LONDON (Alliance News) - BP PLC on Tuesday announced it has invested USD20 million in Israel's StoreDot, a "ultra-fast charging battery developer".
According to the UK oil major, StoreDot's innovative battery technology can charge electric vehicles in five minutes. StoreDot aims to commercialize its flash battery for mobile communication devices as early as 2019.
"Ultra-fast charging is at the heart of BP's electrification strategy. StoreDot's technology shows real potential for car batteries that can charge in the same time it takes to fill a gas tank. With our growing portfolio of charging infrastructure and technologies, we're excited by our opportunities to develop truly innovative EV customer offers. We are committed to be the fuel provider of choice - no matter what car our customers drive," said Tufan Erginbilgic, chief executive for Downstream at BP.
BP said it believes that ultra-fast charging will be key in accelerating the adoption of EVs worldwide.
Doron Myerdorf, co-founder & chief executive officer of StoreDot, said: "Working closely together with a global energy leader is a significant milestone in StoreDot's direction of strengthening the EV ultra-fast charging eco-system. The combination of BP's impressive presence and StoreDot's eco-system of EV partnerships enables faster implementation of ultra-fast charging stations and could allow a better charging experience for drivers."
<BP cuts three per cent of jobs within its upstream workforce >
They didn't tell you this at the AGM did they? Wait a few days later for the bad news, standard tactic!
I've been telling you folk for some time now about the cash flow problems BP have and how they exist by fire sale of assets or increasing their debt. Now they can't hide any more, the first job cuts of what I foresee many more to come.
<According to a BP spokesman, the company will cut around 540 jobs of the total upstream workforce of 18,000 by the end of this year.
The reason for the cutbacks is that the company seeks to restructure itself to increase efficiency by cutting back the employees working within the crude oil and gas section of the company, following the $50bn (£37bn) divestment in the last few years.>
Looks like you have been drinking from the poisoned well. Nevertheless, thank you for replying but you should feel free to not reply for another few years as my main objective is to get my important information into the search engines. It is more effective when it goes unchallenged.
Every now and again, I like to see how my shares are going. Although delighted with the performance of BP, at long last, I was staggered and amused by the ramblings of Les B. Quite frankly a delusional nutter. Simply incredible - nutter. TGM
(but well done for making me post, haven't done this in years).
BP PLC (BP.LN) said on Tuesday that its BP Ventures business has invested $20 million in StoreDot Ltd., a company developing technology for ultra-fast charging batteries.
The oil-and-gas giant said it believes ultra-fast charging will be key to the wider adoption of electric vehicles and this investment will provide it with significant insight and access to promising new battery technology.
BP PLC (BP.LN) said on Tuesday that it will cut its global upstream workforce by approximately 3%, resulting in around 540 job losses, as it aims to improve the business's efficiency and competitiveness.
The oil-and-gas giant said that it was making the cuts to its 18,000-strong workforce in its upstream business, which deals with the production of crude oil and natural gas, as part of a continuing process to modernize the company.
BP said in a statement that it continued to focus on the efficiency of its capital spend to maintain competitiveness, adding that it remains committed to developing upstream opportunities and delivering its five-year growth plan.
<absolute nonsense - next time you fill up your car with petrol, or try to pay the mortgage or do a shop at tesco - offer them monero and see how far you get>
Au contraire, it will be the perfect form of money as it becomes more and more used throughout the world for commerce, buying a coffee at Starbucks, etc.
You still haven't realised the the advantage of Bitcoin as currency. Like Frog and others, you think governments back up currency, but really they enslave your wealth within the currency, meaning they can grab some of it or dilute it whenever they want. In the future it will become normal to take a % of everyones money for whatever situaton is labelled as a crisis. Then the money will work its way to the Oligarchs and owners through one route or another.
Bitcoin and Monero will enable you to escape that trap, and so it will prosper!
I will not drink from the same poisoned well that many others on this board, who call me mad, drink from. Remember the parable of the poisoned well-
There was once a wise king who ruled over a vast city. He was feared for his might and loved for his wisdom. Now in the heart of the city, there was a well whose waters were pure and crystalline from which the king and all the inhabitants drank. When all were asleep, an enemy entered the city and poured seven drops of a strange liquid into the well. And he said that henceforth all who drink this water shall become mad.
