This is a collage image - the left hand side says no sanity claus, and the right hand side is a photograph of a tree wrapped in a quilt. It is an illustration of the article on investments written by Charles Gillams called 'there is no Sanity Clause'

THERE IS NO SANITY CLAUSE

Three big topics this week from three central banks, all of whom look to be in a muddle, with their knitting all jumbled up and highly implausible. Entirely predictable inflation meanwhile threatens to sweep them off their path, as they tinker with micro adjustments to interest rates.

Boris is diverting, but we doubt if it all matters; pre-Christmas entertainment. If he were logical or even vaguely numerate, he would change, but he’s not, and he won’t, but nor does he need to.

The Lib Dems win a by-election, that Labour fails to contest, but it makes no difference in Parliament, and it lets Boris look contrite mid-term. He will survive this with ease.

Which is not to say he should, or that he’s not making a hash of COVID, the sequel. In keeping the NHS in its current format, Boris fails to ask, as many have before him, whether it is still fit for purpose. This remains an urgent question. It can’t simply collapse every year.

Bailey - Bank Governor and historian

But perhaps Andrew Bailey, Governor of the Bank of England, understands the extraordinary risks Boris poses to the economy, and has hiked rates to show that. A Cambridge (Queens) historian, with a doctorate on the impact of the Napoleonic Wars on the cotton industry of Lancashire, he will know full well the impact of a French orchestrated trade war backed up by a dodgy pan European monetary system.

A consummate insider, via the LSE, he moved on to the ascending ladder of the Bank, which did include a slightly unfortunate move into the FCA. This turned out to have rather more real villains than he was used to. Married to the head of the Department of Government at the LSE, he will be very well aware of the political game and the current mood in Whitehall.

He’s seen enough inflation and has decided the Bank must pretend to act. Not only is the rate rise trivial, but it also coincides with a continuation of Government bond buying (QE), an odd call. That the last thing the economy needed was still more liquidity, has surely been obvious for eighteen months now.

Christine Lagarde and Jerome Powell

In Europe the same mishmash exists. We have been hearing Christine Lagarde explain why the ECB is now accelerating one asset buy back (APP) while ending another one (PEPP). She was winging it with the phrase “utterly clear” in answer to a pertinent question, when it was clearly anything but. Still, she did seem to have her ear rather closer to the ground on wage inflation, at least compared to Jerome Powell.

He by contrast has been caught with his pants on fire, trying to weasel his way out of the Fed failing to spot inflation, by saying that most market commentators agreed. Remind me, which is the canine, and which the wagging appendage?

Basic economics - why inflation arises

We called it on inflation as soon as that stock market rally took off, and for the simplest of economic reasons: the pandemic had reduced global productive capacity, so absent a change in price levels, the economy was less productive, profits were therefore lower, competition would therefore be less (unless prices rose), and total production must fall. Less output, same demand will always mean inflation.

Forget the energy issue, forget supply chains, less capacity, more demand always means trouble. True based on that one schoolboy error, the dopey measures to reduce capacity further by more regulation, hiking the minimum wage, paying people not to work and so on, plus embarking on accelerated decarbonization and a few new trade wars, was not going to help much either. But please no more “surprise” inflation, it was baked in. (See extract from my book, Smoke on the Water, blog dated July 2020, title re-appearing shortly on Amazon)

After the interest rate rise

However, we have also long felt that interest rates can’t rise enough to stop inflation, but that as governments have to back off fiscal stimulus, as they are already overborrowed, the lower productive capacity will itself shrink demand, and in the end cause inflation to fall. But we see that as taking years, not months.

Why are interest rates not rising to combat inflation? No political will for a start, and any one country that gets too far out of line will find currency appreciation itself addresses the problem. So, do we believe the US “dot plot” suggesting three rate rises in 2022, while the Euro zone does nothing? We struggle to.

Powell is still clinging to the lower workforce participation rate (which matters) as a signal to defer rate rises and not the unemployment rate (which is more closely related to vacancies) and hence of less fundamental relevance. While employment is great, it will still be unattractive if inflation (and fiscal drag) takes off, thereby holding the participation rate low.   

