Cameron  00:06

Welcome back to QAV episode 620. We’re recording this on Tuesday the 16th of May 2023. It’s about 2:21pm on the east coast. The markets having a terrible day again. How are you, TK?

Tony  00:24

I’m good. Having a better day than the market, I guess.

Cameron  00:30

It’s gloomy out there. I believe that today at some point, the former boss of the RBA, Glenn Stevens, gave a little talk at some little conference. The Westpac Melbourne Institute. No, that was something else. Anyway, he gave a little talk. Oh, here we go: The Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association, where he said, there’s probably going to be more interest rate rises. Market obviously took him seriously. I woke up this morning and read The Fin and it said the market was gonna open higher today. And it did not. It opened much lower. So, anyhow.

Tony  01:13

Yeah, but like, it always amazes me how, like, I watch the morning news as well and it’s “oh, the markets expected to open higher today.” It’s like, honestly, if you knew that was 100% accuracy what are you doing working as a reporter at The Fin well or for ABC News, or whatever, just trade the market. But of course, it doesn’t have any sort of correlation to what’s going to happen next.

Cameron  01:36

All these financial journalists would be rich. They’d be doing the podcast.

Tony  01:39

Yeah, exactly.

Cameron  01:43

Well, let me talk about the portfolio. I did my weekly report on it this morning. It’s looking pretty good. Since inception — for new listeners, that’s the beginning of September 2019 — our dummy portfolio is up. According to Navexa, it’s up 16.99% per annum CAGR versus the STW, which is up 7.21. Little bit less than two and a half. I think I worked it out this morning, it’s about 2.35 times the index over that period of time, which is pretty good. Coming up to four years. This financial year, the benchmark is still ahead: it’s 16.41 we’re 12.33% per annum for the financial year. So, we’re having an okay year, but not as good as the index for the quarter. Still kind of neck and neck. It’s overtaken us a bit recently. 1.65 versus us, 1.38 for the quarter. In the last week it’s been kind of, you know, fair to middling. A few stocks are up: ASG is up 7.3% this week, in the last week I mean; DUR up 6.74, SRG up 3.47. On the other end of the scale, SKT is down 3.61. I just bought that, too. Replaced Myer with SKT and it immediately went backwards, so thanks for that, Sky. Reject Shop was down 3%, IGL down 2.12%. But, you know, nothing big. Nothing big up, nothing big down; the markets kind of just coasting sideways recently, nothing really exciting going on. Have you had any big wins lately, TK?

Tony  03:28

In my portfolio? No. No, I’m gonna have to flag with full transparency, I’m probably going to-I’m almost definitely gonna underperform the market with my own portfolio this financial year as well. But we’ll wait and see. A miracle could happen in the next month or so.

Cameron  03:45

Are you bothered? Are you concerned about that?

Tony  03:48

No, not at all. I mean, there’s been plenty of years where I’ve underperformed, and it often gets followed by outperformance, because that’s how statistics work, right? When you have an average outperformance, any sort of underperformance is going to be followed by outperformance.

Cameron  04:02

And if you just stick to the system and just keep doing what you’re doing, you know that eventually it comes good.

Tony  04:08

And psychologically, there’s always a temptation to say, “oh, I should just sell everything and buy an index fund,” right? It’s probably the wrong time to do that. Once you get to near the end of the year and you’ve found out you’ve underperformed, it’s more likely to be your chance to regress to the mean and outperform as the indexes. So yeah, it’s the wrong time to change tack.

Cameron  04:28

Yeah, but in that book, What Works on Wall Street I read a year or so ago, he said that’s what a lot of the professional fund managers he knows kind of do. They’ll follow one sort of system of investing for six months or a year and it works well. And then when it stops working, they’ll try and jump on another horse for a while, and it doesn’t really work.

