Schroder Uk Public Private Share Discussion Threads

[spectoacc] 18/6/2020 09:21

@Magnum - seriously? Just can't make it up with Woodford stocks! He's the gift that keeps on giving (taking). And SUPP will no doubt have been heavily diluted by that fundraising too, unless the Schroders juniors found some loose change.

[magnum opus] 18/6/2020 08:57

Spoke too soon Speccy, Evofem has not escaped the Woodford curse - they just raised $100m and the share price halved from $6 to $3. There are plenty of women who don't want to take the pill though, so with FDA approval their treatment should start to sell.

[spectoacc] 18/6/2020 07:04

Thanks @Magnum Opus, missed your link.

Evofem c.3% of SUPP so isn't nothing, & (very) rare to see a Woodford winner.

[pete_bane] 17/6/2020 16:45

Not only does adae/spectoacc not have any raw data, he doesn't have the intellectual apparatus to process it.

Perhaps he could get jonwig to cook some again in his oven?

[spectoacc] 17/6/2020 14:41

@chucko1 - indeed, I'd understand it if it was a few freebies to shift the total junk. But they've still got the total junk - more of it (if you believe the farcical valuaions) than the total of everything they "offloaded" to Acacia. Plenty of listed and (as shown from the sales) fairly liquid holdings - DDDD another.

And "offloaded" - done no such thing, they've given a £100m+ discount to the valuation of only a few months ago, but may have to wait up to 6 months to get the money in as Acacia sell it on.

What was PJT's job, if not to do the selling themselves? 6 months or more ago too - again, if this was done the week WEIF went pop, just to get people their money back and before fees had built up..

Since this was the best of it, the remainder is going to be interesting. Sell it to Woodford for a few eventing ponies?

Edit:

"Final prices for stakes in four unquoted companies, Oxford Nanopore, Viamet, AMO Pharma and Novabiotics, are yet to be agreed. Acacia has secured agreement that should the price for those stocks prove higher than the initial offer, the difference will be discounted from that paid for the listed companies."

"Investors have sent shares in US-listed Acacia soaring 58% since news broke of its swoop on assets from the former Woodford fund.."

[chucko1] 17/6/2020 13:55

To be fair, sometimes in ugly portfolio sales, you get one or two freebies thrown in there. Nevertheless, MTPH is listed and ought not to have been in that category, so WEIF stakeholders should be disgusted. Except most of them will not be aware of what is going on - they just want the cash back.

[spectoacc] 17/6/2020 11:24

That link works, thanks :)

[jonwig] 17/6/2020 11:18

It is, isn't this OK for you?

[spectoacc] 17/6/2020 10:38

Press are proving slow to pick up on just how scandalous a deal this is, for former WEIF holders.

"..Which has quickly sold on a substantial portion, raising an estimated £128m."

"They show the US investor bought a 9.9% stake in [MTPH] from the former Woodford fund for just £65,000 at a little under 1.7p per share, on 4 June, the day the £224m deal was struck. Less than a week later the stake was sold for just over £817,000 at 21p per share, more than 12 times the price paid, netting Acacia a profit of over £750,000. The shares were trading at 20p yesterday."


Posted plenty on it above - it wasn't a "sale", it was a transfer with delayed consideration. If it had included the total junk that remains, ie an incentive to take it in return for deals like MTPH, then maybe. But they've still got the really bad stuff, haven't received the proceeds up front ("up to 6 months"), and could just as easily have sold the listed stuff themselves - as Acacia are proving.

(@Jonwig - thanks re RUTH - can you set it to PB re-write please?).

[scrapheap] 17/6/2020 09:45

hxxps://citywire.co.uk/new-model-adviser/news/us-buyer-flips-woodford-stocks-after-cut-price-deal/a1369015?re=75478&ea=199352&utm_source=BulkEmail_NMA_Daily_EAM&utm_medium=BulkEmail_NMA_Daily_EAM&utm_campaign=BulkEmail_NMA_Daily_EAM

[magnum opus] 17/6/2020 09:01

Evofem news:
hxxps://www.ftadviser.com/investments/2020/05/29/woodford-bet-delivers-boost-for-investors-in-schroders-trust/

[jonwig] 16/6/2020 10:12

RUTH thread:

[spectoacc] 15/6/2020 07:24

"Two drunks propping each other up", but seem to recall Ratesetter is one of SUPP's holdings? Not Top 10, but enough surely to at least pay Schroders:

"METRO BANK PLC

Response to Press Speculation



15 June 2020: Metro Bank PLC (the "Company") notes the recent press speculation regarding a potential acquisition of Retail Money Market LTD and its subsidiaries ("RateSetter"). The Company regularly assesses various opportunities in the market and accordingly confirms that it has entered in to a period of exclusivity with RateSetter, but discussions regarding the potential acquisition are at an early stage.



RateSetter is a UK focused peer-to-peer lender whose distribution platform could accelerate the Company's stated strategy to grow its unsecured consumer lending book.



There can be no certainty at this stage that a formal agreement will be reached, nor as to the terms of any agreement. A further announcement will be made if and when appropriate."

[jonwig] 11/6/2020 09:59

@ Spec - Too busy at the mo but will set up a thread.

[spectoacc] 11/6/2020 09:51

Ages since I looked at RUTH in detail, but they've at least got land & property, something an expanded NHS might value.

A quick look at the 2019 AR shows revenue of £1.5m (2018: £18,000!). That could surely be tens of millions in 2020 - and everyone loves a bit of growth.

