Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Guest_ringledman_*

Anthony Bolton 'bp Once In A Lifetime Opportunity'

Recommended Posts

Bolton or Mega on here?

I side with the guy with the 30 year record...

http://citywire.co.uk/money/anthony-bolton-bp-is-a-once-in-a-lifetime-opportunity/a414761

Anthony Bolton: 'BP is a once in a lifetime opportunity'FTSE 100FTSE 250FTSE 350.FTSE 100 -10.57 (-0.20%)

to 5148.28

by Charlie Parker on Jul 15, 2010 at 10:48

Legendary Fidelity investor Anthony Bolton believes BP now represents a once in a lifetime opportunity for investors to buy in.

Bolton, who now runs the Fidelity China Special Situations trust, said that he has searched hard for a way to buy into BP in his China trust but has conceded it is not a China theme.

He said: 'You have to take this as a top down view because I am not as close to BP as I used to be. But I have thought long and hard to see if there is anyway I could include BP in the fund but I really can't find a way to make it into a China play. I think investors are being given a classic once in a lifetime opportunity to buy BP.

'Most of the time it is the case that when something really negative happens investors worry about if and the reality is not as bad as the worrying. Okay they have to pay a lot of money out but my view is BP will survive and will prosper. This will just be considered a very poor chapter in its history.'

His backing for the stock comes as it is knocked in Washington by the decision of a Congress committee to effectively bar it from oil exploration in the United States for years to come.

Nonetheless, the company still trades at a deep discount to the perceived embedded value of its oil resources. The company is trading at 399.5p, falling 0.36% today.

No double-dip

More broadly Bolton does not believe the world is facing a double-dip recession arguing that investors are still caught in a negative mentality acquired during the credit crunch. In fact he argues the second phase of the bull run will start later this year.

He said: 'What we have had is the deepest recession we have seen and it was a global recession. Then we had the opposite of that; a sharp economic recovery. My view is this is camouflaging the underlying situation and as you get into this year it will become apparent that the world is getting back to a position of low growth. I don't see a double-dip recession in Western economies.

'We will continue to have low interest rates in the West and at some point people will start to look at risk assets because there is too much liquidity on deposit and that is not attractive. It will come back into stocks and shares.

'From the beginning I thought this would be a multi-year bull market. But we needed a significant correction and we are now living through that.

'Investors get very influenced by recent experience and because of this terrible financial crisis and sharp downturn investors worry we will get these things often. But my view is this was a once in a lifetime event.'

Edited by ringledman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Growth...sure...its all stimulus money and will fizzle....maybe he sees more stimulus in the latter part of the year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another guy living off the fact that he bought a bunch of value stocks when they weren't in fashion. Wonder how much of his personal wealth he has in BP.

Also when they roll out the word legendary you know the fund manager has nothing left to offer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another guy living off the fact that he bought a bunch of value stocks when they weren't in fashion. Wonder how much of his personal wealth he has in BP.

Also when they roll out the word legendary you know the fund manager has nothing left to offer.

he is a star....top performer for 30 odd years....could be luck....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

he is a star....top performer for 30 odd years....could be luck....

He buys cheap stocks which shows he is smart, but I'd rather take my chances with an index of cheap stocks rather than some guy who thinks he knows more than the rest of the world and charges a management fee that reflects that belief.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He buys cheap stocks which shows he is smart, but I'd rather take my chances with an index of cheap stocks rather than some guy who thinks he knows more than the rest of the world and charges a management fee that reflects that belief.

he ran the highly successful Fidelity Special Situations Fund, and supervised for a while the Global Special Situations fund till he "retired"...just couldnt go away and started the China fund with Fidelity.

Both these Special funds are still doing well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

he ran the highly successful Fidelity Special Situations Fund, and supervised for a while the Global Special Situations fund till he "retired"...just couldnt go away and started the China fund with Fidelity.

Both these Special funds are still doing well.

I don't know about here, but in the US if you had taken the smallest third of companies then bought the cheapest third of them, by say book value, and done the same every year you would have made over 16% per year for the last 50 years which is far in excess of the Dow or S&P.

You can go further and take the smallest tenth of companies and then only buy the cheapest tenth - you get the idea - and the return would be over 20%. And you would never have had to visit a company or look at a balance sheet. Just play golf every day.

