Shaft Sink Share Discussion Threads

[hedgehog 100] 21/6/2013 18:30

muckshifter 21 Jun'13 - 16:28 - 2090 of 2090 0 0
"...Hedgehog has no experience or knowledge of heavy civil engineering contracting, its contracts, or its dispute procedures (apart from a few sharp lessons he received here). ..."


CJohn,

I know enough about the industry in which SHFT operates ... whereas Muckshifter perhaps know TOO much about it. Excessive industry knowledge can mean that you don't see the wood for the trees. A jockey can be the worst judge of a horse.

Aggravated in his case by his apparent obsession with the state of the industry decades ago (two of his best three investments were about forty years ago).

Things have moved on massively since then, e.g. globalisation, technology, the commodities super-cycle, deeper mines ...

Even in just the last eleven years, things have changed massively:

1. Metals prices have risen exponentially.
[The last major bear market for metals and mining (not including the 2008 financial crash) arguably lasted six years, from 1997 to 2002.
(The bear market before that - from 1992 to 1994 - lasted three.)]

2. Mining costs have also increased exponentially (which equates to massively increased turnover for mining services companies).


I also submit that Muckshifter knows next to nothing about business, and business knowledge is generally more important for investment than anything else.

There is no reason why a well-managed company in a non-competitive business should not be able to make good profit margins, and contractually protect itself against excessive risk.

Say what you want about oligarchs from the former Soviet Union, but they are good businessmen. They have the ability to take a previously sleepy, under-performing business and transform it with better business controls and pursuit of growth.

And one of the attractions of SHFT to me is that it contractually protects itself to a very impressive extent.

With regard to potential operational difficulties with SHFT's projects, this extract from SHFT's prospectus is helpful:

"4.3 Contracting philosophy
4.3.1 Background
The tendering process for contracts varies between clients but will normally involve at least a two-stage process with binding tenders and contracts awarded on the basis of the second tender. A typical shaft sinking contract specifies the depth and diameter of the shaft, the surface infrastructure required, the expected duration of the project, facilities and services provided as well as shaft infrastructure and funding arrangements. The Group's shaft sinking contracts are typically for the full duration of the project.
The nature of the Group's work is inherently unpredictable, depending on ground conditions and other factors beyond the control either of the Group or the client. Where the Group is not confident of such factors, it seeks to ensure that its contracts contain escalation clauses as well as adjustments for unforeseen or abnormal ground conditions or features so as to pass on any unexpected costs to the client. In addition, both sides typically recognise their mutual inter-dependence and the likelihood that discussions may be required at some stage during a project to resolve any issues which arise."


Of course Muckshifter wants to try to make out that it is very risky, and it is very easy to 'scare by association'. Any troll could go onto any company board and highlight companies from that sector that have previously gone bust, sometimes decades ago.

But one thing he rarely seems to mention is SHFT's lowly rating. If SHFT was on a lofty P/E, it would be different ... but I think that forward P/Es of 3.6 for 2013 and 2.6 for 2014, on forecasts that would mean good earnings growth, mean that any risk is more than in the price.

Nor has Muckshifter ever mentioned the SightPower shaft scanning technology, in which SHFT has a large stake.


P.S. From an article I posted on the Oil Services thread in early April:
"Twenty-five years on, and some of the executives behind the switch to outsourcing might have come to regret their decision."

Similarly, Anglo American Limited may well come to regret their decision to have sold Shaft Sinkers.

[muckshifter] 21/6/2013 16:28

CJohn,
Don't know if you tried reading the two opposing points of view as I suggested – you would have to be keen, and have lots of stamina for that.

But here are the differences as succinctly as I can explain them:-

Background.
Hedgehog has no experience or knowledge of heavy civil engineering contracting, its contracts, or its dispute procedures (apart from a few sharp lessons he received here).
I've worked in heavy civils contracting, in the element which has the most similar characteristics to that in which shft operate, for 40+ years. Both muckshifting and underground work suffer the same enormous casualty rates, and in fact I only know of one company in those fields, out of dozens, which has survived more than a decade without receivership or rescue. During those years I was involved in both a court action, and arbitrations, and saw plenty of others around me.

The view without Eurochem.
Hedgehog thinks that this is the "share of the decade". He expects ever increasing workload, profit, and dividends (despite the recent shock he received when they passed the final dividend for 2012) and thinks that the problems with a few current jobs are going to be fixed by a change in personnel.
My view is that this is the normal up / down pattern of events for a company in this type of work, as revealed even by the IPO prospectus, and the RNSs since. Some jobs will be very successful and some will be disastrous. What destroyed companies in this industry in the past, and will again in the future no doubt, is cashflow when they get a couple of concurrent disastrous contracts, where they would probably eventually be entitled to substantial extra payment under the terms of the contract, but it doesn't come in time.