Tony  04:48

Yeah, and that’s a real advantage that we have over the professional fund managers. I mean, we’re kind of professional because we’re doing a podcast about it, I guess. But I mean, the ones that have to go out into the market every half or every year and have their performance measured. I mean, yeah, if we had a fund out in the market and we underperformed, we’d have people redeeming. And so, we’ll do everything we can to try and get back to the index. And guess what, if you do that enough times, you hug the index, which is what a lot of fund managers do. So, the people are paying fees for no benefit. Or they make dumb decisions. Like, you know, it’s the one time you underperform in a long period of outperformance, and so people sell, and of course you bounce back the next year and keep bouncing back and they’ve left the train. So, yeah.

Cameron  05:32

But if I look at the All Ords for the last year, twelve months today, it was trading at 7350. Today, it’s at 7432. So, it’s really just gone horizontal for twelve months. It hasn’t been a great time for the market. If I go back two years today, it was 7299, and it’s now 7450. Sorry, 7430.

Tony  06:01

So, how does the index go up 16% like you said?

Cameron  06:04

Well, that’s the STW I’m comparing it to, it’s like the 200, not the All Ords.

Tony  06:10


Cameron  06:10

So, the All Ords is a little bit broader, right?

Tony  06:13

Yeah, a little bit broader, but it should still… The STW should make up the bulk of it.

Cameron  06:19

Well, if I go back to two years ago, the STW was trading at 65. It’s now at 65. So, the STW has moved in two years, according to Yahoo Finance. One year ago, it was at 66. Now it’s just under 66. So, it hasn’t moved at all in a year. But if you go back to the beginning of this year, it started at 62 and it’s now at 66.

Tony  06:48

Oh, sorry, okay, so you’re looking at a rolling twelve month versus the financial year.

Tony  06:52

Yeah, it’s a good question. I haven’t done a lot of thought about it, but I did look at PRN when you raised the question before the show. And to me, it looks like they’re largely servicing the gold industry, gold mining industry.

Cameron  06:52

Yeah. If I look at, you know, the last six months, it hasn’t moved much either: 6064 to 65. So, yeah, it’s a little bit different to the All Ords, but yeah, it too has been sort of travelling more or less horizontally over the long haul. Hey, let me ask you a question: PRN Tony? PRN. I was looking at them, Perenti this is, I was looking at them last week. They were a buy last week. I was struggling to find anything to buy to add to our portfolio. I was sitting on a bit of cash in the light portfolios and in my Super, trying to find something to buy. PRN was a buy but a hard one to figure out, and I ended up buying it and then rule oneing it a couple of days later, so didn’t really work out. But it’s exposed to the mining sector, and I was trying to figure out exactly what kind of risk it was. So, as I understand it, Perenti basically sell picks and shovels to the mining sector. But they’re involved in lots of different projects, copper, gold, coal, all of which at the time were a sell or a Josephine. Gold is a buy this week. No, it turned around. But I couldn’t figure out how closely their revenue is actually tied to the underlying commodities of the sectors that they serve. Have you ever done any digging into PRN and thought deeply about their exposure to underlying commodities like that? Should we tie them to the underlying commodities of the businesses they’re involved in? Or are that one layer abstracted out of that, is my question.

Cameron  08:39

Yeah, mostly gold.

Tony  08:40

Which, as you say is, is having a good run. So, I would think, without doing any research into PRN or knowing that well, that yeah, if you’re servicing one particular commodity industry, you’re going to be tied to how the industry is going. I would have thought if the gold mining industry was turning down that there’d be less outsourcing work. I think Perenti make a lot of money from operating mines on people’s behalf, contract mining, as well as providing engineering services and data services and things like that. But you would have thought that work would ebb and flow with the underlying industry, and I think in this case, it’s mainly gold. So, yeah, I’d be tempted to use the gold commodity chart to work out whether to buy or sell this one.

Cameron  09:24

Right. Well, I’m just, I don’t know. Like, if I look at the gold chart itself, let’s say over the last five years, and then I overlay Perenti on that they look nothing alike.

Tony  09:40

Really? There goes my theory.