All the people drank of the water, but not the king. And the people began to say, "The king is mad and has lost his reason. Look how strangely he behaves. We cannot be ruled by a madman, so he must be dethroned."
The king grew very fearful, for his subjects were preparing to rise against him. So one evening, he ordered a golden goblet to be filled from the well, and he drank deeply. The next day, there was great rejoicing among the people, for their beloved king had finally regained his reason."
"A time will come when the whole world will go mad. And to anyone who is not mad they will say: 'You are mad, for you are not like us.'" - St. Anthony the Great ."
I wil;l not drink from the poisoned well that makes many others on this board mad!
"fixed asset as there will only ever be 21 million coins"
so what - if the sellers and buyers (as that is the only thing that determines its value) decide over the next 10 years that the price of bitcoin should be 7 cents, what does it matter if there are 21 thousand, 21 million or 21 billion?
also what happens if the inventor of bitcoin decides to create more, are there any legally binding rules or regulations to say he cant?
and you keep going on about the limited amount of bitcoin the "hard cap" as they call it as one of its best selling points, then you are advocating monero but that doesnt have a "hard cap" number...............can you elaborate on your contradictory advice?
p.s you don't need to keep putting your name at the bottom of your posts, we can see its you already and you are not writing a letter
Look matey, the regulars are well aware and as much as they hate to admit, I always am proved right in the end.
Talking of which, I know some of you have a peculiar fascinaton into my trades so just to update you.
Yesterday I bought into SpaceX. Been really keen to buy into SpaceX but it isnot public, and may never IPO -- but you can still own a piece of it by buying Alphabet which have a 7.5% stake in SpaceX, so bought a few shares in Alphabet.
Also bought 1, yes just one, more Bitcoin which brings my total nmber of Bitcoins to 55.
Frog you questioned whether BP was really a Ponzi scheme by posting a refernece to a Motley Fool aricle that gave me a good laugh m8, You are always going on at people about the source they use and yet you post an obvious conflict of interest source, Motley Fool are not going to point out shares are a Ponzi!
Bison - you are trying to compare apples with oranges, you need to think of Bitcoin not in the sense of a share like BP but in the sense of both a currency and also as a fixed asset, I see it as a hybrid and so is unique, Bitcoin can be thought of as a perfect form of money, which you can save and spend, as well as a fixed asset as there will only ever be 21 million coins.
I mean, that got me excited straight away - thinking that it might have been misspelt.
"BP has been forced to stop work on one of its North Sea gas fields following the US's decision to pull out of the Iran nuclear deal and reintroduce sanctions.
The Rhum gas field is 50% owned by the Iranian Oil Company.
Last year, BP sold a stake in three gas fields - including Rhum - to Serica Energy and had hoped to complete the transaction in the third quarter of this year.
BP says that certain services in support of Rhum field operations are currently provided under authorisations obtained from the US Office of Foreign Assets Control and the current licence runs until 30 September.
However, because of the US decision to pull of the Iran deal, it is not clear if the licence will be renewed.
BP said: "To ensure that all operations can be undertaken to the highest safety and environmental standards during the interim sanctions period, BP has decided to defer the commencement of work on [Rhum] while the position relating to US sanctions is being clarified.""
A bit of a non-story, Les. And I guess another of your silly wind-ups.
Of course share prices reflect investor sentiment. That's not news. Investor sentiment is not alwaŷs bang on the money but it is not without a basis in the perceived money making potential of the business the money is invested in.
From Motley Fool:
"According to the Barclays Equity-Gilt Study, if youd invested £100 in the UK stock market in 1945 and taken all the dividends out as cash over the years, and spent it, the value of your shares would have risen to more than £9,000 by today after adjusting for inflation. But if youd reinvested all your dividends in buying new shares, instead of spending the cash, you be sitting on an inflation-adjusted pot of, wait for it nearly £180,000!"
There are many such studies which show the effects of compounding when dividends are reinvested. This is what most of us who are buy and hold investors like Warren Buffet base our strategy on. My own portfolio has over 20 years clearly demonstrated the power of compounding when dividends are reinvested.
The definition of a Ponzi scheme is:
"a form of fraud in which belief in the success of a non-existent enterprise is fostered by the payment of quick returns to the first investors from money invested by later investors"
The constituents of the FTSE100 and the like are hardly non-existent enterprises.