The Eurochem dispute.
Hedgehog, despite knowing nothing about the industry, its contracts, or its dispute procedures, constantly proclaims that shft have no case to answer and will win the arbitration Eurochem have entered against them. If you look at the basis of this assumption, it is pathetic.
My view is that there is a serious basis for this arbitration, in that shft had only achieved approx 8% of the shaft depth in 75%+ of the contract period with payment of 44% of the anticipated contract sum, without getting through any of the three anticipated difficult water bearing strata. Hedgehog's position might be likened to someone saying to a builder "build me a house here to this plan and take as long as you like and I'll pay you whatever you ask for", which I find incredible.

Further to the arbitration for $900m, which is based upon non performance imho, Eurochem are suing IMR, the bunch of dubious Russians who effectively floated shft, also for $900m, but this case is, (imho) on the completely different basis of alleged corrupt actions by IMR in obtaining the contract.
Hedgehog can't get it out of his head that these numbers are the same and therefore Eurochem can't go after both, and the number must have been taken from a passing bus and used twice.
My expectation is that Eurochem have two entirely different basis for the claims, know that what they can get out of shft is very limited (if they were awarded even a tenth of their claim against shft, shft would be bankrupt – or at the very least a main subsidiary would, and the remaining company would be on its knees), but also know that they might find evidence to support their corruption action against IMR, who are capable of paying, one way or another. The fact that the sum is the same is perfectly normal – it supposedly represents the extra cost of a two+ year delay, and loss of income, and is the same whatever the cause of the problem.
Hedgehog, has stated many times, starting in January, that this dispute was being amicably settled, and settlement was imminent, right up to his attendance at the AGM, when the story seemed to change a bit.
This arbitration could finish or severely cripple shft, unless they win it, so it comes down to how confident people are in the outcome of an extremely expensive arbitration process conducted in absolute secrecy.

So those are the opposing positions, best of luck with whatever you decide to do.
Regards.
PS. And I'm sorry you came in in the middle of a row. Hedgehog had just accidentally revealed evidence that he knew he was lying in past posts.

[buywell2] 21/6/2013 15:19

Don't kick a Hedgehog when he's curled in a little ball Coyote

Not fair

[wylecoyote] 21/6/2013 11:43

Well my short is going well now, it required a little patience, and have paid a little interest, but this is going sub 30.0p now... Come on 20.0p, that is my target

[buywell2] 21/6/2013 07:46

I see poor olde Hedge Hog has started his own thread dedicated to the cause of Shaft Sinkers use of technology with the thread title avoiding the wordplay on Shaft shares Sinking ..... perhaps his old mate Hector will speak to him as he plies his lonely Shaft Sinking ramps

He has given up on this Shaft Sinkers thread .... as they have dug themselves into a pit of dispair

Sinking into a quagmire of their own making

As the Shaft Sinkers share price sinks into the South African sunset

And the PLAT and GOLD prices drop back as the USA starts the process of ending QE3 taking the SA miners down the Swanee and the sevice industries along with them

[hedgehog 100] 20/6/2013 22:15

"MINESHAFT MONITORING

The mine shafts are the lifeline to underground mines, and miners depend on safe uninterrupted and efficient flow of material. The shafts and hoisting systems provide access to network of openings used to recover the underground resource, carry out vertical transportation of miners and materials required for the mining operations, and serve as an escape way in case of emergency. In addition the shafts assist in mine ventilation and supply of engineering services underground (power, compressed air, water, cooling conduit etc.).

Most underground mines have 3 shafts (rock shaft, service shaft and the ventilation one) and if something ever happens to any shaft the production can be severely disrupted and consequently the mine may suffer serious financial losses.

Mining shaft generally is a very complex engineering object but from a geometrical and topological point of view it can be described it as a cylinder with a diameter of 5-20 metres and the depth of 100-3000 metres in a single go. Inside a single shaft there are many different objects: pipes of various diameters, cables, vertical guides (rails for the conveyances), horizontal steel beams (buntons), fixing brackets and other attachments. Shaft lining is normally constructed from reinforced concrete or cast-iron tubbing rings. Besides that each shaft has one or few stations – intersections with mining levels (horizontal mining workings).

In any point of time all of the shaft constructive elements must be kept in good working conditions for the uninterrupted and safe mining operations. For instance, all guides must be perfectly aligned as the vertical speed of conveyances e.g. 50-t skip can reach 12-18 m/sec.

The description of the existing problem.

Every mine shaft must be stopped for 4-12 hours (depending on the shaft depth) per week in order to undergo its visual inspection. This legal requirement is stipulated by law in every major mining country e.g. Canada, USA, South Africa, Australia, Germany, Russia, Ukraine etc.

