Conversations

1. Jon AdairAuthor 15 Oct 2019 at 11:20 am

   If you have views or questions, you can get in touch with Link on 0333 300 0381 or you can email at equityincome@linkgroup.co.uk

2. David Scrivener 15 Oct 2019 at 11:28 am

   I also believe this is a very poor decision. Having an outside company crystallize my losses for me is not one I appreciate. My main concern now turns towards the Income Focus Fund, which I am also invested in and was hoping to stick with. Will this suffer the same fate? or are Woodford Investment Management going to look to continue the running of the fund. As an investor it would be good to know. I think this also happened at a time that the fund could have been turned around, a poor decision by Link. Also the bad press coverage did not help the situation, putting as much fear into investors as they could.

3. tony wu 15 Oct 2019 at 11:37 am

   Is it possible to challenge the decision?
   It’s a terrible decision on Links behalf

   1. paul bending 15 Oct 2019 at 4:46 pm

      Yes terrible decision must be challenged.

4. Murray Smith 15 Oct 2019 at 12:14 pm

   A disgraceful decision by Links!! This is our money, our choice. This can not be allowed to happen!!

5. J M 15 Oct 2019 at 12:50 pm

   A bad decision and precisely the wrong time. What on earth are they thinking??

6. J M 15 Oct 2019 at 12:53 pm

   For the record…if the board of WPCT read any of this, please don’t take Woodford off PCT.

   I have been very pleased with how the board has stepped up since the suspension at the equity income fund and I would hate for Mr Woodford to be removed. The NAV has only fallen 35%. It’s not a catastrophe. Just hold your nerve please.

   1. F G 16 Oct 2019 at 12:53 pm

      WIM would have no income to manage WPCT. It’s impracticable to keep WIM as manager.

7. Anthony Holland 15 Oct 2019 at 1:08 pm

   I think the managers in charge here should seriously consider if they can ever hold a financial position in any company ever again. This is outragious and clearly not in investors best interests at all. The FCA need to stand up NOW and put a stop to this daylight robbery at a time when market turmoil is at its highest inflection point in modern history – ie Brexit imminent. I was advised by a financial advisor to invest in this fund, accepting that a 5 year time frame was needed. That was 3 years ago!!!! No one knows which way the market will go, I suspect those responsible for this decision today will make money either way. Disgraceful!!

8. Mona Smith 15 Oct 2019 at 1:10 pm

   I agree that this is a terrible decision. I should like to decide when to crystallize my losses and would prefer for Woodford to be given time to work this out. This is a particularily precarious time with Brexit uncertainty, changes in currency Values etc. Links need to reconsider,

9. Denis Christie 15 Oct 2019 at 1:14 pm

   What right does Link have to unilaterally decide to close the fund?
   Surely it is up to the majority of the investors to make that decision?

10. robert shelley 15 Oct 2019 at 1:20 pm

    You made some very strange decisions in my time invested here Sir, I’m just relieved I reassessed my decision in early 2018 and made my redemption when I did, it saved me a fortune

11. Iain Longworth 15 Oct 2019 at 1:20 pm

    This is a disgraceful decision, time should be given to Neil Woodford to rectify the situation, I do not feel this should be Links decision to make. Arranging for outside companies to liquidate holdings in my opinion will make further losses certain. There should be consultation with investors before this happens

12. Michael Claxton 15 Oct 2019 at 1:33 pm

    On what basis has this disgraceful decision been made ? To change the Manager is one thing but to summarily close the fund causing losses to investors without providing the opportunity for a replacement Manager to recover the situation , much of the damage having been caused by adverse media coverage , is extremely difficult to understand and accept . Links needs to reconsider , appoint a replacement Manager , and allow the Fund to continue with a name change which I understand was proposed at one point . Investors can than decide what to do with their investment rather than having Links make the decision for them .

    1. Michael Tipton 15 Oct 2019 at 7:23 pm

       Totally agree with your comments.Im guessing the guys appointed to do this will be getting a pretty penny for their services.The whole situation is a fiasco. Woodford for straying outside the parameters of the fund, Hargreaves Lansdowne for continually pushing the man and fund as top drawer and Links as betraying us investors.( in our best interests indeed).The one thing they all have in common is FINANCIAL GREED AND GAIN for themselves.The lot of them have no morals at all and sadly they will all get away with it Scot free at OUR EXPENSE.

    2. Denis Christie 15 Oct 2019 at 7:43 pm

       Links and its management were never highly rated by employees it seems.
       https://www.glassdoor.co.uk/Reviews/Employee-Review-Link-Asset-Services-RVW21465103.htm

    3. Mona Smith 16 Oct 2019 at 12:27 pm

       I couldn’t agree more!

13. paul knight 15 Oct 2019 at 1:34 pm

    I really don’t understand why:

    Investors views weren’t taken into consideration
    Some kind of consultative exercise undertaken

    I await the reasons to be clearly set out
    My view is this will just be rich pickings for the “wind up” team

    I don’t see how this can be justified in Investors best interest

    1. Nicholas Headley 15 Oct 2019 at 7:49 pm

       Paul Knight, totally agree – investors should be consulted before such a significant decision is taken

14. David Scrivener 15 Oct 2019 at 1:36 pm

    If you read a lot of the media reports today they use words like ‘refund’, and ‘returning your money’. If this is done via Links methods we all know we are not getting nowhere near our money back. I was happy to let the Woodford team try and turn this fund around (and I believe they would have done). I would like to know what Link will gain from this, along with the other companies having a hand in winding the fund up. This is not in our interest, but I know it is in theirs.

