http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2004/05/23/ccjack23.xml
Edmond Jackson Telegraph 23rd May 2004
Don't fret too much. Don't try to be clever
It looks like a bumpy few weeks ahead as markets grope for values that take account of new
and different risks.
The easy profits of earlier this year are over. Of course, potential buying ideas still arise almost daily, but the question of what to sell to finance them constrains me.
Should I reduce my exposure to the oil industry to buy into hard-hit shares? Oil shares have done well and experts keep citing the risk of a further spike in oil prices upsetting the global economy.
During the 1991 Gulf War experts alerted us to a similar risk. As now, this was a possibility rather than a probability. But oil markets are inherently volatile and when you hear of such fears, it can mark a current high point.
Oil prices eased and stock markets rallied mid-week on talk that Opec would raise production.
For private investors, the risk with trying to trade on the basis of such news is that you end up on the wrong side of market shifts. Even hedge fund hotshots get some trades badly wrong.
As a long-term investor, I try to balance my portfolio roughly in line with the big picture, with occasional contrarian moves. I ignore what is just market noise. It is so easy to get tempted just when a short-term trend is about to reverse.
I am not "protecting" my portfolio with derivatives (such as contracts for difference).
Trying to outguess volatility seems a recipe to lose money; it's an inherently speculative activity.
On balance, I don't see oil prices above $40 a barrel as sustainable, but this uncertainty is damaging confidence in 2005 forecasts for companies generally. Shares may remain under
pressure this summer.
The prospect is not pleasant, but it's closer to economic reality than the market complacency earlier this year. Brokers are prone to lapse into a happy consensus of predicting earnings growth. After all, their role is to sell stock. Financial life, unfortunately, is rarely such a steady progression. Expect jolts to market confidence.
One problem with trying to hedge via oil shares is that they aren't rising commensurately as others fall. Oil companies have themselves hedged an element of production at lower levels, and the stock market expects oil prices to retreat eventually. So while I think a portfolio should be at least 20 per cent weighted in smaller oil and gas companies, one must be steeled for volatility.
Unless you have already increased your cash position, or anticipate trouble for particular shares, I would ride out the current swings. Don't fret or try to be clever.
A new chief executive in a recovery situation is among the most potent of factors that can drive change.
Thus, when shares in PlaneStation fell from about 5p to 4.25p, with the market,
I added to my stake.
Institutions that invested heavily in last December's 4p-a-share placing (and open offer) were reported to be impatient about the lack of news on property sales. So the chief executive was replaced. In situations like this, directors may sweat to line up progress; a new boss gets appointed and takes about six weeks to settle in, during which there is scant news. Then it starts to flow.
A first sign of PlaneStation opening up was the news last week (accompanied by a press conference) of the company taking a 30 per cent stake in EUjet, a start-up airline due to begin flights from Manston airport in Kent. This should help Manston market itself to other airlines, and if its business model can be made to work then surrounding land values will be enhanced.
I recognise risks but was encouraged that the new chief executive - a recovery specialist - judged that the prospects merited extending his commitment to run the company from nine months to two years. Implicitly, he recognised upside in the shares by negotiating a total of 25m share options exercisable at 4.47p. This was confirmed seven weeks after his appointment, ample time to assess PlaneStation. Any capable director also investigates a company before joining it.
As I continue to invest money in the shares, guessing the likely scenario, I don't like a situation where the chief executive is geared to the upside but none of the downside risks.
Furthermore, this is another example of where the exercise price of a major option deal is struck ahead of anticipated news.
A higher threshold, based on return to shareholders, will be set for the second tranche of 12.5m options. But as a shareholder one feels in a different boat to the boss, when corporate governance is meant to align interests.
The remuneration committee ought to clarify how this is being achieved when seeking shareholders' approval for the options.
The way various directors and managers are being cleared out has a flavour of autocracy.
For example, on Tuesday a non-executive director was sacked "after a loss of confidence by the executive board". But the initiative to hire and fire non-execs must not come from executive directors (even though in this case it was supported by the chairman). Non-execs sometimes need to be a thorn in the sides of management if they are to do a proper job.
Such are the niceties of corporate governance. A raw truth about autocratic chief executives is that they can make a lot of money, especially in turnaround situations.
My approach is to hold PlaneStation shares firmly and be vigilant.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2004/05/23/ccjack23.xml