The current practice of mine shaft inspection have several disadvantages. The most important one are as follows:

•significant revenue losses due to production interruption;
•safety issues: people exposure to the dangerous working conditions resulting in severe injuries and even fatalities every year – huge indirect losses;
•visual inspection conducted by human eye is not perfect – serious mine shaft accidents still happen including the ones caused by human error, which results in additional production and consequently financial losses and often in fatalities.

The need for better and more efficient technology is confirmed by mining professionals – mining executives and shaft engineers as well as the governmental officials in the most of the major mining countries.

What is the Laser Scanning?

LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) is the integrated system consisting of three components: lasers, GPS (Global Positioning System) and IMU (inertial Measurement Unit), the latter in essence is an optical gyroscope. The integration of all these system's components allows determining with extremely high accuracy the co-ordinates of the point in space where a laser beam reflects from a non-transparent object. LiDAR systems are widely used to effectively collect spatial data for DEM building. In addition the laser beam can penetrate through foliage therefore this technology is applicable even in the heavily forested areas. The application of LiDAR technology varies from construction industry and road maintenance to city management and planning. The LiDAR systems are used in either airborne or terrestrial based mode.

The proposed technology

The idea is to create the initial 3D "basic" scans (for new shafts – after shaft commissioning when all permanent steelwork and equipment are installed inside a shaft barrel) for the current shaft conditions. Subsequently the shaft scanning system can be used as frequently as required by a Shaft Engineer, for instance, on weekly basis. By comparing the subsequent scans it is possible to determine all changes and their severity, specify which element of shaft infrastructure was affected, generate reports etc.

The advantages of the developed technology

What kind of benefits the proposed technology can offer to underground mines with the scanning of their mine shafts infrastructure?

•the automated shaft monitoring system will offer the better accuracy than human eye can measure. The role of human factor in particular fatigue, lost of concentration, bad lighting will diminish;
•earlier detection of defects in shaft infrastructure will reduce the probability of accidents thus increasing the safety and efficiency of mining operations;
•the amount of man-hours spent by engineering and technical staff in the dangerous conditions inside the shaft barrel will decrease therefore reducing the probability of lost time injures for mine personnel;
•the shaft scanning is quick and unobtrusive for mining operations with the LiDAR system (attached to any conveyance) moving up and down the shaft with a normal hoisting speed. Hence the shaft availability increases and subsequently the mine can realize a significant financial gain from the increased production;
•a 3D realistic picture of the entire shaft with all internal infrastructures (constructive elements) is created which allows conducting the detailed visual analysis in the comfortable office conditions. Shaft Engineer will be capable of interactively building any horizontal and vertical cross-sections, together with the ability to measure the sizes, distances, diameters as well as the angles from vertical and horizontal axles and compare them to the originally designed shapes etc;
•superimposition of the subsequent 3D scanned images can immediately determine and highlight the areas of concerns (ground movements, cracks in lining, misalignment and deflections of pipes, buntons and guides etc.) as each element of such image can be compared on-the-fly with its own past position, original shape etc;
•with the assistance of the unique recognition protocol each and every object inside the shaft can be specified. The defect report contains a reference to the affected element and it's location in the shaft. The allowable margin of changes as well as the severity of damage can be determined for each constructive element. That can be further divided into following categories: change of shape, change of location, level of corrosion and rust build-up. The implemented feature extraction algorithms enable the comparison of any shaft object with its original predetermined shape, location, level of corrosion or rust built-up thus allowing a shaft engineer to plan his maintenance work more smartly;
•the ability to archive all scanned images and to support a history log of all changes further assists in determining the chronic and newly revealed problems with mine shaft thus improving the whole shaft management system and making its maintenance more efficient.

The proposed technology is highly scalable as currently there are more than 1000 operational mine shafts around the world.

An additional fields of application for the developed technology are subways (~100 in all major cities around the world) and high-volume transportation tunnels e.g. Eurotunnel between UK and France, St. Gotthard tunnel between Switzerland and Italy and so on."

[muckshifter] 20/6/2013 17:55

CJohn,
A couple of points relating to shrewd n sharps posts.
Dividend was passed this half year, so that was wrong.
Price to book value based on tangible assets doesn't mean much in construction.
Obviously the PE is different
On the problems - I would read all RNSs & ARs and make your own mind up.
It has been around for decades, but mostly much smaller and under a big wing.
The moat, is its exposure to high risk work, rather than technical.
Debt falling, is a leap of faith.