Cameron  09:45

Well, I mean, should there be a correlation if they’re tied that closely to gold. You would think there’d be some correlation, right?

Tony  09:53

I would have thought so, yeah. I mean, they’re not going to have the one-to-one correlation, perhaps, because, well, I don’t know what their contracts are like, Cam. If they’re doing contract mining for a gold company, are they getting a percentage of the revenue or percentage of the earnings? Or are they just getting paid for their time, basically? I’m not sure.

Cameron  10:12

I would assume it’s the latter, but I didn’t… But if I look at their five-year chart, Perenti five years ago was trading at about $1.17. They’re currently trading at $1.19. So, that’s been their five-year going sideways. They went up, you know, a bit and down and all that kind of stuff. They’ve had some peaks and troughs, but they’re basically exactly where they were five years ago. If I look at the gold price, Australian gold price, over the last five years, you know, it was sort of 1644. It’s now 3012. So, it’s doubled in the last five years. Perenti has just gone sideways. So, they don’t seem to be correlated.

Tony  10:53

Okay. Well, look, if they’re not correlated, there’s no point using gold. I’m just looking at them in Stock Doctor, and yeah, they have diverged quite a bit. That’s the test I always do on these things, is it correlating with a commodity chart?

Cameron  11:07

Yeah. I looked at gold, it didn’t seem to correlate with gold. I looked at copper and nickel and it didn’t seem to correlate with those very well, either. So, I just ended up taking a punt and it didn’t go well.

Tony  11:20

Well, I mean, that’s the thing. If you can’t make your mind up, just go back to the normal three-point trend lines and the rules to buy and sell. Because as you say, a lot can go on from a corporate level with a company like this. Like, it could be acquiring companies or selling companies, it could be winning contracts, losing contracts, all that kind of thing, which aren’t necessarily correlating with the… And then you’ve got the gold price on top of that, and how the industry is doing on top of that, but normally it’s a broad brush. If the industry is doing well and you can track into the industry, you’d have to be really stuffing up to not make money.

Cameron  11:54

Yeah, well, there you go. That was a tricky one. Didn’t really get me anywhere. But it’s been a tough week for a lot of stocks, so I wasn’t surprised that I had to rule one it. Buffett. We spoke a lot about Warren last week, I don’t want to speak anymore, but I did read this. I like this. He was talking about Ben Graham’s book, The Intelligent Investor. He said, “I wrote Harper Collins a note the other day because they’re bringing out another edition. I asked them how many copies have been sold, and they said the records didn’t go back far enough, but they had 7.3 million copies of this little book that changed my life. Everybody keeps bringing out new books and saying a lot of other things, but they aren’t saying anything that’s as important as what he said in 1949, in this relatively thin little book.” Now, I’ve got a copy of The Intelligent Investor. I don’t think it’s a thin little book.

Tony  12:46

No, it’s not. And it’s also damn hard to read, too, because it was written in the 1930s.

Cameron  12:52

And I don’t know how… Like, they’ve obviously sold millions and millions and millions of copies of this book over the last whatever, how many years that is. Seventy-odd years, eighty years?

Tony  13:04

Well, no, it’s a hundred I think, isn’t it?

Cameron  13:06

Well, he said 1949? What year did it come out?

Tony  13:09

Ah, okay. Okay, no, possibly, yeah.

Cameron  13:12

But there are millions and millions and millions of successful value investors. I’m pretty sure there’s probably a loss, but I don’t think there’s that many. And, you know, that just made me think. I mean, one, what he’s saying is, I think, terrific, like, nobody’s written anything that’s better than the Intelligent Investor in terms of the underlying ideas and the influence of those ideas. It just gets back to what you said, like, I remember buying it for the first time when I was eighteen or nineteen and trying to read it, and just doing my head in. I gave up and you know, I think that’s… Like, the value of what we do on the show is trying to take these ideas and making them digestible for people. Teaching it in a way that those of us that have an average intelligence can get our heads around and apply the ideas behind it.