If Mr Bolton has done better than that then he has indeed earned his money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He buys cheap stocks which shows he is smart, but I'd rather take my chances with an index of cheap stocks rather than some guy who thinks he knows more than the rest of the world and charges a management fee that reflects that belief.

The point of managed funds is that they should out-perform the index (i.e. trackers). A lot don't but the best do. If maganed funds didn't offer better returns than trackers they wouldn't exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Buying opportunities like this only come round once every 50-80 years :o

11271556.jpg

That's just what I was thinking. It's less than two years since it was last under 4 quid.

Utter, utter ****** from the financial services industry as usual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No luck was involved just the biggest credit bubble in modern history.

Yes there is some evidence from Japan that Anthony Bolton's style of investing wouldn't have worked so well in a deflationary environment. Might actually be better to buy growth stocks if prices aren't rising. Probably something to do with investors being unable to accurately discount the future when there is inflation that makes growth stocks too expensive and return less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know about here, but in the US if you had taken the smallest third of companies then bought the cheapest third of them, by say book value, and done the same every year you would have made over 16% per year for the last 50 years which is far in excess of the Dow or S&P.

You can go further and take the smallest tenth of companies and then only buy the cheapest tenth - you get the idea - and the return would be over 20%. And you would never have had to visit a company or look at a balance sheet. Just play golf every day.

If Mr Bolton has done better than that then he has indeed earned his money.

Unfortunately he couldnt match your 20% per annum. He only turned in an average of 19.5% per annum for 28 years.

Beating the index by 6% per annum.

Bolton finally stopped running Special Situations at the end of 2007 after 28 years. He generated an average annual return of 19.5 per cent compared with a 13.5 per cent return from the FTSE All-Share index.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/article-1231739/Anthony-Bolton-Its-years-Chinese-investment-fund.html#ixzz0u9ucx4zO

Not great really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure he's done well in the past, no denying that, but he's jumping on the Chinese bandwagon about 15 years too late.

Only prominent fund manager who realises China is Japan+ is Hugh Hendry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's just what I was thinking. It's less than two years since it was last under 4 quid.

Utter, utter ****** from the financial services industry as usual.

This is a typical answer from someone who hasn't a clue about investing.

I am sure you would think the stock offers better value at 650p?

The point is the stock market have been in a SECULAR bear market since 2000. BP since 98 or so.

SECULAR markets last on average 15 years or so. There is no guarantee in life that any investment will pay off, just look at the way cash on bonds are being destroyed by inflation currently. However Bolton has looked at the fact that the share has been in a bear market that will eventually end, looked at the fact that the share is trading at the bottom of its long term trading range and then thought of it as a buy.

Value increase as a share price falls.

Read some James Montier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it was such a dead cert the share price would already be higher.

BP aren't out of the woods yet.

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/predicted-bp-tries-pretend-new-leak-natural-seep

As Predicted, BP Tries to Pretend New Leak is a "Natural Seep"

George Washington's picture

Submitted by George Washington on 07/19/2010 18:48 +0100

Listening to the news this morning as I drove to work, I heard that BP is saying that the seep discovered near the blownout well might be a natural seep .

As I pointed out on June 24th (and again yesterday):

The Washington Post made a very important point yesterday:

Bruce Bullock, director of the Maguire Energy Institute at Southern Methodist University, said additional leaks are a possible source of deep-sea plumes of oil detected by research vessels. But this part of the gulf is pocked with natural seeps, he noted. Conceivably the drilling of the well, and/or the subsequent blowout, could have affected the seeps, he said.

"Once you started disturbing the underground geology, you may have made one of those seeps even worse," he said.

Remember that geologists have said that if the well casing is substantially breached, the oil and methane gas will find a way through fractures in the surrounding geology and make it into the ocean. For example, the Houston Chronicle notes:

If the well casing burst it could send oil and gas streaming through the strata to appear elsewhere on the sea floor ....

Obviously, if there are natural oil or gas seeps nearby, there are already pre-existing channels up to the seafloor ... so that may very well be the path of least resistance for the subterranean oil to flow up to the seafloor.