I'm not sure what he means by "if the worst comes to the worst the net assets should mean that we get our money back". If he means that irrespective of the Eurochem claim, if things on other contracts went bad to the extent that the banks pulled the pin, and called in receivers you would get your money back he is very sadly mistaken, imho. Perhaps that is not what he means.
Regards.
PS. I think both shrewd n sharp and sigala bought into shft and then sold again, so don't assume the posts above are "current".

[hedgehog 100] 20/6/2013 17:25

CJohn,

Here is some more intelligent and balanced analysis on SHFT from Sigala's thread "ValueGrowth Investing (VLG)" -


Sigala 19 Jan'13 - 11:11 - 260 of 639 0 0

"Hi H26 and HH100,

Cheers for that additional input.

I am still updating my research into SHFT and also beginning my research into CAPD - thanks for suggesting those Co's HH100.

I like SHFT very much and the current price is attractive to me. They won a contract worth $160m with Hindustan Zinc last year at Rampura Agucha which is the biggest zinc/lead mine in the world I believe. Hindustan Zinc are seriously rich and are making a ton of money at them moment. They also have expansion plans - so the fact that SHFT have got their foot in the door looks very good to me.

Historically a lot of the operations have been South African based - and also platinum mines to boot - I'm sure everyone is well aware of the negativity swirling around that industry in that country at the moment. Although SHFT seem to be navigating a course through the difficulties.

Operationally I think SHFT didn't have their best year. There seem to have been cost over-runs on some of their projects. And of course there was the Eurochem contract which went very wrong. Reading the chairman's statements I get the feeling that they also identified there was a weakness in the operational management. I see they are placing emphasis on the appointment of the COO - so hopefully they have found an experienced and wise operations manager who can help them get a grip on things again. (Parallels of the situation at Lamprell?)

The operational difficulties lead to a poor financial performance in H1 - EPS crashed to 1.6p from 8.5p in the comparable period last year. That's some drop!! So the current quoted p/e is perhaps a bit misleading as it is based on 2011.

SHFT pay a wacking great dividend - currently the yield quoted by ADVFN is 18.46% - (yes you read that right....just shy of 20%!!!). They decided to maintain their interim dividend unchanged from the year before even after the poor H1 performance.

Anyway.....thats a few thoughts for now....I will try to add more when I get the chance.

Regards,

Sigala"


Sigala 23 Jan'13 - 22:16 - 268 of 639 0 0

"Hi HH100,

You're welcome.

I think both SHFT and CAPD are interesting companies - in a sector that I like.

I guess SHFT is the one with the real expertise and history - there should be a lot of specialist knowledge and skills in their workforce hard won from many jobs. This sort of "company intellectual property" is impossible to value - but in many cases it is the most valuable thing of all IMO.

I am perhaps most impressed by their contract win with Hindustan Zinc - that is a world class operation - if they can win contracts like that then they are playing in the big league. It will be a big job, make no mistake - but it looks like SHFT can handle jobs of that scale.

Of course with hindsight the Eurochem contract was a mistake - but hindsight is a wonderful thing. I just can't imagine contractors as experienced as SHFT leaving themselves open to such far-ranging liabilities as Eurochem are talking about.

I am a bit wary of any legal process / arbitration - its a shame if it comes down to who can afford the best representatives - rather than be judged on the rights and wrongs of the case itself. But as far as I can tell - it does look like Eurochem are "trying it on".

Without the Eurochem situation hanging over it I would have thought SHFT's share price should be quite a bit above where it is at the moment.

The other fly in the ointment is their operational underperformance this year - they need a strong hand on the tiller as it were. A good COO is worth their weight in gold - the appointment of Louis Germishuys sounds good. His credentials look right - and apparently he has been COO of SHFT before, so he should know how this company ticks.

I haven't researched the CEO much - but from what I've read it doesn't leap out at me that he has a lot of practical mining eperience - perhaps he is more of a money man and deal maker - which is fine - but that makes it even more improtant that he has a strong COO at his right hand to tell him what is possible and what is not.

Cheers,

Sigala"

[hedgehog 100] 20/6/2013 17:10

Hello CJohn,

Welcome to this thread!!


The positives & negatives on SHFT? Shrewd_n_Sharp contributed two good posts on these a couple of months ago. Obviously though his lists would need to be adjusted to take account of subsequent changes:


Shrewd_n_Sharp 19 Apr'13 - 13:30 - 1848 of 2083 0 0

"ell in the last couple of days, despite my general views on the markets for the summer, I added just the second share of my portfolio - SHFT. It's a bit of a special situations/turnaround stock and goes into the "risky" part of my portfolio, but is also cushioned as a value/income play.