15. Gary Luddington 15 Oct 2019 at 1:44 pm

    Agree that Link operating without the interests of investors being considered.
    Need to have a vote from all investors.

16. jonathan williams 15 Oct 2019 at 1:46 pm

    Link Completely disgracefull ! the wrong thing to do. PRA look into the wider picture please … ! The people who have made this dicision are victims of media brain washing. Due to this lack of sound judgment from the funds administrators , now we are all to loose.

    For Woodford Investment Management this represents the final part of the very obvious co-ordinated industrial sabotage .from start to finnish ..

    Mr Woodford I personaly am very sorry for the way you have been treated. Time will prove you right .. that much i do know. Stick with us. Mr Williams – Investor

17. Michael Isaacs 15 Oct 2019 at 1:56 pm

    I agree this is a terrible decision which goes against the best interest of private investors in the fund. My workplace pension is invested in this fund and I do not want it wound up at the worst possible time crystallising significant losses which I cannot recover from. Please think again and at the very least freeze the fund for another year until Brexit is done and the UK focussed companies in it have time to recover. I for one do NOT give my permission for this action to be taken to my investment. If everyone rallies round and protests to LINK maybe something can still be done before its too late.

18. Geoffrey Brain 15 Oct 2019 at 2:01 pm

    Has anyone thought to ask the investors views? I, for one, am totally horrified by this decision and looking at other comments, I am clearly not the only one.
    All funds have issues periodically but historically recover in time – time is what is required here!
    I’m sure I am not the only person concerned with losing money on the whim of Link?
    Totally outrageous!!

19. Robert Hackney 15 Oct 2019 at 2:02 pm

    This does not seem to be the best time to be taking this course of action. I thought that these funds were supposed to be looking Towards long term growth, so the effect of volatility was minimised.
    I invested with Neil Woodford, not Link or BlackRock.
    If the fund is closed down now everyone will lose (Except them).
    Can this be stopped?

20. Paul Thackray 15 Oct 2019 at 2:04 pm

    I agree it is outrageous that an outside company not of my choosing should take this decision. Surely there must be a process to appeal this. I invested for the long term not to let some chancer take over to tell me what is in my best interest.

21. david bowers 15 Oct 2019 at 2:06 pm

    If Neul had made some efforts reduce the exorbitant fees he was charging then I might agree with some of the early comments. As it is,I think this is the best outcome if the winding up is done slowly and carefully.

22. Phillip Attfield 15 Oct 2019 at 2:14 pm

    This is an idiotic decision . We will be selling shares just at the wrong time. I think I’m right in saying that Birkshire Hathaway shares have lost 50% of their value twice since its conception. But the value of the company never changed. I would agree that this was the wrong structure for these shares in hindsight. But we are where we are. This is the wrong time to panic. As Warren Buffett says it’s the stomach that is much more important than the IQ. Please reconsider the decision that link has made.

    1. Nicholas Headley 15 Oct 2019 at 7:52 pm

       Phillip Attfield, you are correct – this Fund is traded at NAV and individual investors should be allowed to either stay in or get out.

23. David Adams 15 Oct 2019 at 2:14 pm

    I’m sure it’s not worth spending a second looking at the documents to see if Link have the power to do this because they will have spent plenty of our money getting expensive legal advice.

    The problem with this approach is that what is legal may well not be just. It seems to me that there’s no moral justification for having an outsider chuck the toys out of the pen, rather than let the management team we effectively chose do their best with achieving best value without the democratic choice of investors being tested.

    Referenda are all the rage, but surely our opinions should be tested

    1. David Adams 15 Oct 2019 at 3:16 pm

       To develop my thoughts further, why can’t we have the option to retain our investment and just let Link sell a proportion of each holding to be paid to those who want out?
       I’m extremely happy to hold on for the Woodford team to look after my bit of the ongoing fund

       1. Bernhard Grob 15 Oct 2019 at 8:36 pm

          Fully agree with your suggestion that we as investors should have a say and must have a right to decide to stay or sell. To challenge their decision does not make sense as lawyers would like it with us picking up the cost.
          Winding up will lead to extorted costs by the appointed companies i do not trust. Having had the Equitable Life experience, this looks going the same way.

24. jonathan kleinman 15 Oct 2019 at 2:15 pm

    Ridiculous timing and a terrible decision. FCA force a contrarian focused fund to liquidate and for retail investors to take a very big loss. Blackrock will make some very nice fees for doing me this favor and i get no choice in the matter.

25. neal frankel 15 Oct 2019 at 2:17 pm

    This is absolutely disgraceful what the hell are they playing at ?

26. BRIAN MILLER 15 Oct 2019 at 2:28 pm

    This is an absolute disgrace to close the fund. I firmly believe the fund will bounce back once Brexit has been decided. I have been with Neil for over 30 years and I believe in his ability to return the fund to profitability.

27. tom bailey 15 Oct 2019 at 2:30 pm

    Link’s decision may or may not be wrong here but the heart of the issue is Neil Woodford’s own management of Equity Income Fund, in my opinion.

28. Alan Duff 15 Oct 2019 at 2:35 pm

    Last Friday, on the back of a glimmer of optimism about Brexit, Barratt Developments rose 11.52%, Bovis Homes 11.67%, Crest Nicholson 11.69%, Taylor Wimpey 10.83% and Provident Financial 7.36% – all top 10 holdings in the Woodford Income Focus Fund. As a consequence the fund rose 5.08% that day.

