Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Quote  |  Bullboard  |  News  |  Opinion  |  Profile  |  Peers  |  Filings  |  Financials  |  Options  |  Price History  |  Ratios  |  Ownership  |  Insiders  |  Valuation

Regal Partners Ltd V.RPL


Primary Symbol: VGIPF

Regal Partners Limited is an Australia-based company, which operates as specialist alternatives investment manager. The principal activity of the Company is the provision of investment management services, specializing in alternative investments. It is engaged in managing a diverse range of investment strategies covering hedge funds, private markets, real and natural assets, and capital solutions on behalf of institutions, family offices, charitable groups and private investors. The Company has seven alternative investment management businesses: Regal Funds Management, PM Capital, VGI Partners, Taurus Funds Management, Attunga Capital, Kilter Rural, and Merricks Capital. The Company operates offices across Australia, Asia, United Kingdom/Europe, and North America.


OTCPK:VGIPF - Post by User

Comment by InvestorSuperfanon Jun 18, 2013 12:48pm
119 Views
Post# 21537873

RE: RE: Will Eric Nuttall Do A Bruce Campbell

RE: RE: Will Eric Nuttall Do A Bruce Campbell

grasshopper, I agree that everyone should do their own due diligence and not blindly rely on Market Call or Market Call Tonight guests when making their investment decisions. My point was that I think Market Call / Market Call Tonight guests step over the line when they keep recommending a stock over and over again as the stock tumbles downward, then all of a sudden indicate they sold their position between appearances on the show. Bruce Campbell was a classic example of this (though to be fair, he is not the only one who has been guilty of this act). During his March 26, 2013 appearance on the show, he stated that RPL is a company that still tests the cheapest in the models he uses and has been oversold at $1.64 per share. Then, about six weeks later during his next appearance on the show (May 10, 2013) after the stock plunged to $1.23 per share, he reveals he sold his RPL shares (presumably at some point between March 26 and May 10). The Q1 2013 numbers revealing the debt problems were released on March 21, 2013, five days before his appearance on the show, and he even mentioned the debt issue during his March 26 appearance. How do you go from stating that RPL tests the cheapest in the models you run to selling your stock six weeks later? Do the models he runs have serious flaws? I would not have had a problem with this chain of events if, on March 26, Mr. Campbell had stated that the Q1 numbers came in, the debt is an issue, and he is re-evaluating his position in the stock. This way, at least investors / viewers know that he has some significant concerns about this stock going forward and may even end up selling his shares. That would be helpful. But don't say the stock tests the cheapest in your models and is oversold one appearance, then say you sold your shares during your next appearance six weeks later. The only instance I can think of where the aforementioned would be understandable is if say, foul play was discovered between his appearances on the show and thus was unknown at the time of his last appearance (eg. company falsifiying their financial statements, company or its management involved in criminal activity, etc.) . Short of that, you lose credibility with the viewers, and it as least gives the appearance you may not have been sincere with viewers when you gave the stock a vote of confidence even after the debt issue came to light.

<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>