Ann: 2016 AGM Presentation, page-55

Take a CR.

Say, what?
You want to apply the analogy of a capital raising to a company for which the notion of a capital raising is a complete anathema?

Because, this particular business:

a.) has a surplus capital position,
b.) currently generates surplus capital, and
c.) has always generated surplus capital (so much so that it has been able to fund - without any recourse to shareholders for capital - over 5%pa CAGR is Revenues over several decades)

Maybe the unwitting souls who are clients of stockbroking firms might be swayed that sort of alchemic argument which sprouts forth daily from the talking heads manning the sales desks operating out of Canary Wharf (or on Throgmorton Street throughout the ages), but more independently-minded investors are these days sure to view it with the copious amounts of circumspection it surely warrants.


"You ignoring volume is like a chef trying to prepare the perfect meal but ignores the vegetables!"

As for your culinary analogy, I think it, too, is clearly also way off the mark.

For, I can show you a long list of shares that have made for quite excellent dining (i.e, created significant wealth for their owners) over extended time periods without any consideration whatsoever given to a single vegetable in their preparation (i.e., share trading volumes).

You may as well have said ignoring volume is like a chef trying to prepare the perfect meal but ignores stuff that has no bearing on the quality of the meal, like the direction his stove faces, the colour of his apron, or the day of the week he was born.