Tony  14:05

Yeah, I think what Warren’s saying is there are some key concepts in the Intelligent Investor which are good for all time, really. Even though you can queue up Alan Kohler and say, “this time it’s different,” it’s still the fact that the markets are a weighing machine. Not a weighing machine in the short-term but a voting machine in the short-term, weighing machine in the long-term, and that you need a margin for safety when you buy things. They’re probably the two key concepts. And then the concept of Mr Market I think is another one that was there. But, you know, there’s a whole rest of the book on things that Ben Graham was talking about. I recall things like net nets, and he goes into when you should be buying bonds versus shares and how to find a deep value stock by looking at different key metrics like we do and coming up with a score for the stock. So, things have evolved since then, but the basic concepts are just as beautiful as ever. They’re as simple and unchanged as they ever were. So, when people come along and say this time it’s different. It’s just rubbish.

Alan Kohler  15:05

“It is different. Every time. It’s always different, Tony, it’s never the same.”

Tony  15:09

Well, the thing that’s the thing that’s not different is we haven’t evolved in the last hundred years. It’s not possible that we could have evolved in the last hundred years, so the stock market is always going to be Mr Market, Mr Manic Depressive, who comes to you with a price every day. And people are going to buy based on where they think the votes are, they’re going to vote on the stories rather than weighing up the balance sheet and the P&L of the company — that hasn’t changed in a hundred years — and Ben Graham was the first person to, you know, to talk about that.

Cameron  15:38

And as Warren said — we quoted last week — the opportunity in investing is always other people doing dumb things. That doesn’t change either.

Tony  15:48

That’s right. “This time it’s different is not different.” That’s the dumb thing that’s been said before the dumb thing that gets done, every time.

Cameron  15:59

Yeah, anyway, I like that. Let’s talk about the buy list, Tony. So, Alex and I were having a chat yesterday and the question came up, and I know the two of you have been talking about it as well, should we keep putting the Josephine’s and stocks that have an underlying commodity sell in the buy list each week, and then just forcing everyone to filter them out when they actually trying to decide what to buy? Or should we leave them in? And Alex and I talked about it in some depth yesterday, and one of the reasons I kind of like having at least the Josephine’s, and the commodity sells also in there, is because they can change during the course of the week, and I don’t want to have to do a new buy list every day. I do need to trade stocks, particularly with the size of the portfolio’s that we manage now, several times during the week often. And, you know, what I can do now is just use stock history to update the share price and I can quickly check to see if it’s still a Josephine, what the sentiment is, and you know. It may be the commodity, like, gold did change from last week to this week. Commodities can change sometimes relatively quickly, and we want to get in on it when it changes. But do you have any thoughts on whether or not we should take them out? Are there any other reasons to take them out of the buy list each week apart from making the buy list smaller?

Tony  17:21

No. So, I think I probably confused Alex on the weekend because she rang up and asked me whether she should include the stocks that weren’t above the second buy line, but were above the buy line, and I said, “well, they’re Josephine’s. You include those,” and she said, “well, I’ve only got buy and sell, what do I do?” So, I said, “well, they’re a sell, so you can’t include them.”

Cameron  17:43

Wait, no, they’re not a sell.

Tony  17:47

Well, she said, “I’ve only got buy and sell, what category do I put them in?” So, I said, “Well, they’re not buy, so they’ve gotta be a sell.”

Cameron  17:53

But if we hold them, we wouldn’t sell them.

Tony  17:55

Correct. But she only had “buy” or “sell”, and I wouldn’t buy them if they were below the second buy line.

Cameron  18:01


Tony  18:02

So, I confused her. And then she rings up a little bit later and says, “I’ve only got twenty stocks on the buy list tab, what have I done wrong?” And I thought straightaway, well, I probably made the wrong call there. So, “go back and make all those stocks that haven’t got a second buy line buys and see what you get.” And she got the normal buy list that came out. Long story short, I agree with the way it’s done now. Include them all, but let people know that as of the time of the download, “this one’s a commodity sell, this one’s a Josephine,” and that they should check if they’re not doing it on the same time as the buy list is downloaded.

