Schroder Uk Public Private Share Discussion Threads

[zimmie] 05/5/2021 14:47

Those thoroughly discredited plums did not see Imm, Kymab, Kuur, Inivata coming - what next have they missed? As for IPO - is this the stock that sat at 250 five years ago and 750 five years before that. What is their purpose?

[magnum opus] 05/5/2021 13:32

RNS just out re: ONT to be revaulued, adds 6.9% to NAV, ONT was 16.3% of NAV before so now about 17% now, not sure?

[chucko1] 05/5/2021 13:11

There is another fact:

IRR of SUPP since inception (May 2015) is -16.8% (-66.9% total return)

IRR of FBIOX from the same date is +7.5% (53.3% total return).

FBIOX is a bog-standard fund specialising in bio and pharma. It is one such fund among my universe of "alternatives", albeit denominated in USD. In fact, the IRR of FBIOX taken from 2012 or so to today is nearer 15%, so I have taken an appalling base date. In other words, SUPP was launched at a bad time, or investments were bought at silly valuations.

Whichever way you look at it, SUPP has been a dreadful investment. Understandable for the retail investor to have been somewhat misled, but inexcusable for the more thoughtful with the time and inclination to analyse.

[scrapheap] 05/5/2021 13:10

What we didn't know (I think) was how much was sold - from your post 753

"The Sale Portfolio consists of the Company's entire holdings in Carrick Therapeutics, Mission Therapeutics, PsiOxus Therapeutics and Mereo BioPharma and partial holdings in Inivata, Immunocore and ReNeuron. The agreed acquisition price represents a discount of 22 per cent"

The 'partial' holding now seems to have been circa 50% of Inivitia and we learned that today was my point as I think the sale news in today's RNS is the first time we've seen the rebased Dec 31st valuation of that holding to compare to the annual accounts.

[scrapheap] 05/5/2021 13:02

And now an uplift to the NAV based on the recent ON fundraise.... surprised it's only 22 million more but at least that's 3 bits of good news after the grim 31/12/20 NAV news...

[chucko1] 05/5/2021 12:18

It is now clear, as it ought to have been previously, that the prior poor risk management sucked the air out of this. It is still fighting for each breath, but at least there remains a measurable pulse.

Alternatives are still a much better bet. The management speak of new investments, but the alternatives have been investing anew for years, unimpeded by financial leg-irons.

The hope for SUPP from this point is that new investments show a far higher conversion rate than the alternatives, but there is no evidence of this being likely.

If I were NW, I would be trumpeting the fact that some of my investments can now be seen to have been decent. Undoubtedly the case, but I would also be asking about the average IRR (adjusted) of all his smaller picks and an accurate account of this would still be appalling. And that's just in absolute terms - in relative terms, horrendous [where |horrendous| > |appalling|]. SUPP still have some of these, unfortunately.

[scrapheap] 05/5/2021 11:45

Looking at the Annual Report and the RNS today re Iniviata, it looks like roughly half the Dec value holding was sold to Rosetta - genius. So SUPP sees value uplift from £13m to £27m when could have been £27m to £54m plus...

Sweet money for the Rosetta team - ridiculous really.

Re-reading the Schroders report it does suggest that monies were to be applied to some of the existing portfolio not just new ones so who know perhaps the ON stake hasn't been diluted so much?

[pete_bane] 05/5/2021 10:59

The two threadlice specto and Porsche picked a fine time to do their trolling on the duffers' thread. They never ever get anything right do they?

[spectoacc] 05/5/2021 07:21

Agreed, both good outcomes, very good in the case of Kuur.

Unfortunately Tim & Ben had already flogged some of Iniviata to Rosetta in January's 22% discount dump, with no provision for uplift unlike with 3 of the 6 sold.

Per usual with SUPP, there's never only good news.

RUTH this morning:
"RUTH, the "Group"), a healthcare group committed to providing innovative cancer care of the highest quality, is pleased to announce that the conditions necessary to enable drawdown of £15 million, the remaining balance of the £40 million infrastructure investment signed in March 2021 with Equitix Investment Management Ltd"

Burning through cash, tho Link did at last revalue RUTH at last NAV. If they read this BB they'd have done that 18 months ago.


Yesterday re ON:

"...Oxford Nanopore Technologies Ltd has raised £195 million in new capital including £125 million from new investors Temasek, Wellington Management, M&G Investments and Nikon with existing shareholders investing £70 million.

IP Group committed £18.7million to the round, being its full pre-emptive allocation."


Not impossible SUPP also paid in - but they've said nothing (& have little ready cash), so likely suffered some dilution to their small % stake.


News over the weekend confirming one they have put more into, but I'll stop there.