This is a graph showing US labour participation during November 2020-21.
See the Statista page from which this is extracted for more detailed information

This does still suggest dollar strength, while sterling like other smaller currencies always needs to be wary of getting too far out of line with US rates. But also, a need to fathom out the new look economy. To us, it does not seem service industries that rely on cheap labour are operating in the same world they grew up in. Certainly not if it is onshore.

There is a forced change in government consumption patterns (and hence employment), and this will also be telling. We are heading into quite a different market, when all this shakes down.

Sitting on high cash levels over Christmas, as we are, is pretty cowardly, but if you can’t see the way ahead, slow speeds are usually safer.

We do also rather agree with Chico Marx, this year at least.

Charles Gillams

Monogram Capital Management Ltd


Thin ice skaters or savants?

photograph by charles gillams

Are we drifting out further from the shore of reason, confident we can slide gracefully back to safety, or do we have insight others lack? Perhaps rates just can’t rise, whatever the inflation rate? If so, they are a paper tiger. While in a week others have pondered the failure of UK investing during this century, we look at why our biggest bank seems to hate the country.

I’m talking about the economics prognostications from HSBC, our largest bank. Following an intellectually flawed change in accounting standards (yes, another one), on top of the insanity of “mark to market” comes the “predicted loan loss model”.

Now professional bankers (unlike those in fintech) don’t make loans to lose money.

So, the politicians have instead required them to assume that they do.

Do the regulators know the industry they’re regulating?

Imagine portfolio management where you assume a certain portion of your buys always fail. Might be true, but how?   And if you admit you have to buy a certain number of your holdings to instantly lose money, what do your investors feel?

But although banks advance money on the basis of their credit committee assessments, the  hordes of regulators deem some of it is immediately lost. Being rational people on the whole, the banks, not great fans of predicting the future (given their record), hire economists to do this for them.

Economists, as we know, actually know little, but they do build nice econometric models. The regulators, who know even less, tweak the models, the bank Boards (see above) also tweak them. Soon every model is so tweaked that the economists wonder why they bothered.

UK shown as the riskiest of places to lend

Which leads us to page 62 of the HSBC Interim Report. We read it, so you don’t have to. There on the excitingly named, but dull as ditch water section called “Risk” it is set out.

Now HSBC lends globally: Mexico, India, Vietnam, Peoples Republic of China. So, guess where “The highest degree of uncertainty in expected credit loss estimates” relates to?   Apparently, the basket case to end all wicker weaving is . . . Yes, the UK.

How?

Well first up their ‘central scenario’ model sees the short-term average UK interest rates for the next five years, as 0.6%. Which at least is positive (unlike France, as they hate Macron even more), France (i.e., the Euro) rates are assumed to stay negative till after 2026.

This gloomy central scenario has a 50% chance, although for France it is a tiny bit better at 45%.

Now these are central estimates, but their “downside scenario worst case outcome” for the UK is heavily weighted, with a chunky 30% chance, and oops, France then gets a 35% chance of that disaster, neatly using up the slack just given to them, by the central scenario.

From this OECD page - our particular selection of countries.

Oh, and there’s worse: house prices crater, double figure unemployment is locked in etc.

And that’s a combined 80% of outcomes sorted; for a bank, that is pretty near certain.

China compared to the UK and France

What about Mainland China, then, their biggest market, if you now include Hong Kong. Well like the US (75%), China is at a high (80%) central scenario certainty, with Hong Kong at 75%. The worst-case scenario for the PRC is ranked at just a measly 8%, the lowest of any of their major markets.

Call it impossible - a prediction that China can’t fail.

Well, if that’s what the economists believe, who are the dumb Board to argue? Well of course they can, to cover their well-appointed posteriors, they then chuck another couple of billion of extra reserves in on top of the doomsday forecasts.

So, you see the vortex, everyone, regulators, economists, non-executives are just adding to reserves, like the good old days.

Maybe they are right, but we are seeing very little sign of those incredibly low global interest rates for five years, negative in France, 0.6% in the UK, 1.1% in the US? Really? If they are right, the markets are wrong.

And it is not just technical, with a 35% chance of France hitting the worst-case scenario, no wonder the Board has shipped out their French operations to a fin tech start up, albeit one backed by private equity giants Cerberus. Not an outfit known for overpaying. With five-year rates at 1.1% the dash for cash in the US makes sense too, selling out of their retail side as well. While with a virtually nailed on, global leading, 5% five-year average GDP growth in the PRC included, surely time to expand there?