Cameron  18:35

Yeah. We do have, thanks to one of our club members — I can’t remember who it was now, might have been Chris, or Gary — somebody built some code that we put out in the buy list now that does show people what’s a Josephine. It uses Excel stock history to do that. So, yeah. Taylor sometimes complaints to me, “ah, it’s too hard. I have to filter everything when I get your buy list. I have to filter this out and filter that out. I just want it clean so I can just look at it and know what to buy.” And I get the rationale. But yeah, as I said, things change quickly to over the course of the week. Like BRI, Big River Industries. I added that to one of our light portfolios today. It was a Josephine yesterday when I checked it and today it’s not. Or it was having a down day yesterday, maybe, and today it’s not. One of the two. But things change day by day, and if it’s not on the buy list you don’t know to check it. If it is on the buy list, so it’s past our fundamental checks: it’s above the first buy line, it’s above the sell line but it’s a Josephine, it’s there so you can quickly do a check as the week progresses rather than having to do a new buy list every day.

Tony  19:53

Yeah, so just helped me out here because that’s the way I do it. So, if I’m needing to sell a stock, say I’ve just received an alert something’s crossed the sell line and I need to sell it, I will download from Stock Doctor into my version of the buy list, which I think is different to the one you put out. I download it and then I’ll call up the scorecard, which is put out every week, and check for the commodities if it’s a commodity stock, or I’ll jump into the Brettelator and check for a second buy line or a Josephine if it’s some other reason, before I buy. Maybe it’s a bit easier for me because I’m looking at large ADT stocks. I might only have to do that half a dozen times before I exhaust the buy list or find something that I want to buy. But that’s the process I go through every time, regardless of who puts one out.

Cameron  20:37

So, what are you getting with the new download that you do from Stock Doctor? If you do one on a Monday and you do one on Thursday, the only thing that’s changed in Stock Doctor, unless it’s reporting season, the only thing that’s going to have changed is the price, right?

Tony  20:50


Cameron  20:51

So, in the version of the buy list that we put out on a Monday that uses Excel stock history, every time I open the spreadsheet it updates the prices of everything. It doesn’t update it in a way that it updates the scores. So, the QAV score doesn’t change over the course of the week as the price changes.

Tony  21:10

I’m sorry, I just was gonna say, if you really wanted to be anal about it, you should check the PE ratio. If it was scoring on the PE ratio as being the lowest, that the price movement hasn’t changed that score.

Cameron  21:23

Yeah, those things could change.

Tony  21:25

Yeah. But then again, we’re only talking about maybe a slight change in the rankings and those kinds of things.

Cameron  21:31

If something comes up to buy and I look at the price when we did the analysis on Sunday night, and I look at the price today, and it’s changed by 10%, I will run the numbers again.

Tony  21:43

Yeah, okay.

Cameron  21:44

If it’s changed by that much I’ll run it just to make sure it hasn’t, you know, the QAV score hasn’t dropped below point one or whatever. But generally, you know, prices don’t change that much over the course of a couple of days.

Tony  21:56

The only other thing I do check from time to time, especially if I can’t find something on the buy list. One is to check that there hasn’t been something reporting in the intervening period. So, in the last couple of weeks, the bank stocks have reported, for example, and stocks like Elders and Eclipse, Eclipse has got a new name, but the old Eclipse, haven’t reported. So, that’s one thing. But they should come out on your buy list when you do a new download if they’ve changed their scores. But they do require you to go through and do the manually entered data, at least on my buy list. And the other one is to go down the list into what’s not on the buy list, in my version of the spreadsheet I still have those stocks that didn’t make it and look to see if anything is popping up close to sentiment and then go and check on those. Because like you said, if the sentiments gone up by 10% since the last time you did the buy list, they still might be coming up in the stock filter in our spreadsheets as not having passed the buy line. So, you can drop down. The way my spreadsheet works, if you drop down to things which are scoring above 0.1 again but they have negative sentiment, you’ll see them all grouped in the spreadsheet. And I will run through those occasionally as well to make sure nothing new has come on the buy list that we haven’t got a sentiment check for.

