Woodford Patient Capital Share Discussion Threads

[daffyjones] 15/5/2018 08:58

Why did you sell on the next working day, when the share price was still massively below the launch price? Surely if Woody is such a biotech genius, you'd expect the share price to rise further at least to get back where it started at 100p. Why did you turn your back on this guaranteed future profit? Could it be that you don't actually have faith in the long term prospects of this Patient Capital Trust?
Thanks for joining us bears! Glad you saw reason in the end.

[daffyjones] 14/5/2018 15:59

Andy - I apologise for that, you did post at the time about your buying and selling.

[andyj] 14/5/2018 15:08

Not sure yet, but I will post when I buy. Funnily enough I did last time and was mocked by My Retirement Fund for investing in a certain loser. A few weeks later when I took profits after making 14%, daffy Jones found it hard to believe. Some rather odd bears on here that are riven with schadenfreude.

[jamesjamiebarlow] 14/5/2018 14:38

Andy Jay. What price would you be buying back in at?

[solonic] 14/5/2018 13:52

Thank you for posting, andyj. The voice of sanity is much appreciated. I long to achieve your equilibrium one day. Perhaps it is the influence of the Orient?

[andyj] 14/5/2018 13:10

WPCT has edged back to the top of my watch list on a risk reward basis. After the disappointment of Prothena I had been wary of an exodus, but it has not followed. Instead there has been an appropriate and orderly markdown while investors await the next news, suggesting WPCT holders are indeed patient. The bears on here, aggressively and repeatedly demanding reasons why anyone should buy are missing the point. When the successes in the portfolio become known, you will be buying at a considerably higher price. I am not back in yet, but the potential rewards are beginning to outweigh the potential risks.

[chucko1] 14/5/2018 11:37

1tcm1, you are a fool.

[chucko1] 14/5/2018 11:36

Littleweed1 - it would be most helpful if you could describe (only in general terms) the “forensic̶1; methods you refer to.

I asked a similar question of a poster called Trollwatch. I did so because I and others were labelled as being his aliases, and that poster also claimed “forensic̶1; methods. For such a truth seeker as he/she/it, I regret no response as yet.

[1tcm1] 14/5/2018 11:28

Tom here, of course.

All this is nonsense. All this is nonsense. All this is nonsense. Topvest and me are just bosom pals, just bosom pals. Anyone saying anything opposite, opposite is a homophobe. Our friend Chucko will vouch for that, for that.

[mochyn] 14/5/2018 11:13

But, topvestwinnie, you were wrong in your emphatic, explicit prediction were you not? People have made real money in taking the opposite view.


How long do your prophecies remain open? Until the last Trump?

HA HA HA. You were caught out as a disreputable charlatan and you don't like it!

[topvest] 14/5/2018 10:56

Mochyn - LOL. I hardly think that one month in the stock market is a judge of any comment. I think months and years & not weeks!
I've filtered you for spamming me. If you can't take people having a contrary view then don't bother reading these boards.

[ltcm1] 14/5/2018 09:21

Blind bulls LOL.

Saltraider lets just say I scored top marks with the judges :)

[topvest] 14/5/2018 07:36

There you go again. Having a go at people, rather than discussing the facts / responding with a bull case!

Its just amazing how blind bulls are here. Looking at "Excess returns", which is a great book by Frederik Vanhaverbeke, then this is an excellent example of "Consistency Bias". This is also called "confirmation bias" and is the inclination of people to remain loyal to their original opinion by rejecting discomforming information.

[saltraider] 14/5/2018 00:31

Hi Tom, you've been posting only since 9 February this year using this particular false identity. Out of 50 posts over this time, all but one was made here on the WPCT thread and every single one of those sets out the same pessimistic, deramp case. This has been noted.

It's a consistent performance, Tom, but sadly not convincing in view of the fact that this alias was obviously established with one objective in mind and is clearly not an actual person.

Also, why the one post on Capita? I expect you just got mixed up. It's bound to happen, I suppose, when you try to manage so many multiple identities.

How did you get on with Pandora and Chantalle the other evening? Sorry ... I shouldn't have asked.