While there are risks in investing in shares as you incessently try to demonstrate with your daily bulletins on the risks involved in BP, in a well diversified portfolio those risks are very much diluted.
<Liu has written a book The Ponzi Factor - so dangerous that financial websites, finance shows and blogs want nothing to do with him and banned him from their comment section, Camp said introducing the guest on his show.
The author revealed how our stock market is the dictionary definition of a Ponzi scheme - frauds that end with a lot of people getting royally screwed.
Lee Camp: What do people think the stock market is? Most people think they're investing in a company and they get a small piece of the dividends, the profit, that's the money they get from it. But that's not really true, is it?
Tan Liu: No, it's not. Those are usually the people who don't actually read the documents in terms of what the stockholders are really entitled to. Basically, as you can see on CNBC in Jim Cramer shows, what they focus on is earnings and growth of the company. Why are they focusing on that? That's because they're trying to predict or foresee whatever the stock price is going to be by earnings and growth.
The issue, of course, is profits from stocks and what makes a stock price move is not the earnings and growth. It is actually money from another investor. Now, is there a connection at all with respect to the earnings and growth and this price movement? Yeah, it is called a speculative connection: it is not a legal one, it is not a logical one, it is not a definitive or mathematical one. It is pure speculation.
What else is a speculative connection? A Ponzi scheme. I can speculate, a Madoff scam, when people will stop entering with more money. Speculative connections don't mean anything, but the thing is that is actually what CNBC, what school and academic institutions and Jim Cramer focus on.
LC: When your stock goes up, you buy something for $20, it is now worth $200, all that money is not coming from the company's profit, rarely, if ever, it is coming from other people willing to buy that stock from you for that price. But that is kind of the definition of a Ponzi scheme: all the money coming in is from new investors. And if they stop putting that money in, it all collapses, right?
TL: You are absolutely right. It is the purest definition of a Ponzi scheme. First of all, there's a name for this process of buying and selling at that profit. It is called capital gains. Basically, you buy low and sell high. That process itself is the definition of a Ponzi scheme. I didn't make up the definition. It is not my opinion that it is a Ponzi scheme.
By definition, the SEC defines there is three aspects of it. One, it is an investment scenario. Two, the investment profits come from other investors. Three, the investors think the profits come from somewhere else. And what we can clearly observe every single day, every single moment, the stocks are trading, is in the event where the stock seller, an investor, sells it to another investor, taking some capital gains profit if you're lucky.
So we have an investment scenario. We have profits that come from other investors. And those investors who are selling it, according to CNBC, according Jim Cramer, they think the money's come from somewhere else, like the growth of the underlying company. We have an event that we can witness every single day and we have a definition of a Ponzi scheme: the event matches a definition. Therefore, it is a Ponzi scheme.>
<BP could be on the hook for millions, if not billions of dollars, Kathy Mulvey, accountability campaign director at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said in a statement. Why wouldn't shareholders want to know about the risk of legal liability, a risk thats growing rapidly as climate costs multiply.>
That's highly relevant, it's one thing being responsible for causing damage and injury and death, but once one starts to try to cover it up, particularly not being open and transparent to shareholders about the risks, part of BP's culture, then it just makes things a whole lot worse. This is just one of many risks I believe BP play down or are totally silent about!
I hope Omaha Man and his supporters are happy now we are talking about the AGM,
BP Accused of 'Corporate Evasion' over Response to Climate Change Questions at AGM.
It gets worse folks! "Corporate Evasion" hey, don't like the sound of that. The way BP dodged the questions by saying they didn't know or ask someone else. What a wretched company to own shares in? Ideal for shorting, especially at its current ridiculously high share price!
<Climate change was the single biggest issue raised during oil giant BPs annual general meeting, as both activists shareholders and institutional investors pushed the company to take more ambitious action to shift its business model away from fossil fuels.
Campaigners criticised BP senior executives for at times dismissive answers, which they say showed little willingness from the company to take into account some issues around emissions, social justice and human rights.
For the first time, BPs AGM was held outside of London and activists and investors gathered in Manchester on Monday from around the country.
Despite a much smaller number of participants - with about 200 people in attendance compared with more than 1,000 in previous years - the meeting lasted just short of three hours during which BPs board was repeatedly grilled on climate change.