Cameron  23:08

Right. And so, they might have gone from a 0.08 to a 0.1.

Tony  23:14

Well, yeah, they might still be 0.08 because we haven’t updated the manually entered data, because sentiment checking is still a manually entered data thing. So, yeah, they might be 0.08 on the spreadsheet, but if you go into the Brettelator, you might see they’re a buy because the stock price has moved. So, you’ve got to go in and add that score and then check it again.

Cameron  23:32

Yeah, so there is good reason if you want to be that anal about it, doing it each time you run it, not just using Monday’s list and updating the prices, I get it.

Tony  23:42


Cameron  23:43

I’m not going to do that.

Tony  23:45

I think it’s probably fine to just use the weekly one that Alex does that you guys pull together and provide, and as you say, just finesse it during the week.

Cameron  23:55

Before I buy anything, I am in the habit of checking the news, all that kind of stuff, just in case. I still miss things from time to time. But yeah, I’m trying not to let anything slip through the cracks. Alright, I’ve got one more thing to talk about. Plato Investment Management, Dr David Allen. I read, I think, something in Livewire, a quote from him yesterday that I liked. He said, “I just learned the other day that the great Don Bradman, the best cricketer of all time, only hit a handful of sixes in his career, and his whole philosophy is ‘you don’t get out if you just hit the ball on the ground.'” And Alan went on to say, “that’s very much akin to our strategy. We’re looking to consistently eke out Alpha every day, every week, every month, rather than betting on any one stock or one thematic.” I thought, well, that sounds like us.

Tony  24:48

It does. Yeah, I agree. Yeah, and I’ve spoken about it before. I think there’s only been one time in my investing history of twenty plus years where I’ve had, you know, a really good return of twenty times my initial outlay. So, generally it’s just things getting… See, I’ve had plenty of three and four times my initial outlay, so home runs. But yeah, mostly it’s some up, some down, and overall, they’re 20% up.

Cameron  25:13

I actually looked this up, because you know me, I know nothing about sport. I did know who Don Bradman was but that’s about it. I did look it up. He hits six sixes in his entire career. That’s incredible.

Tony  25:27

It’s amazing, isn’t it?

Cameron  25:28

The greatest batsmen of all time only hit six sixes.

Tony  25:31

Yeah, because he thought if I hit the ball into the ground, I can’t get caught.

Cameron  25:35

Yeah, right.

Tony  25:37

He’s right. He was like risk pricing his style of play. It’s like, getting six runs for hitting it over the fence wasn’t enough of a score to recompense taking the risk.

Cameron  25:49

Yeah, right. Yeah, it’s one of the things that I love explaining to people about QAV, like new club members. I had a couple of Zoom calls with new club members this week, welcoming them and just, you know, sort of talking through some stuff, explaining some of the finer points and the history of it and whatever, history of us and the show. But yeah, just that very idea. Like it’s, you know, just buying good quality companies that have a good history of producing a lot of cash, try to buy them when we can get them at a discount to what we think the valuation probably is, and just playing the odds on that. You know, more of them will do well than won’t do well and we’ll just make good solid returns over a long period of time. You don’t have to try and shoot out the lights, don’t have to take big swings, don’t have to hit sixes. It’s just consistent, disciplined performance.

Tony  26:43

And we’re also negating survivor bias by doing that, too, right? I mean, even though we are surviving in the market because we’re doing that, which is good, but the financial press and the financial bookstores are full of stories about people who took outrageous risks and made a billion dollars, right? And so, people think “that’s the way I have to invest.” But what’s not in those bookstores is the other nine-hundred-and-ninety-nine people who tried to do the same thing and they’re now waiting tables at the local cafe or something.