Their loan book does not bear out HSBC’s bullish estimates of Chinese infallibility

So it is with some trepidation that we look at their loan book, on Real Estate, in China. It must be massive? Certainly, markets apparently assumed so last week. But no, a paltry $6.336 billion, for HSBC that’s a rounding error. Luckily too, all rock solid, just $28m of reserves needed, although given their certainty that almost feels excessive. The Board probably slipped that bit in.                      

I have great admiration for HSBC, and for me personally it is a long-term hold, but I have much less regard for regulators and ‘economists’ models, about which only one thing is certain. They are wrong.

So, I try to just strip out the predicted loan loss nonsense, but it is still driving asset allocations, even when palpably false. It explains much of the last two year’s volatility in bank share prices and reported profits, it also justified the highly damaging dividend ban.

Yet the HSBC share price is still not much above 50% of its pre-COVID peak. Great investor protection that was, it hammered HMRC receipts too, for what? Based on what? 

Does anyone challenge those weird scenarios internally at HSBC?

Is there really a 35% chance of France virtually collapsing in the next five years?

Or is this just part of cozying up to China? In which case as the IMF has shown, bankers accused of fiddling data for China, are not always seen as professionals and can lack credibility.

Regulators should not impose those odd fictions on real investment decisions either.

If they do real economies and yes jobs, suffer. 

Charles Gillams

Monogram Capital Management Ltd


This is a photograph showing Powell, chairman of the US federal reserve, whose speech is being analysed in the accompanying article, and Michael Gove, UK cabinet member

POWELL / GOVE : DROPPING THE PILOTS?

Jerome Powell looked ill at ease twice at his Wednesday press conference, with neither occasion related to monetary policy. While in the UK, Gove’s sidelining is the end of any chance of reform from this UK government.

Oddly when asked about his ‘hand in the till’, for bailing out his own family position in US Municipal bonds, Powell barely flinched. So why then is he worried?

The Powell press conference - what riled him?

He should be upset that the unemployment rate among black Americans is twice the level it was pre-COVID, at over 6% still. Given his pledge to hold the money taps open till that is fully recovered, which has for a while been clearly impossible without traumatic inflation, harming those same citizens, that should concern him.

This has long been Powell’s talisman to ward off the hard left, who are bent on two great goals, firstly taking over the reins of power by ejecting him and secondly finishing off Wall Street, as they so nearly did under Obama. Kamala Harris has not been in that triumphant position, at least not yet, so do the left really want to accept another deputy?

I doubt it.

So, the two questions Powell was riled by, were one about the new deputy governor, who has in this case the power to drive the regulatory agenda, mandated under Dodd Franks. Now, if one of Senator Warren’s acolytes can be inserted there, Powell will find life immeasurably harder. But for markets worse still,(the second question) was if Powell himself is chopped (Trump looked into it) before the recovery is complete. A weakened Biden has few other goodies to offer, if his portmanteau bill to throw $3 trillion of cash to his voters fails, scrapping a top Trump nominee at the Fed, might be the political trade-off.

While for Powell, as this all starts to get rather dirty, I could see him for the first time, asking if he was really that bothered. 

The US recovery - stimulus, markets, and minorities unemployment

The rest was all telegraphed passivity, still pumping enormous stimulus into the US economy, long after the recovery is running hot.

The US 10-year bond resumed its gentle lapping sound against the low-rate rocks, the storm of inflation roared on overhead, and the shadow of crossed fingers, fell on every vault.

The market has turned, in the US at least, from worrying about ‘when’, to guessing ‘how high’, with, given the global malaise, some confidence that “not very” is the answer.

Chop the Chair of the Fed, and that delicate illusion shatters. While whatever his politics, shipping Jerome off the transom, will hurt those same beleaguered minorities most. We should never underestimate the zeal of a convert, and he is that.  

Sidelining Gove

We have not seen that kind of zeal on these shores for over a decade. True, various short-lived moneymen have breezed through ministries, failing to unpick their form and function, scattered management speak and chums’ contracts around equally liberally, and left.

