lets go, page-12

Agreed nk. Personally though, I have to do the quantitative first, then try my best on the management assessment and other qualitative analysis. This reflects more on my own strengths/weaknesses, rather then necessarily what's best. For me personally, I have in the past struggled to reliably pick the good from not so good management.

Maybe that's why I focussed my portfolio on GBM.

But I've seen many M.D.'s who I think are real losers go on to make millions in their companies - were they brilliant, did they just have the right invisible backer? or did they mix moderate skill with a good dose of luck? and do they have the energy to do it again? Without spending a huge amount of time, how do you pick the younger management? or those who have experienced and have learnt from their past failures?

Does GBM's board pass the test?
On assessment of past business successes? - Nope.
On their recent record of communication and delivery according to plan? - Nope.
But have they got the company from a series of tenements to now into production - Yes - and that's the most important thing.
Do they appear to have the drive to see it through - Yes.
And is the current s.p. discounted sufficiently to reflect management risk compared with other opportunities - I think its well in the top ten value for money, - maybe #1, but ... we'll see.