Woodford Patient Capital Share Discussion Threads

[solonic] 19/6/2018 17:20

You must be extremely thick, Chuckol. I can think of no reason why I should defend Woodford. He'll have to do that himself. All I can say, have said, need to say, here on the WPCT thread is that I am still reasonably happy to hold WPCT. I'll tell you if I change my mind.

I know full well why the shareprophet, perhaps a collective noun, perhaps not (IDC), is hysterically and repetitively demonising Woodford. However if you like you can put forward another lame excuse as to why 90% of the posts, obviously not anywhere near that amount of actual posters, persist in this ineffective charade. There's hardly anybody listening, absolutely nobody believing, and I'm only here for the beer.

(Claiming that topvest is a know-nothing know-all is not a sufficient excuse.)

[chucko1] 19/6/2018 16:25

Solonic, yet another idiotic post. You are batting 1.000 on that.

Try defending Woody properly and please stop leaving it all for me to do!

[solonic] 19/6/2018 16:12

"chucko119 Jun '18 - 16:02 - 3454 of 3454


... on the basis that he may rediscover his way after 30 really successful years (taken as a whole)."


I'm not entirely sure that Minerve has had 30 really successful years. He might claim that, I suppose.

trollwatch did foretell that the shareprophets clucks would leap to Minerve's support. Can you be sure of your ground, though?

[chucko1] 19/6/2018 16:02

Yes, he's lost his way but I own some on the basis that he may rediscover his way after 30 really successful years (taken as a whole). If and when that happens, I am happy to add far more. I once thought this was one of my two sure fire investment line items, along with Fundsmith. Still own a bunch of the latter (in EM form), but little of the former.

So I agree, this is a most useful debate for those mature enough to see things from differing angles and weigh the evidence.

[trollwatch] 19/6/2018 15:57

Oh, now we know, because topvet knows everything about the future, doesn't he Minerve?

[topvest] 19/6/2018 15:54

It’s pretty obvious to most that Woodford has lost his way. You might wonder why we are interested? Well it’s not a buyers market. There’s nothing much to do until wait for the crash at this point in a 9 year bull so Woodford debate is interesting.

[topvest] 19/6/2018 15:50

Put the stalkers on filter Minerva. I believe you.

[minerve] 19/6/2018 15:46

Oh no, I've lost credibility, oh dear me. ROFLMAO!

[trollwatch] 19/6/2018 15:42

YES is the short answer.

The shareprophet gang will pretend they believe your explanation. (Most convoluted paragraph this year award.) But even they won't really.

Very sad. No standards these days..........

[minerve] 19/6/2018 15:37

Oh no, I've lost credibility, oh dear me. ROFLMAO!

[littleweed1] 19/6/2018 15:34

It's not in my normal province to comment on such things, but it looks very clear that
Minerve has lost all credibility after that last post.

However, I do not follow events here to know whether he had any credibility before. "Best ever performer on WPCT shares" or suchlike seems to be an unwarranted boast..

I wonder what really happened to those shares. He might have sold them : it would probably have had to be at a significant loss. Hmmmm

[minerve] 19/6/2018 15:13

chuckol

You are starting to become a bit of a bore.

First, I was a Woodford investor - back in the day (2014) - and have, over time, lost confidence to such an extent that I am no longer a Woodford investor. WOW, difficult one to comprehend eh? ;)

Second, some of my activity are trade/invest hybrids. I start with the idea that they are momentum trades - calculating trade sizes based on current share price and stop-loss points and shifting stop-losses as the share price increases. Sometimes these investments I decide to hold long-term and remove the stop-loss, and others I quickly get out of because of other opportunities.

Your holes in my trading activity are just that - holes - and if I could be bothered to look back to argue with a sad stalker like you I would find a quick sale afterwards for a very small percentage loss or gain (<1%). Really noise level to my investment in WPCT which was much larger, over a greater period of time and did return me c14-15%

So, there we go. Now run along little boy. :)

[chuckol] 19/6/2018 14:59

Minerve you give good chapter and verse for your 15% profit. Bought at float, sold in late 2015. Perfectly credible if unlikely.

Then there was your aberration when this year you bought and sold within a few days. A bit stupid but so what? You probably lost a bit then.

But you forgot to tell us when, if, you sold the two tranches you bought in 2016


"Minerve - 15 Jan 2016 - 15:00:29 - 622 of 3398 ::: WOODFORD PATIENT CAPITAL TRUST

I've bought back in.


Minerve - 18 Jan 2016 - 15:06:55 - 630 of 3398 ::: WOODFORD PATIENT CAPITAL TRUST

You either trust in Woodford or you don't. I originally sold out at 114-115p .....

(long piece praising Woodford).......

I have bought a tranche, and will be buying more!"


What happened with those?

[chucko1] 19/6/2018 13:57

IQ151, I am sure there are a number of investors who believe some of what Shareprophets opine on and are also investors in one or more of Woody's funds.

Don't see this as being mutually exclusive at all. You guys are needlessly sensitive to it.

