Schroder Uk Public Private Share Discussion Threads

[spectoacc] 09/9/2021 13:08

Oxford Nano float news was out earlier today - haven't read it in depth.

Worth a comparison btwn IPO share price & SUPP s/p, since it was first rumoured a week and a half ago.

[magnum opus] 04/9/2021 09:33

sorry should read Revolut something under 3% of NAV

[magnum opus] 04/9/2021 09:27

ON was 25% of the SUPP NAV in their most recent communication. ON in IPO was 34p out of 135p at their last valuation, so 25% the same, SUPP has some catching up to do. Revolut is something under 1%, so no no way have they switched much.

[chucko1] 02/9/2021 15:30

Further favourable press regarding ON. This has given a fair boost to IPO, but not, so far, to SUPP. Does anyone know what % of the fund is ON? If less than 5%, then it is almost irrelevant. This would be a shame for the long-suffering SUPP/WPCT investors as there are those who see ON as severely underrated, even at the muted issue talk price.

In some sense, they have managed to switch ON for Revolut - it's a call that may define how Schroeders's stewardship of this fund is ultimately viewed. That said, it would only be fair to judge this after some extended period.

[johnwig] 09/8/2021 09:53

0p to 20p wasn't it, speccy? You and he never got anything right! You have also been monumentally wrong on Tesla for years now.

You're a bit of a fool aren't you? LOL

[spectoacc] 09/8/2021 08:12

SMT get in early, & tend to get it right - eg think they were previously the largest shareholder in Tesla behind Musk. Schroder Juniors the opposite, late and.... :)

[jonwig] 09/8/2021 08:05

A bit like Scot. Mort. then? Minuscule stakes in large (huge!) companies.

[spectoacc] 09/8/2021 07:28

Undoubtedly an interesting strategy, one they're also pursuing within SBO. Basically: later funding rounds, miniscule stakes, during a bubble. Which isn't to say they won't get out again for a profit in a flotation. But they've no control over the timing.

SUPP now own $13.7m of an allegedly $33bn co. A third of a thousandth of a %.

["Global neobank". No need to comment on that.]


"Schroder UK Public Private Trust plc (the "Company") is pleased to announce it has made a $13.7m investment in the leading disruptive global neobank, Revolut Limited ("Revolut"). This represents the second new private equity investment since the appointment of Schroder Investment Management Ltd as the Company's Portfolio Manager and a clear demonstration of the continued progress towards rebalancing the portfolio.

This investment is alongside Revolut's $800m Series E funding round led by new investors, SoftBank Vision Fund 2 and Tiger Global Management, valuing the business at $33 billion. The Company has invested on the same terms as the Series E."


(For context:

"Fintech startup Revolut has filed some financial results and is sharing details with the press. In 2020, the company reported $361 million in revenue (£261 million) — that's a 57% increase compared to 2019 revenue of $229 million (£166 million)").

Approx the same market cap as NatWest Group.

SUPP NAV allegedly £471m, I'd question how far £10m ($13.7m) goes towards "..Rebalancing the portfolio". Says a lot more about whether the remaining stakes are worth supporting. Am sure Atom Bank would have appreciated the cash.

[18bt] 29/7/2021 09:44

Interesting IC podcast interview with manager - freely available.

[cc2014] 28/7/2021 14:49

Words fail me after reading the above article. Woodford's web of interconnected companies causes me more and more to wonder about appropriate governance.

I'm sure it will all get washed under the carpet as usual or alternatively take 20 years to reach a resolution.

[spectoacc] 28/7/2021 14:05

Been quiet on the SUPP front lately, but this is a good read, albeit the sums involved for SUPP/Schroder Juniors are relatively small. Didn't know about the RM2/Mafic link - RM2 was a particularly heinous Neil punt:

[chucko1] 13/7/2021 13:42

Having stopped laughing, an update on the trade idea.

IPO is roughly flat versus SUPP over a recent time frame, although outperformed by 50-60% over 9 months or so. The alternatives are up 10% over the recent time frame and up only about 20% over 9 months.

