SUM - Summerset Group

SUM share price just on 50% of the RYM shareprice

SUM valued about right v the gold standard

Just shows you that PE ratios aren’t a meaningful way of ‘valuing’ stocks in this sector.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by winner69

SUM share price just on 50% of the RYM shareprice

SUM valued about right v the gold standard

Just shows you that PE ratios aren’t a meaningful way of ‘valuing’ stocks in this sector.

---

Oh - No, how could you mix up "valuing" and "pricing"?

Market sets the price as it pleases. Price is what you pay.

Value is what you get (in this case with SUM a much nicer PE-ratio and much higher long term earnings).

I prefer value. A (sustainable) PE allows a quite good measure of the latter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BlackPeter

Oh - No, how could you mix up "valuing" and "pricing"?

Market sets the price as it pleases. Price is what you pay.

Value is what you get (in this case with SUM a much nicer PE-ratio and much higher long term earnings).

I prefer value. A (sustainable) PE allows a quite good measure of the latter.

---

As always you are right BP - the market sets the ‘price’ and ‘value’ is what you get

However ‘value’ is rather subjective and these days seems to be another word for ‘cheap’ or ‘undervalued’

So I got the words all mixed up (my bad) but what I was saying was that I think the current market ‘pricing’ of SUM around $6 is pretty spot on - if there is such a thing it’s about ‘correctly valued’ but not as the other meaning of ‘value’ implies ‘cheap’ at the moment.

I think PE ratios for retirement sector stocks are not appropriate for assessing ‘value’ - whether you are after an ‘intrinsic value’ or that subjective ‘value’ you talk about.

Like your term nicer PE-ratio .....conjures up a picture of a cuddly toy you want to cuddle.

Sorry to split hairs but it could be argued that the market "values" a company by setting a "price" from time to time. After all, where else does the commonly used term "market value" come from...………..

;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by macduffy

Sorry to split hairs but it could be argued that the market "values" a company by setting a "price" from time to time. After all, where else does the commonly used term "market value" come from...………..

;)

---

So true mac,

I sometimes think ‘value’ is a comforting reassurance thing. Like for those who believe in ‘price is what you pay but value is what you get’ it’s like saying/reassuring themselves I’ve got SUM (as an example) at a cheap price ......and it’ll be all honky dory as the ‘value’ I’ve gotten will be unlocked in due course.

Always turns out that way.

Buying SUM shares for less than half RYM shares - Cunning !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beagle

Buying SUM shares for less than half RYM shares - Cunning !

---

Seems a pretty fair price ...but that cunning?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by winner69

Seems a pretty fair price ...but that cunning?

---

Ask the Gold standard man. He reckons normal range is 50-60% of RYM price with the mid point being 55%.
Anything under 50% is extremely unusual and a great buying opportunity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beagle

Ask the Gold standard man. He reckons normal range is 50-60% of RYM price with the mid point being 55%.
Anything under 50% is extremely unusual and a great buying opportunity.

---

Since SUM floated average is 50.1% and has spent about half the time and most of the time has been between 40% and 60%

The SUM share price did spend a few months under 40% of RYM (when RYM was outrageously over priced / SUM under priced) and has spent a bit of time last year when SUM share price was over 60% of RYM (when SUM was totally over priced)

So SUM share price about right today v the gold standard.

Saying the gao between the two should close over the next year or two is a pipe dream eh Couts

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by winner69

Since SUM floated average is 50.1% and has spent about half the time and most of the time has been between 40% and 60%

The SUM share price did spend a few months under 40% of RYM (when RYM was outrageously over priced / SUM under priced) and has spent a bit of time last year when SUM share price was over 60% of RYM (when SUM was totally over priced)

So SUM share price about right today v the gold standard.

Saying the gao between the two should close over the next year or two is a pipe dream eh Couts

---

Objection...leading the witness :lol: I talked to Coutts the other day about this and as the author of the Couta1 relativity theorem he told me I can completely disregard the time they spent at 40-50% as a temporary aberration and it was always his intention that the Couta1 relativity theory to RYM is that the normal range is 50-60% and anything outside that range is several standard deviations from the norm and to be ignored. Your stat's matter for nought mate :p because he's the author of this theory and I have this 50-60% thing direct from the horses mouth a few days ago !

So going off this Gold standard (which we all know is permanent and nothing else matters, not PE's, cash flow, sales level's balance sheet stat's or anything esle lol) the normal level is 55% and at RYM's closing price of $12.35 therefore we should see SUM gravitate towards $12.35 x 55% = $6.79 so I'm looking forward to that in due course :)