence process even using private detectives to talk to the customers of Chinese companies that it is thinking of backing. It focuses on a handful of fast-growing companies with corporate governance close to western standards. This diligence and focus was rewarded with a share price that briefly cruised past $2.50, and investors including Mr Bolton and Baillie Gifford. More important, VOC avoided the worst of the "reverse merger" scandal in the US. This involved mainland Chinese companies reversing into "shell" companies listed in New York, rather than going through the regulatory process of obtaining a new listing. Bloomberg Businessweek magazine has recounted many of the resulting debacles most of which saw the companies' shares collapse and the US Securities and Exchange Commission suspend their trading. VOC's major holdings have avoided this scandal... until now. One of its investments, a regional diesel and biofuels company called CBH, is facing some tough questions. Are its biodiesel factories genuinely operating at stated capacity? Why did its western auditors suddenly resign? What happened to the chief financial officer? As a result, CBH has had its shares suspended from trading on Nasdaq. VOC sold most of its holding in CBH but the impact on its net asset value has been substantial in the region of 40c per share. Its share price has fallen further: it crashed back to a trading range of between 75c and 80c. What went wrong? VOC's due diligence process seemed robust, and the growth story seemed compelling. However, no amount of due diligence and forensic analysis of accounts can save you from an apparent high-growth stock that crashes back to earth. Stock markets have been full of apparent growth stocks since the dawn of time many of which draw investors into the so-called "growth-stock trap". What happens is that company managers try desperately hard to live up to the growth expectations, and the biggest temptation is to start exaggerating the numbers. By contrast, value-orientated investors such as Warren Buffett look for "moats of competitive advantage". However, these are very hard to find. So VOC is now in something of a quandary. Its core portfolio of remaining stocks seems to be thriving but there's no knowing which Chinese stock will be the next target for short selling. Funds that have a lot of cash might be able to wait and pick up some bargains among the reverse-merger Chinese companies. But this is now a sector where only the very brave would dare to tread. More to the point, the integrity of much of the listed Chinese small-cap sector has been called into question. If relatively transparent US-listed companies are having problems, goodness knows what challenges face Chinese-listed companies, subject to laxer regulation. VOC could decide to soldier on, stick to its core portfolio of companies and wait for sentiment to turn. But even that poses a problem. Focused portfolios of fast-growing companies in emerging markets can deliver strong returns to adventurous investors for example, Aurora Russia is making slow but steady progress with a small clutch of businesses. However, Aurora's approach is based on private-equity investing in unlisted companies under its direct control. VOC still has to work with local managers running their own companies but with foreign and other shareholders. Maybe the best way to invest in emerging market small caps is to go down the private-equity route. Or maybe the best approach is the one recommended to me by a Beijing fund manager: "Never trust the local managers. Always keep a signed copy of the CEO and CFO's resignation letter in your drawer... just don't date it. You never know when it'll come in handy". Good luck Mr Bolton. |
Posted at 11/5/2011 07:48 by jojo_jo All shares are a gamble. Any company can warn unexpectedly and see its share price plummet. This is much less of a gamble. There are no profits to warn about, and share price movements will consist in the main of big upward jumps (on asset/investment/invWhen the assets/investments start being announced this will rocket. As stated above, PIs will probably be diluted to around 50% as a result, but it could well be 50% of a £400m+ company. The Abramoviches will want to move this to the better regulated main market (ideally FTSE 350) asap - certainly within two years. There has only been limited dilution to date, as Abramovich was sold shares by the other main stake holders. The time to add, imho, is when it has retraced about a third. I'm guessing they'll have some news on assets and investments in June, or earlier. It would be nice to see a more regular trickle of positive news though. |
Posted at 21/4/2011 09:32 by t 34 I am waiting for any action in the share price.Looking at the chart,share price retreated around 2p a bit then it moved upwards substantially. Any gooda UKMessy? |
Posted at 20/4/2011 10:18 by moochy Rivaldo, I don't think that Abramovich gives a toss about CSB's short term share price, daily, weekly or even monthly share price fluctuations. this is pocket change for him. Don't make me laugh! |
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