    The possibility of a no-deal Brexit cannot be ruled out. However, it is remote. JP Morgan yesterday assigned a 5% probability of a no-deal Brexit i.e. 95% of another outcome.

    In the event of a deal, the domestic facing stocks in which Neil has invested are likely to rocket. Combine that with a strengthening currency and overseas investors will quickly realise they need to increase their exposure to the UK. In doing so further propelling prices upwards.

    Why have investors in the fund not been given the opportunity to have their say in this decision?

    How can the FCA expect investors to remain calm and invested ‘for the long term’ when that decision is taken away from them?

29. simon bridgman 15 Oct 2019 at 2:55 pm

    I have been an investor in Neil’s funds for 30 years and have therefore experienced the up’s and down’s that he has experienced during that time only to be pleased to have hung on and not panic and sell when all looked rather bleak as I accepted that he is a high conviction investor and somewhat contrarian .

    This latest period of poor performance is hugely disappointing/ frustrating and is perhaps due to his over conviction and with hindsight some poor stock selection ( he is not alone ) which has not worked out well and thus I can see why other investors have sold out or indeed want to – perhaps because they have too much exposure to the fund.

    For my part I do not think that the decision by Link is the right one as it would be better to leave the fund open and give Neil more time to reposition the fund, as he has been doing to some good effect it would appear in the last few days due to the rise in the value of domestic stocks which he favours ,which if Brexit works out well could be very positive but who knows!

30. Brian Sargent 15 Oct 2019 at 3:00 pm

    It has all been said, a bad decision, they need to hang in there and give it more time. What is their motivation in suggesting winding up. Hopefully that’s what it is, a ‘wind up’.

31. P Br 15 Oct 2019 at 3:11 pm

    As is often the case with these unwieldy organisations the collective decision influenced by all the wrong elements will prove to be a mistake .

32. Mark Spooner 15 Oct 2019 at 3:20 pm

    Correct decision, they would not have been able to raise enough cash for everyone to get out who wanted to get out. You would be left with thousands of private investors and no institutional money backed by unlisted securities and 9% of Patient Capital for whatever that’s worth.

    Link and anyone associated with it wouldn’t have been able to make their money in that position so they correctly are putting it out of its misery.

33. Paul Pizzala 15 Oct 2019 at 3:30 pm

    Timing is ludicrous….exactly when domestic stocks ready to rebound. Plus a massive overhang on patient capital. Link should be hauled in front of FCA.

34. tony wu 15 Oct 2019 at 3:31 pm

    Has anyone called Link to complain or ask about whether this is set in stone or it’s possible this isn’t the final outcome?
    I believe people at this firm may be outraged too, this was completely the wrong decision to make( I’m not an investor in this fund btw but I’ve followed Neil since the inception), I believe this fund will likely strongly rebound in the next year or two and to wind up the fund now is a sell-out of all investors

    1. Jon AdairAuthor 15 Oct 2019 at 3:41 pm

       Tony, you can get in touch with Link on 0333 300 0381 or you can email at equityincome@linkgroup.co.uk

       1. tony wu 15 Oct 2019 at 4:06 pm

          Thank you, Jon. But I’m not an investor of the fund so would I have any effect complaining to them?
          I would love to change their decision just for the people in this firm and it’s investors

       2. Lee Harrison 16 Oct 2019 at 8:07 pm

          Sadly now Woodford is closing there is no real point asking them to reverse their decision. If they do it will just go to another fund manager who we can probably ready get exposure to. If Woodford were to keep the fund(s) then that’s a different matter.

35. Peter Jones 15 Oct 2019 at 4:03 pm

    I truly hope that Link will reverse their decision as from reading the various comments already posted, not one agrees with them, including me. My understanding is that the role of Link is to project the investors but the investors have not been consulted on Links decision. In my view it is totally the wrong time to take such a decision.

36. Bruce Thirkettle 15 Oct 2019 at 4:03 pm

    Ditto the above; this is absolutely the worst possible solution to the fund’s problems. Keep the fund closed, but keep it running. Woodford Investment Management need to tell its investors what it can do to stop this.

37. Salvatore Capodici 15 Oct 2019 at 4:04 pm

    Absolutely fuming, we the investors should at least have a say in what we do with our investment. This is all wrong. Links don’t care about us investors they should have the decency to ask us what we think.
    The fund will eventually turn, not happy with what happened but it will turn the corner.
    Thank you Jon for the email address we should all email Link and complain.

38. John Temple 15 Oct 2019 at 4:14 pm

    Certainly not a good idea for Link to wind up the fund.
    I was in for the long term and with Link dipping in an already depleted pot it will not give us, the private investor, any chance of making up the loss from a management that I trust if we are paid out now. Defer for another 6 months at least.

39. Derek Smalls 15 Oct 2019 at 4:25 pm

    Fair decision in the end, this should have been wound up many months ago. It seems the emperors new clothes took some time to see through. Some poor investing which has lost people money year on year. I feel very sorry for those in company/council schemes who did now know their money was in these funds and will now lost money. I am sure Neil will not lose much sleep with all his cash in the bank!

40. Lee Kelsall 15 Oct 2019 at 4:26 pm

    This is an outrageous decision. As a private investor in the fund I’m aware of the risks and comfortable that Neil and the team need more time to do their jobs. This is the worst possible time to sell off the shares and counterintuitive given the mandate of the underlying fund. Does Link even understand the investment thesis?