Whether it's accompanied by profits another matter, but at least they won't be paying tax.

Hard to be sure of Mkt Cap due to variable shares in issue, but appears to be valued at £450m - not sure if Link have applied any discount to that in SUPP, seems unlikely on previous experience.

NHS agreement for 2yrs, with option to extend another 2, but no numbers given. Does imply it's going to go beyond Covid tho.

Net assets & depreciation policy would be interesting, but I fear I've better things to be researching. Will be very interesting to read the next a/c's.

Edit - markets have gone quiet. Do like RUTH, just not at this valuation. Very few shareholder docs on website (no interim report etc) but 2019 had gross fixed assets of £142m. Since then they've had perhaps another c.£60m out of Woody entities, and assuming investment run-rate stayed the same, could be at around £185m of fixed assets at next AR.

Net Assets 2019 - £118m, showing £24m debt which I think may have risen (but note increase in assets too, in 2020).

Operating loss in 2019 - c.£22m, so the NHS deal will have to be impressive. £8m just in salaries/benefits.

It's all historic, the preposterous over-valuation may not look so bad if the NHS deal is producing big profits. Or any profits.

[chucko1] 11/6/2020 09:04

With an NHS waiting list now of 10mn, any outside assistance may be useful for the foreseeable. But, as you say, at what price?

[spectoacc] 11/6/2020 08:54

I've always said if WEIF investors were going to lose their money, better it got spent on cancer treatment centres than chipped pallets, online mattresses, or basic cons. RUTH should have a great year with the NHS deal, but is there much revenue thereafter, ie post-Covid? Profits? Maybe it'll give an op for an exit - it's notionally 18% of SUPP after the many Calls.

But the valuation?

I forget, is RUTH part of the Acacia stuff? Be very interesting to see them attempt to sell some. Is only notionally listed.

[jonwig] 11/6/2020 08:43

Telegraph article only tangentially relating to SUPP (edited):

The Covid-19 death toll may be less than half what has been recorded because many victims of the pandemic would have died soon anyway, one of Britain’s leading medics has said.

Professor Karol Sikora, a senior oncologist who has built a huge Twitter following for his positive takes on the health crisis, said medics were sometimes too eager to put Covid-19 on death certificates.

Professor Sikora said the virus would be mentioned on death certificates when there was “any hint” it could have been the cause, without proof, as well retrospectively over the phone.

This is in contrast to Germany, where a death can only be recorded as being caused by Covid-19 when the clinical team involved in the end-of-life care certifies that is what they believe happened, he said.

The professor predicted the overall death numbers at the end of the year would show that many of those who have died over the course of the pandemic would have died by the summer anyway.

The total number of deaths, rather than what is on the death certificates, should be used to judge the impact of the virus, he said, estimating the real death toll of around 20,000 to 30,000.

He said: “ It could end up that more people have died because of lack of medical care directly caused by the unavailability of it, because its facilities have been taken over for Covid.

“If we look at the numbers, how many people have really died from Covid that wouldn't be dead at the end of the year? The numbers vary enormously. The current ONS data suggests 60,000 people have died from Covid. I'm sure that's not really the case, it's because of the counting we discussed earlier.”

Deaths for June were already “below what you’d expect for the yearly average in the summer”.

“The reason for that is simply that many of the people, sadly, that would have died in June, July and August, actually died during the peak of the pandemic,” he added.

Professor Sikora is the chief medical officer for Rutherford Cancer Centres and has previously served as the director of the World Health Organisation’s cancer programme.

But it his style of tweeting - blending knowledge with short, concise sentences and an optimistic outlook - that has earned him a big following on social media and the moniker ‘The Positive Professor’.

The point is that KS is clearly well-respected, is a government supporter (they need them!) and RUTH has helped the government by taking cancer patients away from the NHS. There could be a worthwhile partnership in there which will at least support revenues.
The fact that RUTH sweet-talked Woody into his sucker deal could be a signal that they are merely glib con men or that they really do have something.
Of course, there's the EIF overhang still to sort out which clouds the outlook for me.

[spectoacc] 11/6/2020 08:15

Bizarre. Could they not pick up the phone and sell the listed stuff themselves? That was meant to be PJT's job after all. OK fair enough - sell the lot, at a big discount, just to get the junk away - but they've still got most of the junk.

And they haven't "sold" if there's an up-to-6-months-wait for the money. Can see no benefit to WEIF holders at all.

[chucko1] 11/6/2020 08:00

They sold 100% of their MTPH position.

[spectoacc] 11/6/2020 07:56

Acacia have started selling down some of the listed stuff the very same day of the transfer.

Surprised how unreported this has been - Link haven't "sold" it, they've transferred it to Acacia, at a big discount, to sell and later pay them.

[spectoacc] 09/6/2020 06:48

@Jonwig - indeed, but that's why it would work with SUPP. They'd be buying the held-in-common WEIF junk with the cash - at an even larger discount than SUPP (theoretically) trades at now, hence getting an instant uplift.

@rambutan2 - it does get remembered, I agree - SHED, RGL, OCI as you say - but all get away with it once ;)

[jonwig] 09/6/2020 06:35

I think the simplest reason why it's "not the done thing" is that you pay 20p for 20p in cash, but once it's invested it will go to a discount (as with the existing shares) of anything up to 50%. Guaranteed to lose money.

[rambutan2] 09/6/2020 04:26

Specto, we'll just have to disagree on that one. But I can assure you that in the small and tight knit world of investment trusts, which still operates via relationships and brokers, it is the one sin that isn't forgotten eg OCI.