The features that attracted me to this stock are:

*. It is likely to pay a dividend of 10-14%
*. Has a price to book value of around 0.45, based on tangible net assets not intangibles
*. A PE of 2.4
*. Does have problems but they are temporary and management appears to be dealing with them all (temporary margin issue, a small claim and overexposure to a certain region and commodity) - all being addressed
*. Is bringing in additional board strength
*. Price crashed from around 180p to 40p.
*. Is growing its order book
*. Has been around for decades in its market
*. It has a very deep moat business model which is hard to replicate
*. Has regular and growing deals with industry leaders
*. Has released a trading update forecasting a "significantly improved year"
*. ROCE=18.84%. ROE=18.20%. ROI=10.85%.
*. Debt reasonable and falling
*. Cashflow to increase and Price-to-cashflow ratio at 4.2
*. Price to sales = 0.9
*. Tobin's Q ratio of 0.13
*. Projected dividend rise

It's end of year statement is due soon and the price is moving north and broken through a 40p technical floor. I am very pleased with my purchase. Happy to be on board."


RCTurner2 19 Apr'13 - 13:51 - 1849 of 2083 0 0

"What were the negatives that came out of your analysis?"


Shrewd_n_Sharp 19 Apr'13 - 14:47 - 1851 of 2083 0 0

"Risks....

*. I think 50p will be stubborn initially. Previous resistance there and the 200DMA might block a quick move.
*. The Eurochem claim falls flat on SHFT's face
*. Further political strikes/delays in African mines
*. Poor performance on the order book/pipeline.
*. The above hitting cashflows, forcing a dilution.
*. ZAR currency weakness, although recent report suggests this is controlled to a degree
*. Metal/minig weakness

However, the price action so close to end of year results plus the very positive statement recently about expectations give a short term mitigation to those points I feel. If worst comes to the worst the net assets should mean we get our cash back at these prices - a nice margin for error."

[muckshifter] 20/6/2013 14:57

One of Hedgehog's favourite posts of mine was that remarking to another poster. ""Exactly, WylieCoyote,but I have a feeling that this will be down below 10p within the next six months.
Hope not, for the sake of holders.
Regards."
Which he jubilantly proclaims was a "prediction" – he has probably posted it 30 times or so by now, and when I offered to show him what one of my actual predictions looks like – no response because he prefers that one?

Then, he posts in post 2064 on the shft board, denying his prediction of - on the way to £1.90,
"I don't recall ever making such a prediction, so perhaps you're confusing me with someone else whose name also begins with an "H"? I prefer to post about possible fundamental outcomes, and let others draw their own conclusions about the share prices that might accompany them - especially for the longer-term."
with reference to this, taken from his post 1840 on shft board.
"Let's wait for the next SCSW update and see what they say: I know that the SCSW publisher Smit Berry can recognise a good turnaround story when he sees it, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if he says that the shares are beginning the climb back to 190p."

He will no doubt come back and explain that that was not a prediction, or more likely that it was someone else's imaginary one.

Similarly, these posts he wrote will not have been predictions in Hedgehog's opinion:
P1744 shft board. "At just 40.75p SHFT is looking like a stellar buying opportunity at the moment ... though as with the previous dip to near 40p in mid December I don't expect this sort of price to last long."

P457 Value Growth board: "The chart and fundamentals are both looking positive, and I believe that the results will see the final dividend maintained at 4.8p (in addition to the 2.4p interim dividend already paid)."

Post 1824 shft board. "(On another topic, both the Citywire piece and the 13 February trading update indicate that SHFT's final dividend of 4.8p/share will be maintained.)"

P 1827 on shft board. "Declaration of a final dividend of 4.8p per share is expected, which at SHFT's current mid price of just 38.75p would represent an immediate yield of nearly 12.4%. With a further 8.1p/share (interim + final dividends) expected over the 12 months subsequent to that. I.e. investors now should get about a third of their money back in dividends within about thirteen months!"

P240283 Top Trader's thread. "- I'm surprised that you haven't included mining services company SHFT (Shaft Sinkers) in your choices to rise next week, as I know that you're bullish on it, and the company's final results are imminent. And those results should be very well-received by the market, especially as they should confirm a final dividend of 4.8p/share as expected, and that the company's turnaround is continuing."

P1862 shft board.
"I'm very confident that the final dividend will be maintained at 4.8p/share, mainly for reasons set out in my post 1833 above (Hedgehog 100 9 Apr'13 - 17:05 - 1833 of 1861).
And some people may even think that it would be a mistake to pay the dividend, but I would totally disagree with that. The company's financial position looks strong enough to pay it comfortably, and pulling/reducing it could send out unhelpful signals at a time when the company is bidding for over a billion pounds of new work (see the following extract from the last trading update) –"

That will do for that point for now.