Therefore, if there were a substantial breach in the well bore, nearby natural oil and gas seeps could very well increase in volume.

Because BP would like to minimize leak estimates to minimize the damages it has to pay under the Clean Water Act, BP would undoubtedly try to pretend that the nearby natural seeps always had the same volume. In other words, the owner of the oil drilling prospect where the spill is occuring - BP - may be the only party to have mapped out the nearby seeps ....

So don't be surprised if - when formerly tiny seeps become gushers - BP tries to pretend that they were always that large.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point of managed funds is that they should out-perform the index (i.e. trackers). A lot don't but the best do. If maganed funds didn't offer better returns than trackers they wouldn't exist.

I can't be bothered digging out the actual evidence, but it goes something like this. Over a given short period say a year something a bit less than 50% of managed funds beat their index. Stretch out the time period to say 5 years and the number drops to maybe 20%. After 10 years there are only a few that have done so. The number that does so out of all the initial investors, and remember that many get fired along the way, is about what you would expect from chance.

Expensive management fees are just another way the finance industry leeches off the investor and dont forget that IFAs can get nice commissions steering you into the most pricey funds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's just what I was thinking. It's less than two years since it was last under 4 quid.

Utter, utter ****** from the financial services industry as usual.

And consider the total return including dividends over the past decade before making these sorts of statements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a typical answer from someone who hasn't a clue about investing.

I am sure you would think the stock offers better value at 650p?

The point is the stock market have been in a SECULAR bear market since 2000. BP since 98 or so.

SECULAR markets last on average 15 years or so. There is no guarantee in life that any investment will pay off, just look at the way cash on bonds are being destroyed by inflation currently. However Bolton has looked at the fact that the share has been in a bear market that will eventually end, looked at the fact that the share is trading at the bottom of its long term trading range and then thought of it as a buy.

Value increase as a share price falls.

Read some James Montier.

Have BP been pumping oil into the GOM for the last 15 years while being in this bear market or this a new factor that needs to be considered when judging value?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Expensive management fees are just another way the finance industry leeches off the investor and dont forget that IFAs can get nice commissions steering you into the most pricey funds.

Who the heck uses an IFA these days? They havent a clue.

Agree with you regarding fees.

Investment trusts are somewhat better than rip off unit funds. Although I wouldnt buy Boltons China fund with its performance fee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And consider the total return including dividends over the past decade before making these sorts of statements.

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/breaking-robert-gibbs-confirms-bps-oil-well-leaking-top-seepage-2-miles-away

Breaking: Robert Gibbs Confirms BP's Oil Well Is Leaking At Top, With Seepage 2 Miles Away

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 07/19/2010 20:20 +0100

Update: Stock right back up to pre drop levels, as BP says scientists conclude seepage naturally occurring, not related to Macondo well... The market seems to be buying it - after all it appears all the scientists have Ph.D.'s

From AP:

A White House spokesman says BP's ruptured oil well is leaking at the top, along with seepage about two miles away.

Robert Gibbs also says officials are monitoring bubbles that can be seen on an underwater camera.

Leaks could mean the cap on the well has to be opened to prevent oil and gas from escaping elsewhere.

The mechanical cap on the well stopped the flow of oil into the Gulf of Mexico on Thursday.

BP%207.19_2_0.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is that the 'bullet proof' BP divi?

Another poor response Pedro.

The point I made is that BP has consistently made a nice 4-6% or so dividend for many, many years. When judging a chart of BP's performance over the past 2 decades (or any stock for that matter) perhaps we should post the 'total return' chart with all those dividends reinvested rather than the share price alone?

Agree?

Secondly going forward, the 'bullet proof' dividend is a bit irrelevant. Obvioulsy BP is not going to be the big dividend stock that is was for the forseeable few years at least. However if a stock stops paying the dividend is that cash just lost? Perhaps it ends up back in the cash flow and eventually into the P/E and then the stock price?

BP's current price well reflects its future liabilities unless the unlikely $100billion outcome occurs (no certainties in life). The point of value investing is to minimise risk.

The stock is trading below its assets - most likely liabilities.

Risk reduces when a stock sells for less than its worth. Amazing how many on here see the opposite view.

Edited by ringledman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 261 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.