41. Dean Moriarty 15 Oct 2019 at 4:32 pm

    I rather agree with the decision of Link, although it does appear that I am in the minority.

    1. David Crane 15 Oct 2019 at 7:34 pm

       As do I Dean. I was dreading the unlocking of the fund for the inevitable ‘fire sale’ that was to follow. I find it interesting that this article is open for comments while others have been closed though.

       1. Michael Clarke 16 Oct 2019 at 8:30 am

          I would have preferred them not to close it but suspect their only other option was a much longer period of no access which would have meant no access for individuals to their investment. Almost every one I know with a holding in the fund (although not me) was planning to use the re-opening to get out and I do not believe they could ever have judged just how much immediate liquidity was needed.

42. Bill Blevins 15 Oct 2019 at 4:49 pm

    Letter to Link
    Dear Sirs
    I am shocked at your decision to wind up the Woodford Equity Income Fund without a full and detailed explanation of your reasoning?
    You need to evidence beyond doubt that this action is in the best interests of the unit holders and not in the best interests of Link.?
    I need you to advise me of the winding up costs in total and the time period expected before funds are turned to unit holders?
    Please confirm that this winding up is in accordance with the Trust Deed or other arrangements governing the administration of the fund.
    Has this action been proved by the FCA or PRA?
    I look forward to hearing from you ASAP
    BILL blevins

    1. Jon AdairAuthor 15 Oct 2019 at 4:51 pm

       Bill – please get in touch with Link on 0333 300 0381 or email at equityincome@linkgroup.co.uk

43. Taha Lokhandwala 15 Oct 2019 at 4:50 pm

    I don’t agree with the closure. Unless Link can absolute guarantee they will give me more money back than if Neil was able to run the fund himself (WHICH THEY CAN’T), then they have no business doing this. Absolute disgrace from Link. Sorry it ended up like this, Neil. If you open another fund, I’ll still support you.

    1. Jon AdairAuthor 15 Oct 2019 at 7:39 pm

       Thanks for your support Taha

44. Sam Meadows 15 Oct 2019 at 4:52 pm

    Is it not possible that, regardless of Link’s decision, Neil Woodford should share the blame for his poor management of the fund?

45. Dave Griffiths 15 Oct 2019 at 4:56 pm

    I have emailed the below to link.
    Good Afternoon
    May I say that the decision to close the fund is wrong
    You have chosen the very day that the fund would begin to change due to the way the fund was invested and to my investment requirements. Why today. Why not just change the manager if you feel you must be seen to be doing something. You have been motivated by the press probably in your defence you felt that was the only recourse however I strongly disagree with you.

46. Brian Dick 15 Oct 2019 at 5:12 pm

    What a terrible decision! Neil Woodford has an enviable record of investment management. Link should not be allowed to simply steamroller everyone in order that others (external managers) can benefit, whilst unit holders loose out.

47. Steven Ojari 15 Oct 2019 at 5:22 pm

    I have emailed Link stating that as an investor this does not reflect my wishes. I don’t believe selling out now is the right thing to do if you believe in the macro view the Woodford team takes which is why I’m invested. Not sure if we have any rights with Link as investors, I’ve asked for details of a complaints procedure.

48. Tom Duncan 15 Oct 2019 at 5:34 pm

    I am shocked and disappointed at this unreasonable decision, particularly as there has been no input by investors. Like others I was content to wait out the 5 year period under Neil’s control of the fund. I am convinced that that is a better option than paying all those engaged in winding up the fund. I hope we will fight this.

49. sue austin 15 Oct 2019 at 5:36 pm

    I’m also gutted at this decision. How can this possibly be allowed, when we have not been asked for our opinions.
    I also would far prefer to wait and see, as winding the fund up means I instantly lose my money. Surely this should be put to a vote?

50. Philip Weir 15 Oct 2019 at 5:43 pm

    Exactly what metrics are Link using to make this decision? At the beginning of June they decided to give Woodford 7 months to reposition the fund. They’ve now made this decision after only 4.5 months! It would appear that the regulator (FCA?) needs to approve this decision. In my case I’ll be contacting them to expalin that Links decision is NOT in my interests. (FCA contact:Call us on 0800 111 6768 (freephone) or 0300 500 8082 from the UK and consumer.queries@fca.org.uk).

    1. Andrew Kirby 15 Oct 2019 at 11:52 pm

       I have logged a complaint with the FCA

       1. Philip Weir 16 Oct 2019 at 2:10 pm

          I’ve now had confirmation, as if any were needed, that investors (in my case Hargreaves Lansdown) were not consulted.
          I’ve also had a response from Link saying they have forwarded my request for information to Northern Trust. Why would that be when I was specifically asking about their, Link’s, decision making.

51. julian thornett 15 Oct 2019 at 5:52 pm

    I think this decision by Link is the worst outcome for share holders. Woodford should be given time to turn things around. He is a contrarian investor and has based the investments on those that he feels will do well post brexit. When looking at today and over the past week many of the top 10 holdings share prices have had one day moves of 3-5% due to positive mood music in regards to brexit and wider trade deals. Hence, when these situations are more definite many of these stocks should rise in line with Woodfords thesis.
    I would much prefer Woodford to sort things out as he has skin in the fund both financially and in terms of saving his reputation. In the case of a third party selling the lot and lining their pockets in the process only their profit motivates them-thats for sure- crystallizing other peoples losses does not hurt.
    Link should be stopped from taking control of other peoples money and crystallizing their loses without their consent. This stinks, if it was going on in an other county the UK would be shouting state interference- banana republic.