Although that one saying that "(On another topic, both the Citywire piece and the 13 February trading update indicate that SHFT's final dividend of 4.8p/share will be maintained.)" might be considered dishonest by those of us, and I think there were plenty, who read the same 13th Feb update and assumed that it warned that the dividend would probably be passed, as indeed it was.

I did actually post one set of historical predictive posts to show what I regard as a prediction, in post 1947 on shft board. It was about the Heritage Oil / Ugandan Government International arbitration, and I made clear it was entirely my own thinking – nothing taken from newspapers or internet articles, no opinions of opinions of opinions. But despite his earlier claims that his record on predictions would be better than mine, in post 1904 on shft board, there was no response.
Now I know why!
Hedgehog must have spent weeks searching through everything I ever posted on the internet over the past 13 years in his desperate attempts to find things to discredit me (definitely OCD!), and will have seen quite a few very good predictions, clearly made as predictions. But don't worry Hedgehog, I hadn't remembered any of the posts you trawled up from my distant past and wouldn't know where to look for them.

[muckshifter] 20/6/2013 11:37

Hello CJohn,
Probably the best way to learn about shft would be to click on a Hedgehog post, then click on the little arrow beside his name and read his posts, there are at least 200 on shft since January. Unfortunately you will find them excessively repetitive, but you'll soon recognise the same articles coming up time after time, which will speed up the process. Then do the same with one of my posts, and you will find the antidote to Hedgehog's relentless enthusiasm.
Then make your decision.

Best of luck with it.
Regards.

[buywell2] 20/6/2013 11:21

I assume you have read the past 500 posts ?

That is how to learn about who says what and why

Do that and then come back a wiser poster

[cjohn] 20/6/2013 10:51

Hello,

Would someone care to lay out the pros and cons of this share?


I am a value investor attracted by the deep discount to assets, but put off by the poor quality of those assets - mining equipment tied to particular projects - and by the numerous blunders on different projects. Are such blunders endemic to the type of work they do? The recent report makes bold claims about operational performance improvement, but the claims just seem too glib to me. Is there a problema with management? Remuneration with management here seems over-generous.

[muckshifter] 20/6/2013 10:29

ZZZZZZ – good, wouldn't want to wake anyone!

One of Hedgehog's favourite posts of mine was that remarking to another poster. ""Exactly, WylieCoyote,but I have a feeling that this will be down below 10p within the next six months.
Hope not, for the sake of holders.
Regards."
Which he jubilantly proclaims was a "prediction" – probably posted it 30 times or so by now, and when I offered to show him what one of my actual predictions looks like – no response, because he prefers that one?

Then, he posts in post 2064, denying his prediction of - on the way to £1.90,
"I don't recall ever making such a prediction, so perhaps you're confusing me with someone else whose name also begins with an "H"? I prefer to post about possible fundamental outcomes, and let others draw their own conclusions about the share prices that might accompany them - especially for the longer-term."
with reference to this, taken from his post 1840
"Let's wait for the next SCSW update and see what they say: I know that the SCSW publisher Smit Berry can recognise a good turnaround story when he sees it, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if he says that the shares are beginning the climb back to 190p."

He will no doubt come back and explain that that was not a prediction, or more likely that it was someone else's imaginary one.

Similarly, these posts he wrote will not have been predictions in Hedgehog's opinion:
P1744. "At just 40.75p SHFT is looking like a stellar buying opportunity at the moment ... though as with the previous dip to near 40p in mid December I don't expect this sort of price to last long."

P457 Value Growth board: "The chart and fundamentals are both looking positive, and I believe that the results will see the final dividend maintained at 4.8p (in addition to the 2.4p interim dividend already paid)."

Post 1824 "(On another topic, both the Citywire piece and the 13 February trading update indicate that SHFT's final dividend of 4.8p/share will be maintained.)"

P 1827. "Declaration of a final dividend of 4.8p per share is expected, which at SHFT's current mid price of just 38.75p would represent an immediate yield of nearly 12.4%. With a further 8.1p/share (interim + final dividends) expected over the 12 months subsequent to that. I.e. investors now should get about a third of their money back in dividends within about thirteen months!"

P240283 Top Trader's thread. "- I'm surprised that you haven't included mining services company SHFT (Shaft Sinkers) in your choices to rise next week, as I know that you're bullish on it, and the company's final results are imminent. And those results should be very well-received by the market, especially as they should confirm a final dividend of 4.8p/share as expected, and that the company's turnaround is continuing."

P1862
"I'm very confident that the final dividend will be maintained at 4.8p/share, mainly for reasons set out in my post 1833 above (Hedgehog 100 9 Apr'13 - 17:05 - 1833 of 1861).
And some people may even think that it would be a mistake to pay the dividend, but I would totally disagree with that. The company's financial position looks strong enough to pay it comfortably, and pulling/reducing it could send out unhelpful signals at a time when the company is bidding for over a billion pounds of new work (see the following extract from the last trading update) –"

That will do for that point for now.

