Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
IP Group LSE:IPO London Ordinary Share GB00B128J450 ORD 2P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  +0.10p +0.07% 140.10p 140.20p 140.80p 141.90p 139.50p 140.00p 64,938 12:49:08
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
General Financial 7.6 -14.8 -2.4 - 1,478.66

IP Group Share Discussion Threads

Showing 1301 to 1324 of 1325 messages
Chat Pages: 53  52  51  50  49  48  47  46  45  44  43  42  Older
DateSubjectAuthorDiscuss
27/9/2017
16:16
any explanation for share price action?
swedeee
14/9/2017
13:56
That's just my axe to grind of course it's bloody frustrating watching nothing happen, nor perts no news retractions no FCA action and so on. I get why Tom Win sounds off so much. I know I'm right and the info was handed over on a plate.
superg1
13/9/2017
22:05
AGM Still waiting on the FCA who have the details, not that I hear they are any good. They are only a drop in the far bigger ocean for the IP group but it's not good Imo the the chief investment officer backs a company that misleads the market. Surely IP should ditch them, there is no clear evidence the tech works commercially anyway. Check the share price since the FCA got the report which is bang on top of the dive starting. AGM will be up for funding again soon so what does it say if the IP group back them again. Something like 10 mill funding first time around and they didn't do what they said they would. Over £8m next time and still they didn't spend it on what they said. Near all of it has gone on salaries of highly paid numerous unneeded staff. IP should cut the umbilical cord Imo.
superg1
13/9/2017
06:42
IVO have been doing a better job than IPO. IVO finals today. IPO look like chancers in comparison, something has gone wrong at IPO. If they do take-over IVO and it flounders, heads should roll. Thoughts?
p1nkfish
12/9/2017
22:14
Sg1,are you referencing AGM in the Graphene space or MWG? Valuations follow standard procedures.
p1nkfish
12/9/2017
20:32
This looks like a bubble as I've said before figures based on fair value and the market cap of companies. It looks like a false market because due to the heavy backing from the IP group to small companies it artificially inflates the share price of those heavily backed. If you like a solid fund with large holdings keeping the funding going. If they tried to sell up the fair values would capitulate and many of the rl;evenat companies would collapse. Is that about right. I have raised concerns about the chief investment officer who is sat in the board of one Aim company with the FCA. Clearly that company released false news (also reported) since I reported the company share price has dropped over 40%. So do IPO continue to back them and ignore the lies ??? No comment from the company, IPO, FCA or the nomad to date yet they all know about it. We'll see as the relevant company will need cash soon.
superg1
06/9/2017
16:02
bb2, it should be the whole point of the company. Increasing the portfolio list whilst treading water on fund valuation smacks of misallocation of capital. "Throwing capital at the wall to see if some sticks" sort of thinking. Even I can do that and without awarding myself shed loads of stock options. Next set of results they would be amiss if they don't state clearly what strategy they have in place to offer shareholder return via exits, ipos etc. Buying another company to increase value is a blunt way to go about it and might not work if the share price performance since announcing it is anything to go by. Its even an admission of failure as they are saying IVO are the missing ingredient for growth. "Let me buy that which I don't have the skills to create." Have they given up trying?
p1nkfish
06/9/2017
09:30
p1nk, I had a look for II's holdings, but found nothing on the IPO website. My guess is that the share price will eventually settle at a discount to nav, which could mean future potential fund raises may be more tricky. If this is the case then they will have to get some of the constituents performing in their own right so that they can be sold off at a profit. Profit that can then be re-invested in new spin-outs. Surely this is the whole point of the co?
bamboo2
06/9/2017
08:21
The major IVO shareholders are for the take-over but the market price action suggests the combined company will be worth no more, possibly less, than the separate entities. Some weakness is probably down to the market and cycle of potential exits for IP, IVO, but the weakness appears to have accelerated post the proposed take-over. Reversal is possible post acquisition but the market is voting with its feet and is often right. Are there any adults in the room at IPO?
p1nkfish
01/9/2017
13:50
bb2, yes, probably. I could only find the 3%+ holders on Morningstar. For the life of me I couldn't find it on IPs web-site.
