Stanley Gibbons Share Discussion Threads

[orange1] 18/8/2004 07:37

From the market report in today's Indie:

Stanley Gibbons, the stamp dealer, rose 3p to 83p on whispers that strong trading has continued at the group and that its second-half results are likely to beat expectations.

[brindy] 17/8/2004 18:00

HI Folks.........You might be interested in looking at the GEMS thread re a question I asked Supermum about this stock.
She would agree she only studies charts and not fundamentals.........

[ukhawk] 17/8/2004 17:53

I'd say the fwd p/e was actually less than "mid-teens" now but all depends really if you're more bullish than share price

[jwe] 17/8/2004 08:36

Thats fine but historic pe is 22! and forward pe is already in the mid teens even after this drop.

[martinp] 16/8/2004 22:41

Shares Magazine says "Exciting growth prospects to justify the mid-teens rating"
This share has got to be long term 1 year+

[jojobt9] 16/8/2004 13:30

catastrophe? Im glad I sold at 103 cos this isnt rea;lly gonna reover..is it?? opinions pls?:(

[barnetpeter] 16/8/2004 12:50

Going straight down to resistance point at around 70p to meet the 200 day MA? Looks very weak but many small caps are getting kicked like this.

[topvest] 13/8/2004 19:48

Looks like the good run is over for a bit. Glad I sold out at over a £1 earlier in the week - always difficult to judge the point to take profits - nice to get one right!

[andrewhbruce] 13/8/2004 16:08

tks kael
there speaks the accountant!!point taken on candlesticks on low volume shares!

[kael] 13/8/2004 14:48

I think you mean to say less volume. SGI is illiquid, which means that you will see sudden price swings. This is why candlestick charting techniques, when applied to these types of stocks arent as accurate as when used with high vlume, liquid stocks.

[andrewhbruce] 13/8/2004 14:45

thanks very informative yf.....

checking various charts, the bullish hammers and shooting stars are often clearly evident and regularly mark significant turning points. sgi now looks fairly sick however!! - although i guess low turnover can result in extreme movements in this stock?

[taurusthebear] 13/8/2004 14:24

OK, Cheers, that explains it - no such thing as a free lunch! :0)

[kael] 13/8/2004 14:17

Ex divi was 11th August....remember the trade settlement time, or rather time it takes to get on the register.

[taurusthebear] 13/8/2004 14:13

Can anyone explain the price fall given the following statement:-

"Both dividends will be paid on 13 September 2004 to all shareholders on the register at close of business on the record date of 13 August 2004."

Surely this shouldn't fall by about 8p till Monday! Or am I missing something? :0)

[clocktower] 13/8/2004 14:10

Thats what I thought as well jwe..I may get back in if I get the chance at those levels but good luck...long term its good at present price.

[jwe] 13/8/2004 13:43

Clocktower i know you are `out` of this also so 70`s would be nice and i think it is a good buy at that level.With a poor market and no news now expected for a while the price could well drift.

[clocktower] 13/8/2004 13:29

My guess...70`s jwe

[jwe] 13/8/2004 11:42

This looks pretty friendless today in a poor market.Having sold last week at 104.25 will get back in if it falls to 80p ish any thoughts on how far this might fall?

[gengulphus] 13/8/2004 05:37

"1) The Feb to mid Mar action produced an island and as such I wouldn't use the hammer in this case. The hammers also do not have shadows that are twice as long as the body. The first to have that is the one in mid Mar. ..."

Are we talking about the same thing? The one I was referring to here is just slightly before mid-March, top of the body at 470. If its tail isn't quite twice as long as its body, it's too close for me to tell by eyeballing it. The one I think you're referring to as the "first to have that" and I had as number 2 is four days later, bottom of the body at 440.

As regards the "Feb to mid Mar ... island", I think I see what you mean - but if I've seen it correctly, it seems to me that if it disqualifies the first of these, it disqualifies the second as well: the only difference is that 4 days more downtrend have happened inbetween.

