Woodford Patient Capital Share Discussion Threads

[harveydee] 06/12/2017 18:41

PRTA no longer c 17% of portfolio because it has crashed almost 35% in price over past month ! Another spectacular Woodford blow-up. Down 6% today alone as I write. He's certainly consistent in picking 'em !

[minerve] 06/12/2017 14:31

Essential

That is my point from earlier. Until the other companies pick-up, if they pick-up, you are having to invest in the behaviour of one single volatile small company that dominates the WPCT portfolio. If you are building up an investment in tranches - like I do - it makes investing more difficult because of increasing volatility; at least until you have a few performers in the fund.

[essentialinvestor] 06/12/2017 13:21

I may be misreading this, Prothena comprises approx 17% of the fund holdings?.

[stewart64] 06/12/2017 13:06

I'd be grateful if someone could point me in the direction of an 11% nav discount on a share bundle as opposed to illiquid trusts that hold property etc. I do agree that those shares look highly speculative and I respect the bearish opinions.

[diku] 06/12/2017 13:00

Low 70's...

[riverman77] 06/12/2017 12:59

I don't think an 11% discount is particularly attractive. There are many decent trusts with established records on 20% or higher - see no reason why WPCT should not eventually fall to those sort of levels if performance doesn't pick up soon

[stewart64] 06/12/2017 12:44

andyj..regarding the nav, we are now about 11% shy, pretty much unprecedented to get such a discount off liquid assets (shares). I have the same reservations as you regarding the prospects of thoses shares. I'm not invested here but it's tempting just because of the nav discount alone. Also because the shares are very speculative, I guess at least I would get diversification ..investing in stuff I absolutely wouldn't under normal circumstances.

[minerve] 06/12/2017 11:44

Another problem is that when a company's growth/value accelerates in the fund it quickly becomes the dominant asset which most likely increases volatility because the behaviour of the share price will reflect one company rather than a basket of companies. Building up an investment here becomes increasingly difficult as volatily - for a while - increases. Comments????

[andyj] 06/12/2017 10:51

A new low for the NAV, 91.63p. There continues to be no reason to think this is a good investment.

[rackers1] 06/12/2017 08:01

up ticked you Minerve ;-)

hpcg - great post indeed. I too think he was carried somewhat at invesco by his team of analysts.

[minerve] 05/12/2017 20:20

Yeah, another red down tick! Keep them coming baby, I love it! 😘

[minerve] 05/12/2017 17:26

Essential

I think his positioning was deliberately emotive to attract Brexit supporters to his funds. He has had over £1Bn outflow on his flagship equity income.

If you think about it, his audience demographic will be predominently Brexit voters; middle-aged or older with money looking for a home, particularly with respect to income generation.

[essentialinvestor] 05/12/2017 17:01

M, surprised by his choice of language on Brexit, without getting
in to the debate!. He could have expressed his bullish UK outlook without
resorting to emotive language.

Notice he has taken a stake in ESNT, CEO bought £500k's worth recently.
I have a small position there, does not look particularly cheap to me though.

[minerve] 05/12/2017 16:38

Thanks for the down tick. I like red. 👍

Keep them coming.

[andyj] 05/12/2017 16:06

NAV lowest since Nov 21st today.

[minerve] 05/12/2017 14:36

Essential

Yes, like you, I am not completely convinced to stake much in cyclicals at this point. I do have house builders in my portfolio and they have been the better performers over the last month or so.

Woodford has a little patching-up to do with respect to his PR and if he is not careful he might be painting himself into a corner.

[essentialinvestor] 05/12/2017 13:15

M, you read the FT article I'm sure.

What did you make of his take on UK cyclicals and his conviction of ultimate
validation?.

It seems late in the cycle to me to stake a lot on cyclicals.

[minerve] 05/12/2017 13:03

hpcg

One of the best comments I have seen on this thread for a while.

When he had the blue-chips in the fund it was very attractive. Small companies are like babies, they never stop needing capital (milk). As soon as those blue-chip income generators disappeared the operational flexibility of the fund was compromised.

I have invested here perfectly - of course success always needs fortune. I bought in at the beginning and sold out, if I remember rightly, at about 14% return. This hasn't been off my watchlist but I am becoming less and less attracted here.

[ttg100] 05/12/2017 11:32

yup me too thanks hpcg
keep thinking about buying back in but think will hang on for a bit longer

[essentialinvestor] 05/12/2017 11:15

Appreciate the view hp.

[hpcg] 05/12/2017 10:07

Not on my watchlist! This is the first I've looked since float and only because it flashed in front of my eyes on the front page of ADVFN. From the first few words of the Prothena blog it looks like NW is far too close to management. This was probably mitigated at his last employer where he had a structure of analysts around him.

To my mind his archetypal failure has been RM2. I too was invested there once, but it became apparent that they were getting no traction in the market. Someone kindly posted some information about how the pallets were perceived by users - they hated them. The combination of anecdotal and financial information made it quite apparent to those able to move their emotions out the way that it wasn't working. That's difficult if one meets a persuasive management team once in a while.

At the moment I can't see him getting more money, so how does he pay interest on the debt? Does he sell winners (not a good idea) or losers (may not even be possible)?

This is a real shame as the UK needs big lumps of VC money if we are to produce the mega caps of the future. If WPCT fails, as looks reasonably likely, this will be more difficult.

I disagree that this should have been a VCT. It should really have been an unlisted VC fund with a multi year lock in, with a mandate for minimal investment in already listed companies.