[scrapheap] 05/5/2021 07:16

Nice couple of tickles announced this morning...

[eeza] 30/4/2021 21:50

"Woodford’s involvement with Acacia reportedly came as a surprise to Link Fund Solutions, the company that oversaw his Woodford Equity Income Fund and took control of its assets following its collapse in 2019.

Acacia has since bought more than a dozen of stocks which Link is in the process of selling off to claw back millions of pounds still owed to investors.

One of those holdings, Oxford Nanopore, this month announced plans to float resulting in Woodford investors missing out on a potential £200 million windfall.............."

"Neil Woodford has financed an extraordinary number of British life-sciences companies over the last 20 years. The scope of his involvement with these companies is unmatched in the UK.

"He was the most successful portfolio manager for many, many years and I can tell you, in the course of my investment career I've met a few of the really legendary investors, and when I met Neil I knew I was standing in the presence of a truly exceptional investment manager."

[chucko1] 29/4/2021 11:22

"Trash", I said. A little harsh, but no substitute for thinking, experience and risk management. Most of this has to take into account ones own personal situation which cannot be commoditised.

I do wonder if holders of SUPP share a common trait - they simply do not think, but trust?

Reagan - trust, but verify. Didn't happen here.

[chucko1] 29/4/2021 08:32

Yes - 75% in the case of IPO but 96% in the case of SUPP. That suggests you are buying SUPP for reasons other than ON. IPO is more nuanced, although at a 50% rise on the carrying value of ON, a 12% rise would be OK. It has seen 30% this year so even 12% is not so large as compared with the other risks. But if you're in it because you see a doubling or tripling of the ON valuation (possible, though I think the champagne has flattened a little) then the ON exposure vs. other risks is decent.

Worth pointing out that the experienced volatility the past year (100 day moving average) for SUPP is 50% greater for SUPP than it is for IPO. That ought to feature in the respective investment assessments.

Perhaps someone will sign into "Stocko" and see if they have any opinion on this!?

Did read it once - trash. Never bothered after that.

[jonwig] 29/4/2021 07:05

chucko - Stockopedia, a subscription service.

Neither IPO nor SUPP gives pure exposure to any one company. In each case you're buying other baggage which could damage your returns.

[spectoacc] 29/4/2021 06:57

And the elephant in the room - what does SUPP do with the proceeds from ON, assuming it floats (many a slip between cup & lip).

They've said already - invest in their own stock picks. In fairness, SBO doing OK so far, but at what point do SUPP holders see a penny back, ever? It's the original "greater fool" stock, 11p off its lows but 69p below 2015 listing price (even further from highs).

[chucko1] 28/4/2021 23:21

"I think you are wrong". Why? Or is it another 'feeling in your bones" thing?

I did search Stocko, in fact, but came back with "STOCKO CONTACT GmbH & Co. KG, Germany | Worldwide manufacturer of Connector Systems, Crimp Contacts, Solderless Terminals, Terminating ."

Probably more sense in that.

Whoever or whatever Stocko happens to be, I am happy to analyse his stuff, but I have to be able to see it. So either put up or shut up. Are we on the verge of seeing another wave of SUPP/WPCT blind idiocy? It just keeps giving and it's really a candidate for the 8th wonder of the world.

[saltraider] 28/4/2021 22:53

Search Stocko. Check the calculation there. I'm not going to cross post it. But the clear conclusion is that it is much cheaper to buy ON exposure through SUPP than through IPO.

Or post your own calculation.

I think you are wrong.

[chucko1] 28/4/2021 22:43

Isn't IPO 25% exposed to ON and SUPP only about 4%? I have not seen the Stocko stuff (in fact, I have not the least idea what it is), but if I am correct then you would have to buy 6.25x as much SUPP to get the same actual exposure to IPO.

Whether or not SUPP is "cheap" however so defined, the risk in having to buy 6.25x as much can hardly be ignored. For it means you are buying 6.25x as much IH as a sane person would wish. And 6.25x as much Atom, with the funding requirements involved there also.

Where the calculation becomes more complex is when taking into consideration the respective current valuations of ON within the portfolios of SUPP and IPO, and that is not that clear. This is where Stocko might have a better idea than me, but to use this calculation properly would require a clear view of where ON would be priced.

The valuation difference would have to be immense (it is not) to offset the risk of having go buy 6.25x SUPP. Either that or you are very confident that the discount SUPP currently trades at will narrow, in which case whatever happens to ON is barely relevant if it only amounts to 4% of the NAV.

I would love to be shown to be incorrect, but until someone presents the analysis here I suspect "clueless" is still apt for the majority of SUPP acolytes.