you are the mod.... do as you please and feel best.

Quote

ouch! A little more than 15 cents per pound is all what is left.

I received a lot of derision and insults for predicting this when the "upgraded" evaluation of IH to a ridiculous value first happened. I suspect it will eventually go to zero. Unless they switch to pure research and maybe even then.

I remember it clearly but I suppose it could be in another thread or possibly in ecatnews.com which is only available in the internet archives. I think you wrote that a lot of the original contents of this thread have been moved. And there is nothing from me anywhere before now in the bare remains in this thread (from any incarnation of me). I'll look if I have time but I probably won't.

Investors who lost millions in the collapse of a fund run by the former star stockpicker Neil Woodford have brought group litigation against the administrator in hopes of recouping at least £18m.

Neil Woodford investors sue administrators of collapsed fund

Law firm brings group litigation aiming to recoup at least £18m on behalf of 1,500 people

www.theguardian.com

The law firm Harcus Parker lodged its first batch of claims on behalf of 1,500 savers at the high court in London on Friday morning. Woodford himself is not the target – the claim is against the administrator of his fund, Link Fund Solutions, which is accused of failing in its duty to protect investors. Lawyers expect to expand the suit to represent at least 7,000 claimants.

The case will pile pressure on Link, which is also facing a claim from another law firm, Leigh Day, which could represent up to 12,000 investors.

UK regulations put administrators such as Link in charge of monitoring and supervising the investments executed by the fund managers.

Harcus Parker claims Link breached UK rules that require the firm to monitor financial risks and the liquidity of the fund, referring to how quickly investments could be converted to cash in order to pay investors. Poor performance of a number of Woodford’s investments, combined with his decision to put money in a number of private unlisted companies that were harder to sell, led to the fund’s suspension and eventual collapse in October 2019.

The once-star fund manager was subsequently removed as investment manager, and its administrator, Link, wound it down, returning money to many investors at a steep loss.

Harcus Parker is now suing Link for at least £18m, which it says is based on calculations of what investors would have earned through their investment had the firm not collapsed. The figure is also understood to take into account money that has been returned to investors through the winding-down – worth about £2.4bn. The fund was worth about £10bn at its peak.

About 300,000 investors were affected by the equity fund’s collapse three years ago.

Daniel Kerrigan, a senior associate at Harcus Parker, said: “Three years on from the suspension of the … Equity Income Fund, our clients are disappointed that it has become necessary for them to issue proceedings in order to reclaim their lost investments.

Aren't these all 'shell' companies trading on the unregulated London-based stock markets? Woodford is the cleverest one, giving everybody the slip! Industrial Heat emerges unscathed too, which is good for our LENR developments.

IH HOLDINGS INTERNATIONAL LIMITED Confirmation Statement 20/04/2022

82 shareholders, a few new

Good news for IH - but what about the rest of us studying cold fusion!

No worries mates, the lawyers will make everything right.

Woodford's WPCT fund, which contained the most "speculative" investments, was taken over by Schroders and renamed SUPP.

Since the takeover (April 2020) and subsequent "kitchen sinking" of the worst parts it has nevertheless done very little. The share price is around the same as when they took it over.

None of the toads seem to have turned into unicorns.

The good news is that at least the new fund managers have been able to pay themselves for the last two years so that has added to the sum of wealth creation.

The bad news is that one of the assets that Woodford poured money into, Rutherford Health with their proton beam cancer therapy, has gone bust in the last few weeks.

In this case they blamed the NHS for not wanting to give enough support to their product. So if the customer does not want the product that will be the fault of the customer then

Start-ups tend to be over-confident or exaggerate, and sometimes even lie, about their product, their timeline to market, and other things.

I suppose if a start-up was under-confident, or under-stated their product, then they are not likely to get the investment funding.

So it is the job of the investor to be able to make the extremely tricky decisions on whether a start-up is worth investing and how much to risk.

Clearly Woodford was not so great at that.

As far as IH is concerned Woodford WPCT invested in it in 2015 and Woodford was already talking to them before this (possibly a year or more).

So seven years later, nothing to show for the investment and Woodford funds out of time and money.

Fortunately I had already exited WPCT before the bitter end, so my losses were not as catastrophic as some.

Now I am mostly in lithium mining - what could go wrong

Quote from ZenoOfElea

Now I am mostly in lithium mining - what could go wrong

Switching over to sodium-based batteries.

I still expect Industrial Heat to capture a portion of the CMNS Energy Tech market, of which there is plenty to go around. This will more than make up for losses incurred to Leonardo Corporation, Team Rossi. Interestingly their profit entry may come through Team MIT. I need to review their patents. Who else is IH partnered with? A full list would be useful.

I think...

The energy market will quickly grow five fold, ten fold with the advent of clean inexpensive market ready "cold fusion" energy; then exponentially as humanity expands to the asteroids and Mars.

In this light...

All teams should help each other with quick successful market entry.

Everyone wins in this version of a CMNS Energy Tech race. I hope Carl Page and Peter Diamandis like this idea.

Do we really need a top dog winner or is this the perfect example of a win win situation?

Personally I would still be happy if IH succeeded with their LENR research. I don't really care who gets across the line as long as somebody does, and the sooner the better.

Many stories on this forum tell of lone researchers or small teams who are desperate for funding and support. Well IH have certainly had significant funding (although I am sure they wanted more) and significant time and still nothing to commercialise.

I invested in Woodford because of his amazing track record.

Having a strong interest in LENR I then increased my investment when I heard that Woodford was backing IH.

Woodford assured us that he had done a year or two of due diligence on IH and was very happy to back them.

Lowly private investors do not often get a chance to be involved in something so potentially momentous as a new energy source.

So investment in a Woodford fund with IH as the cherry on top if it came good, seemed like a good choice at the time.

Where we are now, if I had a chance to invest in IH again I would not do it, it is not for small fry, private investors.

I presume they have something to show their existing investors that is impressive enough for them to put up the money. But then Woodford was impressed also!

What we do know is that despite Woodford's due diligence and his confidence and despite Dewey's optimistic comments from some years ago and despite more than seven years and millions of dollars their timeline to market could be imminent (less likely) or never (more likely).

This is a similar story to BLP (which I also would not invest in) and Brillouin and others.

Brillouin at least have been able to produce more encouraging "evidence".

The lesson seems to be that investing in LENR is for those that are willing to risk significant amounts for maybe ten years or more with a high likelihood of getting nothing.

Of course the potential payoff is huge.

Fortunately there are such individuals around but can LENR catch their interest?

How do you judge a scientific/technical investment when everything is so secretive and if you wanted to pay a mainstream scientist to provide professional evaluation they would likely not want to risk their reputation.

Quote from ZenoOfElea

How do you judge a scientific/technical investment when everything is so secretive and if you wanted to pay a mainstream scientist to provide professional evaluation they would likely not want to risk their reputation.

Excellent summation.

Will this change? What would it take?

IH are taking generous management fees for a fund which is handing out small spoonfuls of money and demanding total secrecy in return. Not I suspect something which makes for a happy team.