Although that one saying that "(On another topic, both the Citywire piece and the 13 February trading update indicate that SHFT's final dividend of 4.8p/share will be maintained.)" might be considered dishonest by those of us, and I think there were plenty, who read the same 13th Feb update and assumed that it warned that the dividend would probably be passed.

I did actually post one set of historical predictive posts to show what I regard as a prediction, in post 1947 here. It was about the Heritage Oil / Ugandan Government International arbitration, and I made clear it was entirely my own thinking – nothing taken from newspapers or internet articles, no opinions of opinions of opinions. But despite his earlier claims that his record on predictions would be better than mine, in post 1904, there was no response.
Now I know why!
Hedgehog must have spent weeks searching through everything I ever posted on the internet over the past 13 years in his desperate attempts to find things to discredit me (definitely OCD!), and will have seen quite a few very good predictions, clearly made as predictions. But don't worry Hedgehog, I hadn't remembered any of the posts you trawled up from my distant past and wouldn't know where to look for them.

Sleep on insomniacs!
Regards.

[muckshifter] 20/6/2013 10:21

With reference to Hedgehog's post 2071 on the shft board.


Well congratulations on the thoroughness of your research Hedgehog, you must really be obsessed with trying to find things to discredit me and spend hours and hours on it. Even more obsessed than I thought when I assumed you found the info in earlier posts on this thread. Unfortunately, the sale of Petrobank, and the other trade I mentioned, hadn't been made at that time, but either would probably have displaced the original "best trade".

For the short term trade, there would have been a few rivals I could have chosen, but I enjoyed Newarthill, so it probably would have remained the same.

And, of course, you've just proved that you knew all along, or at least since you read that stuff, that my work was muckshifting, rather than as you have stated at least ten times, and probably considerably more, mining!

Congratulations on providing perfect evidence that you are a deceitful liar. In post 2040 on the shft board, you say,
"As he has apparently worked in the mining industry for about forty years, and Shaft Sinkers have been around for longer than that, perhaps their paths have crossed professionally at some point, in a way that has left him feeling aggrieved?


And a related issue is that 'Muck-smearer' seems to be a very poor investor. His two best investments were apparently about forty years ago, and now, at the age of about sixty, he is trolling a small cap penny share. He has admitted on another website that he doesn't read investment books, and is uber-bearish on the best investment I have ever seen."

But you now reveal that you got the information about my old investments from a post on TMF, which very clearly indicates that I don't work in the mining industry.

[muckshifter] 20/6/2013 08:23

Hedgehog 100
19 Jun'13 - 18:58 - 2072 of 2076 0 0


muckshifter 30 Oct'12 - 13:18 - 1606 of 2071
"Exactly, WylieCoyote,
but I have a feeling that this will be down below 10p within the next six months.
Hope not, for the sake of holders.
Regards."


This is how I would imagine Muckshifter saying goodnight to guests after a dinner party:

"I have a feeling that you will be violently mugged on your walk home tonight.
Hope not, for your sake.
Regards."

"I have a feeling that you will be badly injured in a crash on your drive home tonight.
Hope not, for your sake.
Regards."

Oh dear hedgehog, so now you are saying that I would "predict" that my guests would be both violently mugged, and badly injured in a car crash, all on their way home, and do nothing about it?

Your desperation knows no bounds!

[buywell2] 20/6/2013 08:08

HedgeHog has been slagging of Source BioScience (SBS) and Cyprotex (CRX) on my threads


SBS came out with a great RNS a few days back ... turnover should be circa 30% HIGHER in first 6 months this year .... and last year they made a profit .... so RECORD profits ahead.

Re Cyprotex CRX

Henderson Global and ORYX INTERNATIONAL GROWTH FUND LIMITED have recently bought 15% of Cyprotex shares

Another Fund has bought just under 10% but we do not know who yet as such Institutional funds don't have to RNS till they go over 10% if they don't want to.

So with regards to keeping the advfn community informed of other small and upcoming Pharma Biotechs as potential investments

Cyprotex RNS out today with Market Update

This little Pharma Biotech is going to make £1m profit this year but has a Mkt Cap of less than £10m ...... bit different to the loss making OXB


A very encouraging update when one reads that the first half will NOT include any monies from the recent $10m contract just awarded by th USA Environmental Protection Agency for carrying out Toxicology tests on their library of chemical compounds in ToxCast3 ( Cellumen/Apredica now both part of Cyprotex won work in ToxCast1 and ToxCast2 )

So the second half of the year will include monies from this contract as work has now commenced. I thus think £1m profit is now on the cards.