52. Robert Carey 15 Oct 2019 at 6:11 pm

    I didn’t realise it was April Fools Day. What a ridiculous scenario, as everybody has commented on, the fact that Link Fund solutions have taken this decision not Neil Woodford,this is not in the best interest of investors and surly the FCA should step in and overule this decision. I feel sure given time we would see this fund turned around.
    If you look at lots of other funds which have made losses does it mean that they can be wound up in the same manner. There did seem to be a vendetta on Citywire giving very adverse articles and allowing people to comment some of which were so revolting I asked citywire to close my account and remove one persons comments which as always was posted anonymously, it would be interesting to find out the identity of these people and see what they stand to gain from Neil Woodfords present predicament.

53. Lee Harrison 15 Oct 2019 at 6:55 pm

    I have emailed link to tell them what they are doing is not in the interest of long term investors. These actions are to please the people who are in the Daily Mail articles saying they need their money for their holiday or house deposit. These people are short term investors who wanted a quick return and put their money in the wrong place. If enough people email link it might make them reconsider.
    Everyone at Woodford i feel for you all at this time. So sad to see the wpct is going as well. I am sorry the British media has ripped your company to shreds and ruined an amazing investor and company with a vision.

    1. Jon AdairAuthor 15 Oct 2019 at 7:38 pm

       Thanks for your support Lee.

    2. James Tucker 15 Oct 2019 at 8:18 pm

       What email address did you use, I will email accordingly.

       1. Lee Harrison 16 Oct 2019 at 8:13 pm

          Hi James
          equityincome@linkgroup.co.uk

54. Tina Mason 15 Oct 2019 at 7:46 pm

    Appears now to be game over – for all of it. I had a core holding in Equity Income, plus much smaller stakes in WPCT and Income Focus. I was more-or-less resigned to taking a hit on all of them, but can’t but agree with other posters that Link’s timing and lack of consultation with investors has been atrocious. They supposedly represent our interests, yet, as far as I can tell, have taken absolutely no steps to ascertain what we consider our interests to be. I had accepted that any outcome was likely to take the form of (at best) loss mitigation, rather than gain, but I certainly wouldn’t have supported winding up ASAP and paying somebody for the privilege. The only very scant consolation is I’ve been relieved of the burden of deciding what to do once it reopens, but is that really a plus? Taking the decision for them is what you do with children.

55. James Tucker 15 Oct 2019 at 8:16 pm

    I am both an investor in the fund and Financial adviser who has recommended this fund to in the region of 150 plus of our clients. Neil Woodford was out of favour with the city in 1999 when he called the dot com bubble and said don’t invest, it will fall. He was proven to be correct. In mid 2005 he warned of the banking crisis, was again out of favour with the city, yet again was proved correct. This occasion he said that when Brexit was completed the fund will rise. It had just started to do so having been the 2nd best fund of 8000 in the uk last Friday having risen 4,2% on the day, so glimmers of green shoots coming through as suggested. I am sure he is right that it would recover, however the powers that be are stopping him doing what he should be able to do and we investors are going to pay the price. I would ask are Link & the FCA going to pay the difference to the now disadvantaged investors for the difference between the unit purchase price and the sale price as they are not allowing the fund to recover, as I am sure it would had this announcement not happened. This is affectively causing a fire sale which will potentially damage the asset values and instead of protecting the investors inside the fund, which is what Neil Woodford was trying to do, it will have the reverse effect. Great regulation guys? The freedom of the fund manager to do what is best for the investors has effectively been taken away!

56. dan young 15 Oct 2019 at 8:18 pm

    Awful news. There were many ways of dealing with this better, certainly from the point of view of a long term investor. I would rather have had a fund or IT built upon illiquid stock for the next 30 years than to crystallize a loss during the brexit bargaining/implementation period.

57. russ donnelly 15 Oct 2019 at 8:36 pm

    Agree with the above and those investors that feel it is the wrong decision. Surely Link should be putting this to an investors vote???

58. Sona Young 15 Oct 2019 at 8:44 pm

    This is disgraceful. Who is Link to make a decision on my behalf. Investors should be consulted. The FCA should step in and stop this ridiculous decision. And then they talk about long term investing! FCA will damage its reputation if they allow this stupidity to go ahead. I cannot understand how this action can be legal allowing some third party company to sell my units without my consent. I invested with Neil not with Link whoever they may be.

    As a private investor I’m well aware of the risks. I’m not retiring for another 10 years and I’m happy for Neil and his team to carry on with their turnaround plan. I have full trust in them. And if I lose money so be it, it’s my choice. I’m disgusted that because of Link I’m now going to lose more money. This should be stopped. Back off and let Neil do his job. This is the worst decision for private investors.

    I will email my dissatisfaction to both Link and FCA.

    1. David Jones 16 Oct 2019 at 9:47 am

       You did invest with Link. They’ve always been the ACD for WEIF (initially under their previous name of Capita). Link contracted out the investment management to Woodford Investment Management. Under the terms in the prospectus they are entitled to terminate that arrangement as they have done.

       You can argue about the rights and wrongs of that decision, but it was their’s to take.

