We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.

Trending Now


It looks like you aren't logged in.
Click the button below to log in and view your recent history.

Hot Features

Registration Strip Icon for monitor Customisable watchlists with full streaming quotes from leading exchanges, such as LSE, NASDAQ, NYSE, AMEX, Bovespa, BIT and more.

WPCT Woodford Patient Capital Trust Plc

0.00 (0.00%)
17 May 2024 - Closed
Delayed by 15 minutes
Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Woodford Patient Capital Trust Plc LSE:WPCT London Ordinary Share GB00BVG1CF25 ORD 1P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  0.00 0.00% 33.60 33.55 33.90 - 0.00 01:00:00
Industry Sector Turnover Profit EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap
0 0 N/A 0

Woodford Patient Capital Share Discussion Threads

Showing 11526 to 11538 of 11725 messages
Chat Pages: 469  468  467  466  465  464  463  462  461  460  459  458  Older
Humphbumph, the point of all these comments was to try and get people like you to understand that there was indeed a relationship between the different funds. Can you STILL not understand that? Or was it pure coincidence that they have all crashed at the same time? Same question applies to your 4 green goddesses. The only difference between them all is the nature of the crashes: head-on, over a cliff and equipment failure.

humphbumph - 09 Jun 2019 - 13:16:02 - 7422 of 11151 ::: WOODFORD PATIENT CAPITAL TRUST ::: - WPCT
Spectoacc. Your first post here was just one month ago, which I would call "very late in the day".

And now that I am here I would venture that you seem to be very confused. You never make clear which of the Woodford instruments you are attacking. There are important differences between open ended and closed ended funds, of which you seem to be unaware.

Besides this is the WPCT thread. See the heading. As far as I can ascertain most of your comments were addressing WEIF which is of minimal interest to WPCT holders. Different kind of fund and very different type of investor.

@humphbumph - you'll find people who called it early (2016) and consistently, and are proven entirely right, tend not to be too popular.

Lucky for me, anyone unable to provide a coherent argument why they continue to support Mr Woodford can go on the filter list. Can only imagine how much money they've lost along the way, believing the likes of HL, STJ, WIM, the press, the BBs...

4 green ticks for your post says it all :))

@CC2014 - none, as far as I'm aware. Personally not a fan of him!

It doesn't look like SpectoAcc is very much held in esteem around here, LOL. Nor very well liked. I'm not really surprised. I bet he didn't twig that jonwig's last post was a piece of satire!
Andrew Bailey explained to the PSC why it had to be gated: a queue for redemptions would have led to a rump of wholly illiquid stocks which would disadvantage later people in the queue - ie. private investors.

Share Prophets yesterday agreed, and said the story must have been fed to the ST by Woodford or his PR team.

Does Woody still harbour hopes of a comeback? The obvious name, "Phoenix Asset Management" has already been taken. There's a bird called a Booby, though. Maybe Pelican. (Filthy creature.)

Disappointing Woody puff-piece on front of ST Business section yesterday. Basically saying how he was only given hours notice of Link suspending WEIF, how he'd not had a chance to explain how Kent CC could get their money back, how giving it back in specie hadn't been investigated.

Nonsense, of course. More revisionist history about how Kent CC's withdrawal request was the cause of the end of WEIF. It'd been losing c.£10m/day in redemptions, Kent were less than a months worth.

As for in specie - did they want handfuls of shares in all the still-unsold cr*p, the unicorns, and overhangs on the rest? How would that have benefited those still in?

The fact the fund still isn't liquidated - nor likely to be anytime soon - says it all.

They didn't have a cart big enough to transport you there, even in the utterly unlikely event that anybody wanted to hear what you had to say! LOL! You're not allowed to repeat your pap twenty times when you're on TV.
@ Ltcm1 - I sent you a private message.
Winnie, you must know what a shill is. If you, (or if by some miracle there is another honest person reading this thread, then that person, that rara avis) don't know what it means, here is a definition:
"a person who poses as a customer in order to decoy others into participating, as at a gambling house, auction, confidence game, etc. a person who publicizes or praises something or someone for reasons of self-interest, personal profit, or friendship or loyalty."

I imagine that what is quaintly called a 'deramper,' on these threads, the opposite of the above, also comes under the same definition.

Anyway it is not beyond the realms of possibility that you and Nigel Wray do that kind of work for each other. I know full well what I am talking about.

By the way, I am amazed that you still occasionally sing from the same hymn sheet as the benighted, verbose West Yorkshire thicko(s), jonwig and Specto. They are pointless and way below the salt.

A top UK fund manager and former protégé of Neil Woodford has been forced to apologise to investors over his performance after a leading rating agency flagged similar concerns to those that brought down the fallen star investor.

Mark Barnett, Invesco’s senior fund manager in the UK, was stung by the downgrade of his £6.1bn High Income and £2.7bn Income funds this week by consultants Morningstar. The funds, which include investments by thousands of UK savers and pension funds, were formerly managed by Mr Woodford before he left to set up his own business six years ago.

More a bye.
this must be a buy
Thanks @Solomon, yes, that seems to be all there is so far. Was very clear at the time when it was happening and a lot of posts about it (on the old thread now).

Hoping he goes on to talk about who set the valuations, and how they were set, as that makes the difference between IIF and WEIF. WEIF would have looked much worse.

The scandal, of course, is that Neil continued to claim he was investing as per the previous strategy - "Once in 30 year UK value opportunity" etc - whilst having a Top 10 consisting of the likes of BUR, Autolus, Benevolent, IH Immunopharma.

@SpectoAcc - Comparing 2014 style with the eventual 2018 makeup of the portfolio told me a lot that I didn't know. I guess you are already well informed.
Chat Pages: 469  468  467  466  465  464  463  462  461  460  459  458  Older

Your Recent History

Delayed Upgrade Clock