Forum Archive Index - March 2002

["tennyson@caverock.net.nz" <tennyson@caverock.net.nz>]

Hi nick, 

>
>
>Have to disagree about GPG having no fundamentals.  Fairly easy for
>the analysts to come up with a fairly accurate approximation of NAV. 
> This is currently estimated to be around 2.33 cents a share, which 
>means the stock is trading around 20% discount to real value.
> 
>

I take your point on the net asset backing of GPG being the best way 
to assess it's value.   But given that GPG has always traded at below 
net asset value, are you saying that you would never sell?

How would you figure out when it is time to get out?

>
>  
>Similar companies in australia are generally trading at a premium
> to NAV this makes GPG look relativly cheap.  
>
>

What companies are you talking about?   I know of no similar company 
to GPG in Australia unless you count 'BIL International', which also 
trades at below net asset backing.

>
>
>furthermore GPG have proved very adept at growing NAV so as long 
>as the price follows the increase shareholders will be happy 
>and the stock will still be cheap.
>
>

Fair enough.  I'm not saying your wrong.  A track record is important 
to be sure.  But you shouldn't invest in GPG by only looking in 
the rear vision mirror.  SNOOPY


disclosure: No GPG shares held


  




---------------------------------
Message sent by Snoopy 
e-mail  tennyson@caverock.net.nz
on Pegasus Mail version 2.55
----------------------------------
"You can tell me I'm wrong twice, 
but that still only makes me wrong once."

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To remove yourself from this list, please use the form at
http://www.sharechat.co.nz/chat/forum/