A lesson in corporate evasion
From BPs climate scenarios, to its membership to trade associations with poor environmental track records, to the financial risk of the lawsuits being filed against the company and its plans for oil drilling in the Amazon mouth in Brazil and fracking in Argentina, BPs senior executives had a lot to answer for.
BP chairman Carl-Henric Svanberg and chief executive Bob Dudley answered most of the questions raised by shareholders, including from the Church of England Pensions Fund, Aviva investors and London-based Hermes Investment Management.
Svanberg and Dudley emphasised the companys commitment to a transition to a low carbon economy and its support for a carbon price. They claimed to be the first company to publicly identify the risk of climate change back in 1998 while continuing to say that as an energy company, BP had to be part of the solution.
But campaigners were not impressed with their answers.
Martin Porter, an activist for ShareAction, described the meeting as an instructive lesson in corporate evasion and lying, pointing to the fact BP repeatedly avoided answering the questions.
Attending the AGM was new experience for Emma Wilkes, of Manchester, who attended the AGM as a proxy for one of the BPs shareholders. Despite the excitement of the occasion, the meeting fell short of her expectations.
It was really powerful to be in a position where you have a voice and it is being heard but it was all talk, she told DeSmog UK. The focus on climate change and green issues was definitely interesting but it left like one big greenwash session, she said.
It was also Bill Warrens first time as an activist shareholder, who was speaking on behalf of his daughter Rebecca Warren, a board member for Amnesty International UK.
Warren asked BP executives whether they recognised climate change as a human rights issue but the question was dismissed by CEO Dudley, who accused some shareholders of leaving the door open to legal action against the company.
They are clearly frightened of lawsuits and wont take on the responsibility that climate change caused by the company is a human rights issue, Warren said.
He added: Climate change was the biggest issue of the meeting because its a huge issue for the oil and gas industry but today also showed that BP is not going to get off the hook of oil and gas.
Ali Stopher, from Fossil Free West Yorkshire, travelled from Huddersfield to ask what the company was doing about repeated oil spills by Russian company Rosneft, in which BP owns a 20 percent stake. She too was disappointed with BP
More trouble for BP , don't want to upset the Church of England and others by not taking part in the TPI.
Interesting the way Adam Matthews appears to slag off BP for being less transparent than other oil and gas company's when it comes to not just scope 1 and 2 emissions, but significantly also 'Scope 3' emissions. Scope 3 emissions cover all indirect emissions due to the activities of an organisation. These include emissions from both suppliers and consumers. Also why does BP not want to submit its operations to the TPI? BP must be wetting heir pants, trying t avoid being assessed by the Transition Pathway Initiative (TPI).
<At the AGM of oil company BP, on 21 May 2018, Adam Matthews, Head of Engagement for the Church Commissioners and Church of England Pensions Board made the following statement:
"Good afternoon, my name is Adam Matthews, representing the Church of England Pensions Board and Church Commissioners and a supporter of Climate Action 100.
"We note that some of your oil and gas peers have stepped forward to take increased responsibility for the carbon intensity of the full life cycle of their energy, including when combusted the Scope 3 emissions.
"We welcome BPs recognition of this challenge in its Energy Transition strategy, which includes as key pillars of the strategy Improving our products with a focus on lower carbon solutions such as the shift to gas or carbon offsets and also Creating low carbon businesses which involves expanding its renewable businesses.
"We believe Scope 3 targets for the full lifecycle energy intensity of the companys products are required. Such targets will bring focus and direct the companys capital allocation and activities to advance lower carbon fuels.
"We therefore ask that BP:
States its responsibility for its Scope 3 product use emissions and reports on these emissions annually
Sets a clear target for product use carbon intensity of emissions in line with the Paris Agreement.
Work with Professor Simon Dietz at the London School of Economics Grantham Research Institute so that BP's future carbon performance of all of BP's emissions, Scope 1, 2 and 3, can be assessed by the Transition Pathway Initiative (TPI)."
Greenhouse gas emissions are categorised into three groups or 'scopes' by the most widely-used international accounting tool, the Greenhouse Gas Protocol. While scope 1 and 2 cover direct emissions sources (e.g., fuel used in company vehicles and purchased electricity), scope 3 emissions cover all indirect emissions due to the activities of an organisation. These include emissions from both suppliers and consumers.
* Climate Action 100+ is a five-year initiative led by investors to engage with the worlds largest corporate greenhouse gas emitters to improve governance on climate change, curb emissions and strengthen climate-related financial disclosures.
