Woodford Patient Capital Share Discussion Threads

[rocketblast] 13/11/2019 18:28

WPCT likely to have a 30% DROP as a MINIMUM like his other fund. Yes OVER 30% DROP SO WILL BE WELL UNDER 20p. Wot a disaster and disgrace....TOO RISKY FOR ANYONE....

[spectoacc] 13/11/2019 15:30

A good read, for those of us who genuinely follow Woody:


I'd agree some are going to zero, and some at massive discounts, but it's mostly the smaller stuff, post-IH, so a further c.33% seems too high to me. I'd guess nearer another 15-20% to come off the already-much-reduced holdings.

[jonwig] 13/11/2019 11:03

The administrator tasked with deciding the fate of Neil Woodford’s last open-ended fund has drawn up a shortlist of potential managers to take it over.

Link Fund Solutions, which Mr Woodford enlisted as an authorised corporate director to his business, suspended dealing in the £249m Income Focus fund four weeks ago, in response to the decision by the former star stockpicker to close his business.

In a letter to the fund’s investors on Wednesday, Link said it had held initial meetings with a shortlist of managers to establish whether they would be able to take it on or merge it with another of their products.

Link said finding a new manager for the fund was the best option for its investors, but it added it could still wind it up.

“This will result in the fund’s assets being sold in a way that seeks to best protect value and the proceeds of those sales will then be distributed to investors,” Link said. “In the event that we determine that the fund is to be wound up we will write to you setting out your options.”

In the four weeks since the fund was suspended it has lost 0.3 per cent, while its benchmark, the FTSE All Share, returned 2.1 per cent.

Income Focus has shrunk by half since Mr Woodford’s flagship fund, Equity Income, was suspended by Link in June. Most of the decline was a result of Hargreaves Lansdown, the fund supermarket that promoted Mr Woodford’s funds until the first suspension, withdrawing a large mandate.

[cc2014] 13/11/2019 10:35

No-one interested in ESL today? Another Woodford WEIF holding.

Bid for 51% of the company in exchange for £55m injection of cash through PIK loan notes.

Interest on PIK not stated but imho PIK usually means totally outrageous interest designed to pillage all value in company at expense of existing shareholders (see IRV for example)

[1oughton] 13/11/2019 10:02

sell this crock of sh1te while it still starts with a 3

[ltcm1] 13/11/2019 09:47

I think nearly all of it was in the IFF Specto. Can't remember where I read it but it was a reporting source like City A.M. This was around September.

[spectoacc] 13/11/2019 07:33

Thanks @Jonwig, and that RNS looks to be the increase?

Very strange - can see nothing under Link either (eg if whole position had been in IFF).

You'd think BlackRock would be accurate on the transfer, so guessing Woody sold but hasn't notified. Been busy with other things..

[jonwig] 12/11/2019 20:10

@ Spec - the last KIE RNS containing the word 'Woodford' was on 16/07, here:



and there aren't any which contain 'BlackRock', so somebodyis behind events.

[spectoacc] 12/11/2019 19:34

I've lost track, is Woody (or rather, Link or BlackRock) still in KIE? Was previously a big holding: remember that £5m of WEIF money he spent on the final average-down after the umpteenth p/w and backing the rights issue.

[kpo115] 12/11/2019 13:07

Do zoos employ monkeys then? I didn't know that.

[jonwig] 12/11/2019 12:10

Whatever you think of Woody, he would never have allowed his staff at WIM to behave like this:



If you employ monkeys, youll have a zoo.

[pugugly] 12/11/2019 08:05

jonwig:- Agreed re fleas See IP Group thread

PUGUGLY
12 Nov '19 - 07:49 - 899 of 899 Edit
0 0 0
jonwig: Re NAV - Still the same valuation problems of unlisted as you so well exposed in respect of Woody's unlisted holdings - Also as well exposed recently we "We DONT Work"!

All unlisted need valuing with a very large sack of salt especially where funding has come through EIS schemes which (IMO) is very discounted money.