Cameron  27:15

That’s the book we should write. “How to take big risks and fail.”

Tony  27:21

Yeah, right. Yeah, we could. We could show people not what to do.

Cameron  27:26

Just go out and interview the hundreds and hundreds of people who thought they were really clever and then failed, and never recovered.

Tony  27:33

Or who took a big risk. And that’s one of the problems with investing I’ve found among people, is that it’s a bit like people who gamble. If their first win is big, they’re hooked. If they lose money on their first win, they go “oh, it’s not for me.” Which is probably equally as bad, at least in terms of investing. They should just learn how to do it better or give the money to someone who does know what they’re doing. But yeah.

Cameron  27:57

Well, that’s what I did. We talked last week about HotCopper. You know, I remember in the dotcom period betting, gambling a lot of money on a couple of shares, friends of mine’s shares, and it going south and just going “okay, well, obviously that was a stupid decision. I don’t know what I’m doing. I better just stay out of that.”

Tony  28:15

I guess I’m just kind of wired differently. Like, if I fail, and I’ve failed plenty of times, my brain just goes, “okay, what did I do wrong? How do I do it better? If they can do it, I can do it. Get your game face on, let’s work it out.”

Cameron  28:30

That is different. I think, you know, that is one of your strengths, is just tackling that. And then you’ve put the work behind it for thirty years figuring it out. Most of us, you know, I guess people do that in different aspects of their life, probably just not all of us do that. They’ll do that in their careers, or they’ll do that in a sport or a hobby or whatever it is, learning a musical instrument, learning how to play chess, just nothing that makes money. Not investing.

Tony  29:01

Nothing important.

Cameron  29:07

Yeah, all right.

Tony  29:08

Learning what not to do is as equally important as learning what to do. I’ve always said it’s just as important to have a friend who knows everything as it is to have a friend who knows nothing, because you can learn from both. And shout out to Roddy, if he’s listening.

Cameron  29:21

I was just gonna say, I’m not going to ask you which one of those I am for you. I don’t need to ask. What have you got on your notes to talk about before we get into the Q&A this week, TK?

Tony  29:31

I only had one thing to say, and this is kind of a follow on from the pulled pork curse. Someone asked a couple of weeks ago to do a pulled pork on-there were two lithium mining companies on the buy list. One was Pilbara Minerals, and then the other one was Allkem, ALLKEM, and I chose Pilbara Minerals. But Allkem was part of a merger deals in the last week and their shares have shot up like 20% or something. I now know if I can find an industry where there’s two companies on the buy list and do a pulled pork on one, I can short them, but I can also go long on the other one I don’t do a pulled pork on. So, good luck to anyone who owns Allkem. They were on the buy list, and they were in a lithium mining stock, which was an unusual thing to find on our buy list. But of course, with the lithium price being up they’re throwing off lots of cash, that’s why they’re there, I guess. But yeah, they announced a huge merger deal during the week with a US company and their stock went up a lot.

Cameron  30:29

Wow, what’s their share code, do you remember?

Tony  30:32

I think it’s ALK from memory.

Cameron  30:34

Yeah. Oh no, that’s Alkane Resources.

Tony  30:38

Oh, no, that’s the wrong one. No, it’s Allkem. Alkane is a goldminer, I think, from memory.

Cameron  30:44

Oh, goodness, me. Look at that. Yeah. Shot up from 10 bucks on the 20th of March to about 15 bucks today. $2.50 in 2020, $2.30. So, if you got in on it then, that was a good ride. We wouldn’t have. But there you go, somebody rode it all the way up.


Cameron  1:31:17

The QAV Podcast is a production of Spacecraft publishing Proprietary Limited, authorised representative of AFSL 520442, AFS representative number 001292718. Please don’t make any investment decisions based solely on listening to this podcast. This is presented as general advice only and not personal financial advice. We don’t know your personal financial circumstances. Please see a financial planner before making any investment decisions.