To date, 279 investors with nearly USD $30 trillion in assets under management have signed on to the initiative.
I see there is a request by a few people to talk more about the AGM fine by me, but if their expectation was a plethora of good news, think again, they should be careful what they wish for!
The AGM was a reminder of some of the swords of Damocles hanging over this bad and rotten company.. take the lawsuits, which are in process and will be expanding against BP over climate change, which I've flagged up before as something which could send this company to the wall. Dudley wasn't even willing to talk about the company's climate change targets! That is a big, red warning flag to any investor in BP.
<After paying more than $65 billion in legal costs for the Deepwater Horizon catastrophe, BP Plc is wary of the risk of lawsuits related to climate change.
Chief Executive Officer Bob Dudley raised the topic of class-action lawsuits twice during the companys annual general meeting in Manchester, England on Monday, saying he wouldnt disclose certain climate targets, or even answer some questions from activist investors, because the risk of legal action in the U.S. was too high.
The sharp exchange between BP and two advocacy groups Amnesty International and the Union for Concerned Scientists shows the growing pressure on major oil companies to acknowledge their responsibility for emissions of greenhouse gases. It also reflects the burgeoning efforts to hold them legally responsible for the potentially disastrous consequences of rising global temperatures.
You want to get us to make statements here in front of you that you can document that will lead to a class action, Dudley said in response to one question from the Union of Concerned Scientists about pending U.S. litigation against energy companies. Such legal actions are a business model in the United States, he said.
In response to another questioner who suggested that selling oil and gas should be considered a violation of human rights, Dudley warned shareholders this could be another attempt to mire BP in a class-action suit. An open letter from shareholders including Aviva Plc last week urging more transparency could also end up providing lawsuit fodder, he said.
BP absolutely believes in being transparent. Transparency is beneficial to all, Dudley said. But we dont want climate disclosures to be a tool for class-action lawyers.
BP is still working through some of the 390,000 legal claims that resulted from the 2010 Deepwater Horizon catastrophe, which killed 11 people and spilled millions of gallons of crude into the Gulf of Mexico. The company had to sell off about a third of its assets to pay the various legal costs associated with the disaster.
In part, the payments were so steep because of a class-action suit, which offered a broad definition of which members of the Gulf Coast community were entitled to payments. BP will spend about $1 billion a year on civil settlements related to the spill until 2033.
Cities and states in the U.S. are also seeking payouts from oil companies for the consequences of climate change, possibly using the funds to build seawalls or other infrastructure, said BP Chairman Carl-Henric Svanberg.
In litigation, all public statements are heavily scrutinized. Exxon Mobil Corp. is facing a multi-state fraud investigation into the companys public comments about climate change after facing accusations it misled shareholders into thinking global warming was not a major risk. Exxon has called the probe a political vendetta.
Svanberg and Dudley both argued that, unlike the Deepwater Horizon incident, BP wouldnt accept sole responsibility, legal or otherwise, for climate change. They said the company has always been forthcoming that greenhouse gases are a risk to humanity, and the energy it provides is an important part of the world economy.
Climate change is a global issue, said Dudley. It is not the
What an amazing bulleting board this is. On most days there are >20 posts on all sorts of random subjects with people getting excited about the posts of various lunatics. Yet on the day of the BP AGM - pretty much nothing!
Warren Buffett does not like cryptocurrencies, a position he reiterated today at the Berkshire Hathaway annual meeting. His grievances against bitcoin and its ilk are many. Its a nonproductive asset. It has no intrinsic value. Its a breeding ground for charlatans who take opportunities to rip off people trying to get rich in something they dont really understand.
Cryptocurrencies will come to bad endings, said Buffett, 87. He then turned to his business partner, Charlie Munger, another outspoken crypto skeptic .
I like cryptocurrencies a lot less than you do, replied Munger, 94. To me, its just dementia. Its like somebody else is trading t urds and you decide you cant be left out.
And their previous quotes on cryptos...
Buffett - "Ratpoison squared", "I can say with almost certainty they will come to a bad ending", "a real bubble"
Munger - "Bitcoin is worthless" "artifical gold" "total insanity"
<Traditional currencies are backed by their respective governments.