So, were you to have tried playing ON by selling your SUPP and buying 20% of IPO and 80% the alternatives, you would be up 10-15%. But with SUPP now down at 30.85p on a NAV of 45p or so, I just don't see further value in the trade idea and would reverse it. Implicitly, that would mean buying SUPP!

Except it wouldn't, as all I said was to sell it beforehand and replace it with the others were you keen to maintain some sort of exposure to ON. 15% on a portfolio with 25% exposure to ON has, I suppose, achieved a 60% return in effect on the ON portion. And as that was the point of the trade in the first place, you might declare on that score.

I think SUPP is not expensive now, but who really cares? Why bother, unless you feel the discount is enticing as compared with the further revaluations that some fear. That said, I see that at near 30p, some will care a lot and (value funds, for example) and this will find higher levels again. And at this stage, I feel the alternatives are rather more exposed to unfortunate outcomes with interest rates. For SUPP, I think it will matter little.

[1tcm1] 09/7/2021 09:43

It's looking like SUPP is a far better bet than IPO!

[chuckol] 29/6/2021 17:42

I admit anybody takling my adcice would have lost 20%+. regards from Greece. Glug.

[chucko1] 21/6/2021 14:22

You may not realise it, but the entirety of that last post confirms your lack of understanding over all issues I have pointed to; and on so many levels, I am still laughing. But [you] as a journalist, I am not one percent surprised.

You write fairly tales and nothing else and it was ever thus.

[chucko1] 21/6/2021 11:12

Bloomberg are not very happy about your investment as they know nothing of it! Not that that would stop someone of frail constitution having nightmares about its change of value.

Paras 1 and 5 indicate you actually know nothing about even basic portfolio theory, or at least convey anything of merit relating to it.

[johnwig] 21/6/2021 10:05

Did anybody understand that gibberish arithmetic in the penultimate paragraph? Specious rubbish, wasn't it?

Anyway IPO, which winnie and spectoacc were ramping so fervently just a few weeks ago continues its headlong slither downhill, LOL. It's getting near a 20% fall since they were loudly and repetitively pushing it. And yet they have the gall to pose as experts over literally scores of ADVFN threads.

I'm glad I didn't buy it last week: I held back because of the general market volatility. I don't think either of them knew anything about that, or so it seems.

As for me I'm very happy with my seven-figure investment in LIT. Sometimes I have heart-lurching moments when at the end of the day I see a six figure drop, but in order to make money (rather than niggle at other people's quiet choices) you've got to do proper research and have the conviction to hold for more than a week.

One final point. Any share in the market can theoretically be considered as "the alernative" to SUPP. It doesn't have to have to hold a share of ONP, for certain. Obsessive, linear, purblind ramping, or trolling, does not make it so.

[chucko1] 18/6/2021 16:07

So another bad day for IPO and another poor day for SUPP. But one day is just noise.

And yet, the alternatives are stable. What does this mean? If you are of the opinion as I am, in that IPO + alternatives are a better bet than SUPP, this has just about been born out the past 2 months.

It rather depends upon the ratios you care to apply, but with exposures to ON of 5% and 25% respectively, were you to have sold 1 unit of SUPP, bought 0.2 units of IPO and 0.8 units of, say, PCT or WWH(or whatever combination of the latter pair you fancy), you would have done OK (around +4%) over the medium term. The precise profit also depends upon the day(s) of execution, but this being ADVFN, everyone will claim to have picked the best one(s).

It's all about factors, and for these sorts of assets, it's not the simplest task properly identifying the principal (determining) ones at any given time. (though it was clear that the principal factor for SUPP had at one time been simply the non-numeric "Woodford").

[chucko1] 16/6/2021 18:46

Neither did you think of buying it before it tripled, either. Or the alternatives, so you will have to load up!

Anyway, it's good to see that at just 1p cheaper than yesterday, you now like it. Fickle, aren't you!