59. Grahame Thorne 15 Oct 2019 at 9:23 pm

    This decision doesn’t do anything to resolve the fundamental problem of the illiquid assets; they still need disposing, therefore, it appears to solve nothing.

    It has always been clearly promoted as a long-term investment so I have been content to wait for the fund to re-open and to trade in or out at times of my own choosing. Link has now denied me this reasonable expectation.

    Link’s very questionable and unwelcome decision has ruptured the natural investment relationship between the fund manager and investors. We should be choosing the risks we take, and taking the market consequences. Link’s intervention seems like yet another opportunity for the professionals, investing or otherwise, to line their pockets by corrupting my legitimate investment choice.

60. Peter Manfield 15 Oct 2019 at 9:58 pm

    The trouble is that the value of the fund still continues to fall, if Woodford had managed to reverse the decline it may have been worth continuing but in the circumstances it is probably better to give us back our investment as soon as possible. After all the more liquid assets are now according to reports mainly in FTSE100 stocks so this portion might as well be returned.
    Link have said that the remainder in private companies will be sold over a much longer period to get full asset value – that has to be the best idea.
    Also we don’t know how many investors have already decided to withdraw their funds so closing the fund might have been the only option anyway.

61. Gururaj Parvatikar 15 Oct 2019 at 11:04 pm

    What an idiotic decision by Link funds, who I did not invest with. My investment was with woodFord funds and while Neil woodford has not covered himself in glory and neither did they waive off the fees while the fund was suspended. This is not the right decision. Such decisions only line up somebody else’s pockets using my money. Surely more time for woodford funds or another manager is the right way forward. Is FCA sleeping at the wheel again?

62. Andrew Kirby 15 Oct 2019 at 11:44 pm

    Agree, Link closing this down without consultation is an outrage.

    The fund will get eaten up by Black Rock’s fees as get get their nose into the trough.

    Additional short sellers will have a field day on the stocks

    Hopefully there will be a class
    Action for negligence

63. Hagop Vadjaraganian 16 Oct 2019 at 12:24 am

    Link’s decision is NOT in my interest. Link have given no consideration to investors interests in this situation as a winding up of the Fund will result in a greater losses for investors. Additionally I cannot understand how Link can be allowed to take such a decision without giving investors any say in this matter.

64. Alastair Brown Douglas 16 Oct 2019 at 5:53 am

    I am sending this response to

    consumer.queries@fca.org.uk, and equityincome@linkgroup.co.uk

    I am in receipt of “investor-letter-regarding-the-winding-up-of-the-lf-woodford-equity-income-fund” from Link Fund Solutions Ltd dated 15 October 2019

    I hold 5,074 units in Woodford Equity Income.

    I need you to know that I do not want to have my assets liquidated at this time by strangers.

    I already have a contract with Neil Woodford to look after these assets. I will hold the Financial Conduct Authority and Link Fund Solutions Ltd responsible for all losses I anticipate you will cause me if you go ahead with this ill-timed proposal.

65. Munish Soni 16 Oct 2019 at 8:04 am

    Likewise I have emailed Link – To state that their decision is not in the interest of the small investor. Neil Woodford should be allowed time to stabalize the situation.

    The small investor should not be forced into taking a loss, and they should look for alternative solutions.

66. David Tuddenham 16 Oct 2019 at 8:42 am

    About 6 months ago I was drinking wine in a neighbour’s garden and I met a fund manager. In conversation they claimed that some people were targeting “Woodford” stocks. Was this just the usual conspiracy theorising or is something like this possible?

    1. tony wu 16 Oct 2019 at 9:33 am

       Absolutely

    2. Tina Mason 16 Oct 2019 at 12:11 pm

       It is absolutely no secret that Muddy Waters (no, not THAT Muddy Waters – a professional short-seller) deliberately targeted Woodford holdings, so no conspiracy theory, but recorded fact.

67. paul knight 16 Oct 2019 at 8:42 am

    do you think it’s worth us starting a Woodford Investors facebook group to support each other / get a shared voice. I’m happy to help although not a social guru

    1. Ian Calder-Potts 17 Oct 2019 at 4:03 pm

       Phil, I support your idea 100%. Would like to see an investors committee and possibly call an investors meeting. Sadly I don’t have the IT ability to get it se up. any volunteers with the IT skills?

68. philip hunnable 16 Oct 2019 at 9:30 am

    Disappointing result to a disappointing situation. I am not sure Link winding up and getting a lot of fees for Blackrock and financial community at the expense of investors is a good thing. Though keeping an equity income fund that cannot hit its income target, cannot be withdrawn or invested in is of no interest to anyone. I understand the 1p per quarter and 4p overall was a target not a requirement but with the income factor in the name I would have expected this to grow with the fund and the income focus fund does not seem to have performed either.
    Surprised Mr Woodford has not stuck to his convictions of publicising the fund, sticking through the hard times but has decided just to quit as the going has got very hard and rather than just raking easy money in now would have to work hard and prove his critics wrong and maybe take a salary cut and deal with the challenges of business that can’t just support a billionaire lifestyle but he gets to retire in comfort and sold out most of his holding in WPCT and likely the other funds before the rubbish hit the fan.
    When WPCT had holdings such as AZN at ~£40 now at ~£70 balancing out some of the risks it looked like a clever thing, but selling out all the cash generating solid companies to end up with 10%+ in utter drivel such as Industrial Heat holdings would seem to show that belief in their own hype rather than any coherent and well though investment strategy that was out of favour maybe it is a good thing.
    While some companies woes ESL etc could be put down to bad luck and the Brexit uncertaintity there does seem be a lot more bad calls than good.
    Would be wonderful to know exactly where the restructuring of the portfolio and true performance is at the date of the announcement !and before neil decided to shut up shop in an arraogant I’m taking my ball away. Unfortunately due to the excuse that if others know what we are doing they will get short sold doesn’t quite wash as if the companies are so great and doing so well then it would be dangerous to short them.

