-
19-10-2014, 07:34 PM
#2001
Originally Posted by nextbigthing
IMHO this method produces sh!t results.
Probably does mate but if it works for MAC it'll work for me as well.
-
19-10-2014, 07:41 PM
#2002
[QUOTE=NT001;512461]FWIW I pulled the following trading totals in ATM from Yahoo.com for the six months April 17-Oct 17, correlating them with the fall in share price over that period.
April 17-30 (10 days) 13,774,100 shares SP fall 85c to 81c
May (22 days) 44,229,000 80c to 78c
June (21 days) 50,863,000 78c to 69c
July (23 days) 21,331,400 70c to 65c
August (21 days) 21,907,000 63c to 64c
September (22 days) 25,193,500 62c to 58c
October 1-17 (13 days) 8,686,800 59c to 55c
Six-month total 185,984,800 85c to 55c
Trades equivalent to 28% of the company’s 660,066,979 shares on issue have taken place in six months.
There were three days, in May-June, when trades exceeded 10m shares, and there have been three other days when they were approx 6m or above. The last really big trading day was 26 August (8.25m)[ bang on information NT but with all these sells whose buying without triggering the substantial holding requirement
-
19-10-2014, 07:42 PM
#2003
[QUOTE=ziggy415;512492]
Originally Posted by NT001
FWIW I pulled the following trading totals in ATM from Yahoo.com for the six months April 17-Oct 17, correlating them with the fall in share price over that period.
April 17-30 (10 days) 13,774,100 shares SP fall 85c to 81c
May (22 days) 44,229,000 80c to 78c
June (21 days) 50,863,000 78c to 69c
July (23 days) 21,331,400 70c to 65c
August (21 days) 21,907,000 63c to 64c
September (22 days) 25,193,500 62c to 58c
October 1-17 (13 days) 8,686,800 59c to 55c
Six-month total 185,984,800 85c to 55c
Trades equivalent to 28% of the company’s 660,066,979 shares on issue have taken place in six months.
There were three days, in May-June, when trades exceeded 10m shares, and there have been three other days when they were approx 6m or above. The last really big trading day was 26 August (8.25m)[ bang on information NT but with all these sells whose buying without triggering the substantial holding requirement
omg dont drink and post...i,l get back to ya
-
19-10-2014, 07:54 PM
#2004
[QUOTE=ziggy415;512494]
Originally Posted by ziggy415
omg dont drink and post...i,l get back to ya
What, too much A2 bad for you
-
19-10-2014, 08:15 PM
#2005
[QUOTE=winner69;512495]
Originally Posted by ziggy415
What, too much A2 bad for you
nah..was trying to say top info NT but fingers went one way and brain didnt move at all.....was just wondering who was doing all the buying with no one triggering substantial shareholder notice
-
19-10-2014, 08:59 PM
#2006
Member
[QUOTE=ziggy415;512496]
Originally Posted by winner69
nah..was trying to say top info NT but fingers went one way and brain didnt move at all.....was just wondering who was doing all the buying with no one triggering substantial shareholder notice
My guess would be fund managers (long term kiwisaver funds), with less than 5% and a multitude of small investors seeing that 55c is pretty good value, worth a crack based on perceived growth expectations, and sharebroker price targets around the 70c to 80c range. I am predicting that Milford will not buy much more in the near future given that it is getting closer to the 20% of issued capital mark and the liquidity issue inherent in the shares.
-
19-10-2014, 09:16 PM
#2007
Appears as ATM is slowly having a lower weighting in some Milford Funds.
Probably a combo of both ATM price decline and Milford not topping up anymore (buying other things wih their inflows instead)
-
19-10-2014, 09:26 PM
#2008
Some tend to try and build risk into a DCF base case like Forsyth Barr very often do, but that just leaves a prospective investor in a position where they must then analyse very carefully for themselves exactly where the analyst has been fair or unfairly conservative. It means their valuations can be very often a bit low too.
Some prefer to apply company set goals and targets and forecast beyond there based on available market analysis and product cycle growth curve estimates for each market and product. At the end of the day the company is the closest to the business, they may not be correct and there are always unknowns, they may perhaps though have the best window seat.
But, at the end of the day if anyone is trying to use DCF to model short term (under six month) moves in share price, forget it, there are much better type of model for that, DCF won’t help you with that much.
DCF.jpg
-
19-10-2014, 09:43 PM
#2009
Originally Posted by winner69
Appears as ATM is slowly having a lower weighting in some Milford Funds.
Probably a combo of both ATM price decline and Milford not topping up anymore (buying other things wih their inflows instead)
Yes isn't it great that they don't see a need to average down from their massive overall buy in at around 80c. Milford must have good faith in the company which is great. Unless you're trying to buy in cheaper still aye Winner
-
20-10-2014, 12:36 AM
#2010
Originally Posted by nextbigthing
Yes isn't it great that they don't see a need to average down from their massive overall buy in at around 80c. Milford must have good faith in the company which is great. Unless you're trying to buy in cheaper still aye Winner
Probably the manager cursing under his breath hoe he got into this situation and hoping like hell somebody offers 80 cents to takeover A2
At least same fund not down on XRO yet
Tags for this Thread
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|
Bookmarks