p1nkfish
01/9/2017
10:21
p1nk, re the selling down. I may have a simplistic view, but I think that is how it has worked up until now. ie large holders get discounted placing shares with a lock-in. But the lock in doesn't stop them selling their existing holdings for the arbitrage.
bamboo2
31/8/2017
18:10
Haven't looked very, very closely but Invesco look like 39% of ivo and were about 23% of ipo. Why important? Because ivo will be about 30% of the enlarged group & Invesco total holding of the combined group will increase. Figures are approx but wonder if they will sell down some to avoid over weighting. Might it have already started accounting for the weakness combined with the British Gifford sell down. Thoughts?
p1nkfish
31/8/2017
10:39
bamboo, it's a long term holdings for me. At least the options require 140p to kick in. Easy to understand IVO management being miffed. Would like to see some activism from Lansdowne, Woodford and Invesco with a finger applied in an appropriate place. Not likely, just a mirror of IPO. I've rated Aubrey in the past but appear to have been wrong.
p1nkfish
31/8/2017
08:55
p1nk, I'm not holding these at the moment, but have done many times in the past. I probably don't need to say what shape the LT chart pattern looks like to me. I feel quite angry about the situation here on your behalf. Just what do they think will happen if the finance for the deal falls apart?
bamboo2
31/8/2017
08:42
dont understand why when the share price has been slipping for a while, they decide to issue more shares to directors. pure greed - sends the wrong signals to investors
swedeee
30/8/2017
22:00
They gained the 90% yes for the IVO action but only just. 90.1033% - a whisker above. 59.6832% of the share capital committed as nonbinding in case an alternative offer should arrive for IVO. The combination will be formidable but the way this has impacted both is a bit of a mess. Noses in trough as B. Gifford announce a holding reduction and take-over not over final hurdle. Great timing, not. "Nonbinding letters of intent from each of Invesco, Woodford, Lansdowne and Imperial College in respect of 96,211,780 shares representing, in aggregate, approximately 59.6832 per cent. of Touchstone's issued share capital." Very disappointed with the actions of the BOD.
p1nkfish
30/8/2017
21:45
Alan Aubrey isn't covering himself in glory.
p1nkfish
30/8/2017
17:33
Just in case there is any doubt where the management think their responsibilities lie, this rns was just released, confirming what I said in the above post. This is just one years free shares. IP Group plc - LTIP Awards IP Group plc (LSE: IPO) ("IP Group" or "the Group"), the developer of intellectual property-based businesses, announces that it has made conditional awards of ordinary shares of two pence each ("Shares") to its executive directors, other persons discharging managerial responsibilities ("PDMRs") and certain other employees under its Long-Term Incentive Plan (the "LTIP"). Conditional awards over 2,568,618 Shares have been made to the executive directors and PDMRs, as set out in the table below, with awards over a further 2,114,094 to other of the Group's employees....
bamboo2
29/8/2017
22:49
Historically, IPO Group has always traded at a premium. That looks all but erased now. Management have lined their pockets with investors cash that was meant to help fund University spin-offs. Given the lacklustre performance of many of the constituents, what reason is there for the premium to be reinstated? It's a more realistically priced prospect now, but some tangible results are needed. imo
bamboo2
27/8/2017
21:16
Looking at that graph above, it has fallen about as much now as it did from 2006. So my guess is it cannot go down much further. I suppose this is a better buy than IVO because it looks like this one is taking over IVO. Any theories on why the decline since 2015?
stevedevuk
27/8/2017
08:33
Might de shorted with no declaration? Some shenanigans.
p1nkfish
26/8/2017
21:35
Been watching these for about a week....they seem to regularly take a dive in the afternoon. Any US influence on these?
nav_mike
26/8/2017
21:11
Nothing g to write home about - 1.3% short interest in ipo with Mangrove Partner's Master Fund open for a while, if the FCA data is accurate.
p1nkfish
26/8/2017
14:10
Suspect there's some shorting in place.
p1nkfish
Chat Pages: 53  52  51  50  49  48  47  46  45  44  43  42  Older
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:33 V: D:20171124 13:16:57