69. Andrew Benson 16 Oct 2019 at 10:11 am

    I am both an investor in the fund and Financial adviser who has recommended this fund to in the region of 100 plus of our clients. Neil Woodford was out of favour with the city in 1999 when he called the dot com bubble and said don’t invest, it will fall. He was proven to be correct. In mid 2005 he warned of the banking crisis, was again out of favour with the city, yet again was proved correct. This occasion he said that when Brexit was completed the fund will rise. It had just started to do so having been the 2nd best fund of 8000 in the uk last Friday having risen 4,2% on the day, so glimmers of green shoots coming through as suggested. I am sure he is right that it would recover, however the powers that be are stopping him doing what he should be able to do and we investors are going to pay the price. I would ask are Link & the FCA going to pay the difference to the now disadvantaged investors for the difference between the unit purchase price and the sale price as they are not allowing the fund to recover, as I am sure it would had this announcement not happened. This is affectively causing a fire sale which will potentially damage the asset values and instead of protecting the investors inside the fund, which is what Neil Woodford was trying to do, it will have the reverse effect. Great regulation FCA and Link? The freedom of the fund manager to do what is best for the investors has effectively been taken away!
    This shows you have absolutely no idea what Neil Woodford’s investment thesis was and how it would work once our politicians were concentrating on domestic issues again after Brexit

    1. Ian Calder-Potts 17 Oct 2019 at 11:53 am

       Andrew, The scavengers have moved in for the feeding frenzy, selling off assets at fire sale prices, awarding contracts to manage the winding up process to their mates whilst our pathetic FCA and politicians stand by wringing their hands. I know nothing of the intricacies of the finance world, but a see a gigantic scam afoot which will greatly profit a few whilst impoverishing the small investors. We need to get organised, call a meeting at which Link Asset, BlackRock, Northern Trust, Park Hill, Hargreaves Lansdown, FCA can have their feet held in the fire and explain to investors what fees and charges they are earning, why they have created a Fire Sale and what exactly they are doing to protect private investors. Perhaps Neil Woodford would also attend? I have written to Link, Hargreaves et-al asking if they will advise/circulate all investors to gauge the interest in a meeting. I have yet to receive an acknowledgement let alone a response. I would also like to know why Woodford could not continue selling off the assets, is that not what we have been paying for in the £60K/fees?
       We also need to form a small investors committee of people with legal and financial knowledge to represent us; any volunteers as the Scavengers seem unwilling or unable?
       We need to move quickly before the carcass is stripped leaving only dry bones for the investors.

70. J S 16 Oct 2019 at 10:41 am

    A controversial decision on WEIF by Link. Nevertheless, as a WPCT shareholder I am disappointed that Neil Woodford abandoned his patient investors. I was counting on him to be in it for the long run…

    1. Tina Mason 16 Oct 2019 at 11:13 am

       I don’t believe Neil had any real choice. Link’s decision made the business untenable. So I don’t see it as “abandonment”. But yes, I was in it for the long haul, and would have liked to see if it came good in the end. Neil only needed to back one or two winners for the fortunes to be reversed. I wonder if history will vindicate him – but too late for him (and us).

       1. J S 16 Oct 2019 at 12:09 pm

          It’s hard to get the full picture from the outside, so I do hope Neil will explain this particular decision in more detail. I would have expected Woodford to continue their WPCT mandate, perhaps on a more frugal basis, out of loyalty to their investors and as a way to “prove the market wrong” in the longer run.

          Appointing a new manager is a significant risk for WPCT, as there will be a major discontinuity in performance baseline and likely much higher annual fees. One should also hope that the board appoint a patient portfolio manager who doesn’t feel the need to prove himself through some massive repositioning.

          The key to Neil’s legacy, in my view, lies with Industrial Heat…

71. Tom Duncan 16 Oct 2019 at 12:31 pm

    I have written to Andrew Bailey, CE of the FCA, to complain about the lack of investor consultation on the disposal of their shares and asking him to step in to rectify that. It must be right that investors have a say in what happens to their money. Copies of the letter have been sent to Nicky Morgan MP and to Link. I suggest other investors do the same.

72. David Kerr 16 Oct 2019 at 12:52 pm

    This has absolutely nothing to do with the fund. Its a wonderful opportunity for Link to make a shedload of money utilising other people’s money. The timing is interesting, immediately prior to a possible Brexit deal. Consequently the opportunity may pass and Link needed to act before market circumstances changed. There are fewer crooks in Pentonville than with Link. An outrageous decision. Now watch how Link rob investors blind with their fees, charges, and exceptional one off costs. Crooks.

73. David Kerr 16 Oct 2019 at 12:52 pm

    This has absolutely nothing to do with the fund. Its a wonderful opportunity for Link to make a shedload of money utilising other people’s money. The timing is interesting, immediately prior to a possible Brexit deal. Consequently the opportunity may pass and Link needed to act before market circumstances changed. There are fewer crooks in Pentonville than with Link. An outrageous decision. Now watch how Link rob investors blind with their fees, charges, and exceptional one off costs. Crooks, all of them.