The acquisition of Apredica(Cellumen) resulted in Cyprotex gaining unique IP which has catapulted them into TOP SPOT in the WORLDS TOXICOLOGY CRO RANKINGS

As my thread title says ..... cos I knew it would






Cyprotex PLC Trading update


20th June 2013



Trading Update - H1 2013

Cyprotex PLC, a specialist ADME-Tox Contract Research Organisation providing screening services to the pharmaceutical, biotechnology, agrochemical and cosmetic industries, today provides a trading update for the half year ending 30 June 2013.

Financial update

Cyprotex can confirm that trading for the half year ending 30 June 2013 is anticipated to exceed the Board's expectations. Total revenues for H1 2013 are expected to be in the range of GBP4.25 million to GBP4.45 million (2012: H1 GBP3.72 million), an increase of approximately 14% to 20% on the comparative period. The revenue performance is encouraging across all of our geographical markets and our main service operations of high through put ADME, customised ADME and toxicology.

The recently awarded Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ToxCast contract, worth up to $10 million over 5 years, is unlikely to yield any revenues in the half year ending 30 June 2013 and its potential impact is not considered in this trading update.

Operating costs for the first six months of 2013, on a pre-exceptional basis, are anticipated to be in line with the Board's expectations. Consequently, as a highly operationally geared company, Cyprotex is expecting to post a record half year operating profit for H1 2013 in the order of GBP200,000 to GBP300,000 (2012: H1 operating loss GBP189,000).

Outlook

The historical 45%:55% split for trading revenues is expected to continue in 2013. Market expectations for total revenues are GBP9.5 million for the year ending 31 December 2013, with an operating profit of GBP0.8 million. With sound fiscal controls applying over all operational costs, the Board believes that operating profitability for the full year 2013 is anticipated to be in line with current market expectations prior to any potential impact from the EPA contract.

The Company is currently scheduled to issue its interim results for the half year ending 30 June 2013 on Wednesday 7 August 2013.

Dr Anthony Baxter, CEO of Cyprotex, commented:

"We are very pleased to report that trading is ahead of expectations for the first half of 2013. Our stated strategy to widen our service offerings is beginning to bear fruit. We are providing more customised ADME assays for pharma company clients and expanding our new toxicology offerings to all our customers. Our focus remains to deliver the highest quality data, as rapidly and as cost effectively as we can."

[wylecoyote] 20/6/2013 07:59

HH, you seem to be missing something. Yes this stock is cheap and on that metric everybody should be buying. The market knows exactly how cheap it is and this keeps getting cheaper, I wonder why that is? It implies that the fundamentals are not stacking up. Yes the market is irrational at times, and that creates opportunities but that tends to be short term....in this case it appears to be getting cheaper persistently.

[muckshifter] 19/6/2013 19:12

Well congratulations on the thoroughness of your research Hedgehog, you must really be obsessed with trying to find things to discredit me and spend hours and hours on it. Even more obsessed than I thought when I assumed you found the info in earlier posts on this thread. Unfortunately, the sale of Petrobank, and the other trade I mentioned, hadn't been made at that time, but either would probably have displaced the original "best trade".

For the short term trade, there would have been a few rivals I could have chosen, but I enjoyed Newarthill, so it probably would have remained the same.

And, of course, you've just proved that you knew all along, or at least since you read that stuff, that my work was muckshifting, rather than as you have stated at least ten times, and probably considerably more, mining!

Congratulations on providing perfect evidence that you are a deceitful liar. In post 2040, you say,
"As he has apparently worked in the mining industry for about forty years, and Shaft Sinkers have been around for longer than that, perhaps their paths have crossed professionally at some point, in a way that has left him feeling aggrieved?


And a related issue is that 'Muck-smearer' seems to be a very poor investor. His two best investments were apparently about forty years ago, and now, at the age of about sixty, he is trolling a small cap penny share. He has admitted on another website that he doesn't read investment books, and is uber-bearish on the best investment I have ever seen."

But you now reveal that you got the information about my old investments from a post on TMF, which very clearly indicates that I don't work in the mining industry.

[hedgehog 100] 19/6/2013 18:58

muckshifter 30 Oct'12 - 13:18 - 1606 of 2071
"Exactly, WylieCoyote,
but I have a feeling that this will be down below 10p within the next six months.
Hope not, for the sake of holders.
Regards."


This is how I would imagine Muckshifter saying goodnight to guests after a dinner party:

"I have a feeling that you will be violently mugged on your walk home tonight.
Hope not, for your sake.
Regards."

"I have a feeling that you will be badly injured in a crash on your drive home tonight.
Hope not, for your sake.
Regards."