[chucko1] 19/6/2018 13:52

Topvest, there is an exception I can think of - PFG, where Barnett added fairly meaningfully. But cannot think of others. The composition of Barnett's funds looks like the Invesco of yesteryear, with BP, BATS, LGEN, RDS, AZN etc. etc. being the top holdings, though with smaller concentrations as compared with Woody's days.

This has not been a winning strategy the past three years, but at least it's the strategy that you accept or reject with as much transparency as you would wish, and with as much or little of this in your overall portfolio as you would wish.

Where I agree with the doubters (of Woody) is that there has been a real shift in his focus which, in the case of the Income Fund, has clearly been unsuccessful so far. And this is where it relates to WPCT - PURP and PRTA have been introduced into the main funds and this has not so far helped matters. Has he become fixated on such things and insensitive to the risks of doing so? Cannot say for sure, but at least at Invesco there were stronger voices to provide counsel. But it seems he did not care for that.

The counterargument is that WPCT is what it says - Patient Capital - and three years is insufficient to derive much that is statistically reliable just from an NAV that is 13% lower (assuming an Autolus-adjusted NAV of 87-88p). Fine, but it still does appear to be a one man band with the same governance as with the Income Funds. Even geniuses could benefit from wise counsel. The FT article does nothing to dispel that fear.

[iq151] 19/6/2018 11:49

In answer to your stupid post 3437 chucko: normal WPCT shareholders are defined as anybody who is not a shareprophet adherent.

Admittedly very few on this thread: or so it appears.

[iq151] 19/6/2018 11:46

Cucko I understand the points you are making (apart from what you say about Minerve whose lying boasts have become insufferable, LOL)

I cannot gainsay your figures. There's never any point in denying relevant figures. The main problem is that basically they are relevant only to Woodford's other funds. Hardly any WPCT holders have any interest in those because their remit is entirely different. WPCT is a standalone product which has admittedly not done well recently, but most of us really believed it would take some serious time to come to fruition.

The trouble is that "all" winnie's mob suffer from premature ejaculation. There's no point in explaining to "them" that in a good relationship it takes sometimes a little more time for both parties to achieve a climax. Perhaps nobody explained that there was such a thing!

As for me I am perfectly happy to hold on to my WPCT shares. Currently they stand at a very few percentage points down. Unlike the genius "topvest" (idiot) I am not CERTAIN that I know the future on any of my investments. Nobody of any intellectual capability could ever claim that.

It would be easy on an anonymous thread like this to do a Minerve and claim that I have made some truly spectacular gains in my time. It would be true but I could not reasonably expect anybody else here to believe me.

In the meantime any specious caterwauling from the direction of the appalling shareprophets is hardly going to make me, or probably anyone else, sell, as things now stand.

[chucko1] 19/6/2018 11:43

Is a "normal WPCT poster" someone who cannot bear to hear anything non-positive about NW's funds, whether that relates to Stobart, the SP, the fund composition or anything else?

Fight with facts, not blubbing.

[chucko1] 19/6/2018 10:37

Sorry the coulmns got messed up between writing and what ADVFN actually shows! But it's pretty clear, anyway.

[chucko1] 19/6/2018 10:35

On the specifics of Minerve's share trading, who cares? Irrelevant to the facts - no more than irrelevant titilation.

Some facts: Three columns of numbers being 1) Woodford, 2) Barnett and 3) UK Equity Income Sector

(1) (2) (3)
YTD -6.01% -1.07% 2.04%
1yr -11.72% -3.41% 6.16%
3yr 1.30% 3.93% 7.20%
2015 16.16% 10.12% 6.69%

A few things becomme apparent:

1. Woody's initial perfoprmacne was great as he was starting the income fund

2. It has gradually been deteriorating both in comparison to the Sector (Equity Income Funds) and to the Invesco High Income Fund that Mark Barnett now runs solely.

3. The approach both Woody and Barnett take has increasingly underperformed recently. I really have no problewm with that at all and I like the way they run their funds in this respect and why I own them (far less so than in the past in Woody's case, but not in Barnett's case).

4. Arguably, Woody's performance has deteriorated even against Barnett as a function of the the increasing inclusion in his funds of smaller companies. And the smaller the company, the worse the performance.

So the risk is that Woody has moved away from his core speciality (great sector calls, i.e financials, tobacco, pharmas etc.) and has become an unsuccessful small/micro company stock-picker.

This can easily happen to any fund manager and it sometimes requires a tap on the shoulder. This is all very well when there is liquidity to change things, but in the case of WPCT and perhaps even the Equity Income Fund, there is some risk that this cannot be done without some meaningful loss of value.

[chucko1] 19/6/2018 10:15

Solonic, how on earth is it "the opposite"? I agree that it was not a direct quote from Woodford - everything else was. It was clearly an interpretation from the FT journalist, who, I suppose, has no axe to grind. What is likely is that was something that NW mentioned in the interview and was quoted in paraphrase rather than directly. But the opposite? Are you hallucinating?