To quote a great philosopher: if you can't trust the governments of the world, then who can you trust?I>
You are correct to the extent that governments have had absolute control over the global finance sector and monetary policy through the fiat currency system . But they cannot and should never be trusted! That is one of the key attractions of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies which are decentralised..
Those governments have the ability to inflate the supply of fiat currencies and essentially confiscate your money and assets. Even gold isn't safe, as you may recall from the disgraceful behaviour of the Indian government a couple of years back, which because of its physical attributes, decided it can be confiscated and repossessed by the authorities at their will.
In fact the people who hold gold I nickname to my Bus Buddies, perhaps cruelly, as GoldaManiacs. They have this notion that gold is somehow a safe asset, they have been brainwashed!
Even leaving aside the fact it can be confiscated, there are millions of times more gold underground than actually has been extracted . Today we mine gold at four times the rate that we did just 100 years ago, and technological advances are also making gold easier to mine. Supply and demand dictates your gold ain't going to go up in value for very long., because the vast majority of it is not used in industry or fror those gold teeth of your, or even for jewellery. about 85% of it ends up as gold bars and coins. So remember, Jack, next time someone tells you about their gold coins or how clever it is to invest in gold, do as I do, smile quietly to yourself and think - another GoldaManiac!
As fiat currencies decline, and gold ain't safe, the only other form of currency, the only one that is safe, is decentralized currency, that is Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies, they will eventually overtake fiat currencies.
In contrast to fiat currencies and gold, Bitcoin has a set cap of 21 million Bitcoins. That's one of its key attributes! Could be many decades or even a hundred years before the last Bitcoin is mined, and some say its price long term if it takes over fiat currencies and challenges the gold market could reach a million bucks a coin!!!
Get on the gravy train Jack whilst the price of Bitcoin is still low.
As for that philosopher bloke you mentioned who said if you can't trust the governments of the world, then who can you trust?I, he didn't know about Moi !
<Well if you are scratching your head and can't find any asset or fundamentals to back up the price then I see you have chosen laws that have no real relevance. >
You are not looking at this in the right way, making the wrong comparisons, and I'm not sure you know yourself what you are comparing,
You seem to think that because Bitcoin is a digital currency it has no store value. You are overlooking the fact that most businesses today are built around digital trust, including the financial system . Take fiat currency, that has very little intrinsic value, apparently it costs 16 cents to create a $100 bill. So the rest of that hundred bucks the remaining $99.84 comes from the trust people place in it. It can be hard to see the digital currency, Bitcoin, as having value because you can't hold it in your hand like you can a dollar bill. same goes for pounds and most, if not all, other fiat currencies.
Well if you are scratching your head and can't find any asset or fundamentals to back up the price then I see you have chosen laws that have no real relevance.
If you use this law on GBP currency then the 1 pence peace would be the most valuable because its used the most.
I choose the law of gravity to explain bitcoins prospects, what goes up must come down!
The realisation that bitcoin will never be used by large retailers will set in eventually as the volatility will put retailers off, what's the point in selling something for £5
Worth of bitcoins for it to be worth £2 by closing time.
I do have to confess though that I have profited from bitcoin, with my IG Index holding, it seems there are plenty of donuts out there willing to trade bitcoin and IG are making out like bandits on it, I am happy to know that they hedge and match the trades so they don't take on the risk of holding it themselves, and the more volatile it is the more they make.
Important message from the Financial Conduct Authority:
Posting inside information that is not public knowledge, or information that is false or misleading, may constitute market abuse.
This could lead to an unlimited fine and up to seven years in prison.
If you have any information, concerns or queries about market abuse, click here.
The content of the messages posted represents the opinions of the author, and does not represent the opinions of Interactive Investor Trading Limited or its affiliates and has not been approved or issued by Interactive Investor Trading Limited.
You should be aware that the other participants of the above discussion group are strangers to you and may make statements which may be misleading, deceptive or wrong.
Please remember that the value of investments or income from them may go down as well as up and that the past performance of an investment is not a guide to its performance in the future.
The discussion boards on this site are intended to be an information sharing forum and is not intended to address your particular requirements.
Whilst information provided on them can help with your investment research you need to consider carefully whether you should make (or refraining from making) investment or other decisions based on what you see without doing further research on investments you are interested in.
Participating in this forum cannot be a substitute for obtaining advice from an appropriate expert independent adviser who takes into account your circumstances and specific investment needs in selected investments that are appropriate for you.