"The bottom of the shadow (tail) clearly provides a bottom which the subsequent trades do not breach."

Eh? By "subsequent trades", you presumably mean trades on subsequent days, since the bottom of the lower shadow is by definition the lowest price of the day. But if I have to know what subsequent days are going to do in order to decide whether the hammer signals a trend reversal, it's hardly a useful signal, is it? It amounts to saying "you've got a trend reversal if prices go up subsequently"...

Points taken about 3), 4), 6), 8) - thanks. Though I am rather mystified about your "3 inverted hammers thru april which signify price rejection at about 470" comment: I can only see two candlesticks in the whole of April with upper shadows more than twice the length of their bodies, and the first of those has a lower shadow too long to qualify as "no (or almost no) lower shadow". So unless "inverted hammer" has a perversely non-symmetrical definition with "hammer", I cannot see more than one inverted hammer in April.

Gengulphus

[yf23_1] 13/8/2004 03:09

The plus point for the SGI chart is that there is no price spike shooting formation at the recent high.

[yf23_1] 13/8/2004 02:34

gengulphus
to answer your points above....(PRU 6mth chart)

1) The Feb to mid Mar action produced an island and as such I wouldn't use the hammer in this case. The hammers also do not have shadows that are twice as long as the body. The first to have that is the one in mid Mar. The bottom of the shadow (tail) clearly provides a bottom which the subsequent trades do not breach.

3) Hammers in an uptrend actually signal a trend reversal (known as bearish hanging man), but this hammer does also not have a long enough tail. What we should focus on are the 3 inverted hammers thru april which signify price rejection at about 470 and the third inverted hammer's tail also coincides with the high at the start of April, which was the hammer you refer to.

4) The hammer in late April is not in a downtrend or uptrend so it doesn't actually signify anything but combined with the previous inverted hammer indicates a big fight between the next direction.

6) Hammer is not in a downtrend and the tail does not define the low point.

8) see 3

Please also note the highs defined by the gravestone doji at end of Jun and the shooting star formations at the end of July.

The point being that intra-day price spikes that are rejected provide good pointers to low-risk low/high trading plays.

[gengulphus] 12/8/2004 21:56

Even in the PRU chart in post 1800, I see a number of candlesticks that look like the description given of hammers. Taking just the examples that look to me to be as clear-cut as the two mentioned in the post:

1*) just before mid-March: price continued dropping
2*) somewhat after mid-March: downtrend reversed into uptrend a day or two later (pointed out in the post)
3) early April: uptrend reversed into downtrend next day
4) late April: uptrend reversed into downtrend
5*) late April (again): downtrend continued
6) early May: middle of quick correction up in overall downtrend
7*) just before mid-May: downtrend reversed into uptrend (pointed out in the post)
8*) mid-late May: uptrend resumes after small correction down

As a record, this looks pretty neutral to me rather than especially bullish... If the description was also intended to say "and the price is lower than on the previous day" that restricts it to the five cases I've put asterisks against - and while the record of those is positive (3 up vs. 2 down) it's hardly convincing... In short, the "Reliability: Low/Moderate" part of the description looks the most important part to me!

In general, if you want to decide how good a technical indicator is, you've got to look at all the places where the indicator happened and see how many of them picked out highs and lows - not pick out the highs and lows and see how many of them had the indicator happen at them.

Gengulphus

[xdavid] 12/8/2004 19:50

OK, I think it's back into the cave until I get woken up by the next RNS - probably the one announcing the March results date, LOL!

Cheers,
David

[popgunn] 12/8/2004 13:56

Yes it would, but it would be discontinuous, e.g. a pattern emerging from the small fry volume over a few days/weeks tells one story, then a huge dump/buy sends the price whichever way it wants in disregard to the previous, so if you watch the previous you get overriden big time, even if you were building up a solid, even predicting, picture. I think we're basically saying the same thing.