Nmc Health Share Discussion Threads

[stdyeddy] 18/12/2019 12:15

Been in the process a while though stoxx. Still no success. No out-of-court settlement. Nothing so far and it's been months. Burford's share price hasn't recovered either. The market's verdict after several months of reflection, analysis and counterclaims from Burford is that MW was right and Burford was overvalued.

[stdyeddy] 18/12/2019 12:12

There's plenty of evidence in the report rabbitfoot. I understand why you might be in denial though. Good luck.

[stoxx67] 18/12/2019 12:11

"Because they would be sued penniless if it wasn't."

Burford are in the process of doing this !!!

[stdyeddy] 18/12/2019 12:11

Well maybe you're right steeple. But the key allegation in the report is one of fraud. The hospitals might remain, but the company as it stands, might not. The external shareholders might lose. I hope everyone here gets out of this unscathed, one way or another. My impression from the report is that the directors are behaving badly and external shareholders are being conned. Time will tell if that is the case. As an earlier poster noted, MW has not been successfully sued and apparently several companies targeted by them have been removed from the stockmarket.

[rabbitfoot1] 18/12/2019 12:05

stdyeddy – Do you really take those statements at face value??? Who says NMC overpaid for those assets? MW? “because they find it too high to be plausible”??? From parties “we believe” are de facto under common control? Really??? “gives rise to concern”? “Seems” to only materially mislead??? “appears”; to also be a significant overpayment? Says who? MW? Are they medical experts? Are they qualified to properly evaluate the worth of a medical facility? Like I said, no proofs whatsoever are offered, and now I can’t wait for NMC’s detailed rebuttal of that report.

[steeplejack] 18/12/2019 12:02

stdyeddy......most people as they get older and more experienced realise that things aren't as black and white and transparent as we would wish.Two sides to every story and all that.I wouldn't be surprised if NMC has a case to answer in part at least but I'm also pretty sure that MW has over egged the pudding to aid its cause.Healthcare is a growth industry.Burford could disappear off the face of the map.NMC's business won't disappear.If they've been naughty,all those hospitals etc will get taken over.Factor that possibility in when you're predicating a six quid share price.

[stdyeddy] 18/12/2019 11:56

Have you read the whole report MrD? It's got some other words in it besides 'appears to be'.

[mister md] 18/12/2019 11:55

'appears to be ...'

3 BILLION pounds knocked off the marketcap since last years also 'appears to be' excessive, no ?

[stdyeddy] 18/12/2019 11:55

Because they would be sued penniless if it wasn't.

[steeplejack] 18/12/2019 11:52

I don't know IS IT?..........Why don't you explain why you think it's right?

[stdyeddy] 18/12/2019 11:52

Is this part -- very specific -- not true:

NMC’s $36.4 million purchase of 70% of Premier Care Home Medical and Health Care LLC
appears to also be a significant overpayment. Our investigators’ findings show that it was an insignificant company when purchased, reportedly with only approximately 10 employees. Multiple industry sources who were familiar with the company expressed amazement to our investigators when informed of the purchase price.

[stdyeddy] 18/12/2019 11:49

So rabbitfoot, is none of this true (from pg2 intro of the MW report):

At the worst of times, the company has invested in large assets at costs that we find too high to be plausible – including from parties we believe are de facto under common control. This behavior gives rise to concerns about fraudulent asset values and theft of company assets. At somewhat better times, the company seems to “only” materially mislead, such as by trying to give investors the (false) impression it does not engage in reverse factoring, and by understating (we believe intentionally) lease debt.

[steeplejack] 18/12/2019 11:48

Of course I've read it stdyeddyNeither you or I know whether the accusations made are valid or not.The criticisms appear convincing and extensive.Given that Muddy Waters is a professional shorter,I'd expect them to cross the Ts and dot the Is.We all know that mud sticks.The rating to end Dec is now around 15.The PE to Dec2020 is now around 12 on broker forecasts.Unless that Muddy Waters attack is fully verified as being correct,it's fair to assume that the stock will recover when the dust settles.Burford is a collection of litigious lawyers.NMC is in the business of healthcare with hospitals and trained medical staff etc.We need the latter but could well do with less of the former.

[mister md] 18/12/2019 11:47

looks like they just hit the 'BUY' button

[rabbitfoot1] 18/12/2019 11:45

Excellent points steeplejack. Comparing NMC with Burford is like comparing tomatoes and bananas. I read the report front to end and I repeat what I already said, they don't provide any proofs - none whatsoever. But they are obviously playing with investors' minds, hence the sell-off, which as you may want to keep in mind is THEIR SOLE OBJECTIVE: to make money from the sale of your shares.

The one pressing issue to be mindful of, is that there is a very good chance that NMC will be removed from the FTSE 100 if its share price drops any more. That event would send the stock into another tailspin. I am sure it is on the NMC owners' minds, and one reason they are accelerating the share buyback.

[stdyeddy] 18/12/2019 11:38

A sensible investor stays up to date on everything that's going on with their investments. A massively high profile hedge-fund specialising in uncovering misrepresentation in company accounts produces a report and you don't want to read it? It's online and free to access. It's short. A lot of the 34 pages are taken up with pictures, illustrating the evidence. Everyone's talking about it. Don't you want to take a peek inside? If not, why not?

[stdyeddy] 18/12/2019 11:35

I'm really surprised at the number of people posting here who claim that the MW report is wrong without having read it. If I were a long-term investor in NMC, I'd read that report and consider it carefully and then take action.

Thumping the table and saying MW is evil/wrong/scum etc without doing the most basic thing; reading their assessment of NMC, is just plain head-in-the-sand idiotic.

[stoxx67] 18/12/2019 11:31

does not particularly matter as to whether the stock is near an all time high or not, the statement by MW, on Burford at least , was shown to be both non factual and fraudulent, one highly doubts as to whether MW will continue to smile much longer, and of course they continue their "business" until such time as the killer blow is dealt.

[stdyeddy] 18/12/2019 11:29

Have you read the MW report steeplejack?

[steeplejack] 18/12/2019 11:27

It’s more than sensible for the company to take its time in answering the MW accusations.Burford took a day or two.

As far as analogies with Burford are concerned,it’s worth noting that Burford was near an all time high when MW launched its attack.Much to MW’s chagrin,NMC shares at around £25 were some 40% off their years high.The stock rating (presuming that you accept reported numbers)is very attractive around these price levels.You are dealing with bricks and mortar here.There’s an NMC owned hospital in my locality that is highly prized and respected.It’s not going anywhere but I suppose it might change ownership.

[gilesy] 18/12/2019 11:23

I have no opinion on MW as havent bothered to investigate them but the fact is the share price of Burford has never recovered and the dramatic fall in NMC is a clear indication that most investors have lost confidence in these 2 companies.
I would not touch either of them with a bargepole personally but good luck to those who hold them and it takes 2 sides to make a market

[costax1654x] 18/12/2019 11:21

Strange reaction!!testing again 1450?

[rabbitfoot1] 18/12/2019 11:18

@ skatersav - actually, MW is NOT always right and they are facing a number of as-yet-unresolved lawsuits. If you surf the net for a few minutes you'll find the same info that I did. However, you are correct in stating that the damage they inflict on companies is usually high and many (but not all) never recover, because once they have planted those seeds even without proof, doubts linger and keep investors away. Also, contrary to what has been said in another post, their research in obviously biased since they stand to gain from the fall of the share price of the companies they attack -- as it is an attack -- hence the conflict of interest. Many countries are in fact taking measures to ban shorting activities, precisely because of their inherent conflict of interest. Again, this is all on the web. Enjoy your day.