The other problem with UK unlisteds is that many get sold onto overseas - usually American companies - before their IP has developed robust and profitable commerial development.

The discount here could therefore be well justified given the risk factors-

The above comment could also apply to MERC after the recent IC golden words. Even the house broker does not see profit for the next couple of years.

[jonwig] 12/11/2019 07:25

I've never given much thought to IP Group [IPO] - it's a Woodford dog-with-fleas, natch - but Questor in the Telegraph reckons his selling has provided an opportunity:

[spectoacc] 12/11/2019 07:24

@Goldenrain - thanks for the post, glad to hear you at least lost less than you could have done. Only got to glance at the BBs to see how many are still supporting Woodford, even now. What Neil claiming to do was not what he was actually doing, and that's putting it mildly.

You've loaned the market some money, hope you recover it before too long.

[johnwig] 12/11/2019 05:24

So, I'm sitting here on the stoop of one of my American homes, not long after midnight, after a fine dinner with intelligent dear friends, listening to the cicadas and sipping a sublime Napa wine.

I'm also reading investment counsel from a man who has lost a shed-load of money on BUR, another who, homeless, has never made any money but insists on asking people to pay for his egregious advice, and, hark, in the distance, a bullfrog making repetitive obsessive noises which have bored everybody else in the county into a restless sleep.

And I think to myself, maybe I am the stupid one after all. That Oxford First, that hard won MBA from Harvard and I simply cannot in conscience put the words together to definitively and with such certainty tell the world where to put its money in a safe and profitable sanctuary. I can only do it for myself.

[chucko1] 11/11/2019 23:01

@Goldenrain, I am glad the board was of help. The reality is that each one of us has something to learn from other posters who may have some expertise different from one’s own whether that be in a given share, or financial sector.

@Tim3, it was the 100% sale of AZN within WEIF, but with no sales within the St. James funds and similar which did it for me. One simply HAD to start looking closely at the behaviour of the fund manager rather than the individual investments (that was bad enough, but his record had been good).

[tim 3] 11/11/2019 22:21

Solomon7 Nov '19 - 13:36 - 197 of 229

Thank you for posting absolutely fascinating in depth look at his fund.

The way it changed from mainly safe value stocks to highly speculative and momentum plays is spectacular, it basically changed identity completely.

Investors have every right to feel angry.This was not just bad luck he exposed them to a high level of risk totally at odds with with the way the fund was marketed.

[jonwig] 11/11/2019 19:45

@ Goldenrain - your first post, I see, and thank you for writing it, though I'm sorry to read it. Whilst you've suffered a loss, looking at the chart it could have been so much worse. A great many were taken in, and unfortunately are unlikely to get redress.

[goldenrain] 11/11/2019 19:06

I would like to thank jonwig, spectoacc, psychochomper, chucko1 for their posts.

WPCT has costed me a 4 figure sum which could have been much more but for the discovery of this BB.

Notwithstanding having sold back in June I follow this saga with interest. Why? In 30 years of careful investing I have never lost so much and am still kicking myself for buying the pitch from WIM without doing the research.

[psychochomper] 11/11/2019 18:03

”Surely humph's point still stands.” Yes, it will stand forever as testimony to the consequences of being blinded by denial.

You complain of repetition, but it seems it was the charitable nature offered by many of us to keep warning those of you who were ill-equipped to see the wood for the trees. Just trying to educate and inform where possible. Cannot really speak for anyone else.

[psychochomper] 11/11/2019 17:50

I did not predict that WPCT would “go bust”. Merely that it was “doomed - doomed, I tell you”. Whatever the reader on this board takes away from such a comment*, it lies in contrast with “filling one’s boots” (after mistakenly [and repeatedly, like a virgin trader] seeing a fall as overdone).

If the point of this board (or any other, for that matter) is to educate and inform, it seems Balliol still has something to offer. And effortlessly, in keeping with past tradition.

* 78p to 31p within a few weeks for an investment trust would satisfy the meaning of such a comment.

[chucko1] 11/11/2019 17:42

I’m not sure this finds support here.