74. Tom Duncan 16 Oct 2019 at 3:25 pm

    Amendment: for Nicky Morgan MP read Catherine McKinnell MP

    1. Paul DG 20 Oct 2019 at 12:45 pm

       John Mann MP appointed interim Treasury Committee Chair – 03.09.19 – https://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/treasury-committee/news-parliament-2017/interim-treasury-committee-chair-appointed-17-19/

75. Eloise Lewis 16 Oct 2019 at 6:05 pm

    Unfortunately sustained poor performance spelled the end for the fund. Link was left with no choice.

76. Richard Parfect 16 Oct 2019 at 11:40 pm

    I have written to the FCA and to Link to formally complain about this arbitrary decision.

    As an informed private investor in WEIF i object to my considered and researched investment decisions being removed from me by Link who are simply erroneously (in my view) trying to cover their backside. The ill timed decisions of other WEIF investors (who had plenty of opportunity to understand the strategy and the fund) to run for the exit should not mean my loses are crystallised. I invested in this fund for a contrarian value style, which by definition takes longer to work out than a momentum strategy.

    Its another sad display of how amateurish so many industry participants and those that oversee it actually are.

    1. Paul DG 20 Oct 2019 at 12:40 pm

       I have done the same and also written to the treasury committee.

77. Andy Dawson 17 Oct 2019 at 11:27 am

    Is there anyone representing the investors in this process so we have a voice in what happens and it’s not just left in the hands of those taking a huge fee out of the winding up process.

    1. Ian Calder-Potts 17 Oct 2019 at 2:42 pm

       Andy, I believe that the FCA are supposed to be looking after our interests, but from what I read they are like rabbits caught in the headlights! I have asked the FCA if they will call an investors meeting which would perhaps give us the opportunity to hold Link Asset and the army of organisations appointed to dispose of our assets to justify themselves. No response yet!

78. Ian Calder-Potts 17 Oct 2019 at 12:03 pm

    perhaps many of you contributing to this discussion may not be aware that this website is now controlled by Link and Northern Trust, the liquidators. we private investors no longer have a voice?

    1. Jon AdairAuthor 17 Oct 2019 at 12:05 pm

       It’s still a Woodford website Ian.

79. Simon Carr 17 Oct 2019 at 5:06 pm

    Poor Neil I feel for him he just needed abit more time for the market to catch up with the value he saw. Link just haven’t given the strategies long enough after all he was investing for the ultra long term we all knew that and always expected to lose massive amounts in the first 5 years. Shame we can’t now Invest further with him as the business will close.

80. David Scrivener 18 Oct 2019 at 8:32 am

    I have just read that Link has purchased shares in Purplebricks on the same day this week that Woodford announced they had cut their holdings in Purplebricks to less than 5%. It seems they have purchased the same amount that Woodford sold on the very same day. Anyone else find this strange?

81. David Scrivener 18 Oct 2019 at 8:37 am

    On another point there is no reason that Link could not find another Fund Manager for the Focus Fund, this is a perfectly good fund and I agree with what Neil said it has very good medium to long term investment opportunities. If Link winds this fund down this will not be in the best interest of any investor. They are doing what they want with 3.5bn of savers money and it appears there an no authorities to stop them. This is the time that the investors should come together and stop other companies skimming off the back of our bad situation.

82. Alastair Brown Douglas 18 Oct 2019 at 10:12 am

    I believe that written petitions are the way forward. I have contributed this to equityincome@linkgroup.co.uk

    I am in receipt of the winding up notice of 15 October 2019. I disapprove of the proposal and wish you to desist.

    I am confidently a “HOLD” today, and do not expect to be a “SELL” on 17th January. If some stakeholders have suficent power to force liquidation, I would prefer a solution where “HOLD” unit-holders could retain some assets in a new format.

    If there is a rump of like minded investors I would have an interest in buying assets at liquidation, first refusal, at open market price.

    A new closed ended fund would seem acceptable.

    This suggestion offers a benefit to “SELL” unit-holders, creating a market for some assets will avoid a total fire-sale.

    “SELL” unit-holders would receive a similar or better outcome than the current proposition.

    “HOLD” unit-holders should retain part of their holdings, without potential fire-sale losses, without their money out of the market for an unknown time and without expenses to third parties.

    I believe you hold a duty of care to poll for declared “HOLD” unit-holders, to get a reliable estimate of their proportion of the Fund and publish it.

83. Paul DG 20 Oct 2019 at 1:07 pm

    I have written an open letter to my local MP and the interim chair of the Treasury Select Committee:

    Honourable and Right Honourable Members of Parliament,

    It is with regret I have to write to you but I am hoping you may be able to help all those investors who have had a poor decision forced upon them by Link Fund Solutions in the case of the Woodford Equity Income Fund decision to wind up the fund before it had time to reopen.

    I not only fear that investors will be severely damaged by the negligent and careless decisions taken by Link Fund Solutions, but I also fear that there will be a damaging and long lasting impact on our financial services industry as a result.

    I have followed up with the FCA and the Treasury Committee this morning following news reported within the Times and Sunday Times.
    Please find below and attached my letter of complaint and subsequent relevant information.

    I also appreciate you may be a little busy right now and this might not be on the top of your list of priorities. If nothing else, I felt the need to bring this urgent issue to your attention.

    Best regards

Comments are closed.