But lifting the drains, sorting the plumbing, fixing the boiler type reform, no, Gove is oddly (because he was useless at it) the last of those to fall. But he had the great merit of scaring people and driving legislation, which with the stodgy morass of public sector spend, is part of the battle. But the idea that he can either help on “levelling up” (which is just a catch phrase, and always will be) or pacify the Celtic fringe, hungry for real power (and unaware it does not exist) is risible.

Meanwhile, the Cabinet Office is quietly stripped of ministers, to be put back in the box marked “too difficult” once more.

A parallel with Chinese policies

This is like selling the inhabitants of East Turkmenistan down the road for some of Chairman Xi’s foggy promises on future coal fired power stations. It would be sad if it weren’t true.

Although China is now helping us return to a land beloved by investors, where money is scarce and hence actually earns a return. While risk still clearly comes in many forms; including Marxist morality, that is, if such a thing exists.

Big corporate failures do at least achieve that heightened risk awareness.   

Charles Gillams

Monogram Capital Management Ltd

:) You might already know that 'dropping the pilot' is a famous cartoon by Tenniel from 1890 when the Kaiser dropped Bismarck.


This is a collage of images illustrating the argument being made by Charles Gillams in his blog post 'every dog' that changes in the perception of Boris Johnson and Chinese policies should be noticed by professional investors

EVERY DOG

Boris seems slowly to be turning into the opposition to his own party, which I suppose is not new for him. Meanwhile China also seems to be hitting an identity crisis. Neither bodes well for investors.

We apparently have a real budget due soon, but this vain Prime Minister seems bent on upstaging his own team, so we had a pile of tax rises and changes to tax law bundled out in a haphazard fashion in response to the endless (and insatiable) demands of one ministry.

A likely collision course with natural Tories

That pretty well defines bad governance, and these ad hoc excursions into major spending plans are a hallmark of waste and short termism. So, to me the investor headline should be about planning ahead for the Tory government to either fail in front of an exhausted electorate, or less plausibly given the large majority, to implode. But have no doubt that No 10 and the mass of the Tory party are now set on a collision course.

The extraordinary extravagance of the blunt furlough scheme has always been the fiscal problem, and it is hard to believe, as many bosses are clamouring for new migration to solve multiple labour problems, largely in some measure of their own making, that the government has still parked up a fair chunk of two million workers, on pretty close to full pay.

I struggle to comprehend that number in a hot summer labour market, nor do I see why employers would cling onto staff until October at which point, presumably they take a decision? Are these ghost workers? Already happily in new jobs, but having done a deal with their bosses to split the loot, their fake pay for not being? Are these people HR have forgotten or are too scared to fire? Will they really try to pick up work they put down eighteen months back, in a largely different world and probably for a now quite alien organisation?

Who knows, but the whole thing cost £67 billion (so far) and that’s what Boris needs back. I challenge anyone to give a lucid explanation of how his latest proposal “fixes” social care for the elderly. Nor to explain how in parts of the country like this, with no state care home provision anyway, it can ever be called “fair”. So, to me, it is just bunce for the ever-gaping maw of the state, and the idea, with Boris in charge, that it will ever be temporary or even accounted for, is somewhat risible.

What would “fix” social care is transparent, autonomous, local provision, not bullied by a dozen state agencies, not run by money grubbing doctors, not harried by property developers and absurd land costs, nor daft HMRC grabs on stand-by staff pay, and it needs to be highly invested in simple technology, all IT integrated with the NHS; not this crippled, secretive, subscale mess.

It is not that there is no problem, but it is as much operational as financial. A recent Bank of England paper looking at wealth distribution highlights how in retirement property comes to both dominate assets and also shrinks far more slowly with age.

A chart showing average wealth by age group, to illustrate an argument in the article by Charles Gillams that we should look at who benefited from the furlough scheme.

(Sourced from this speech given at the London School of Economics, by Gertjan Vlieghe, member of the Bank of England’s Monetary Policy Committee.)

Of course, the crux here is seeing a family home as both an asset and an essential for life. That is the distortion, and this fiddling with care rules attacks the symptom, not the cause.

Can you trust a word he says?

So, now tax on income rises, a broken promise, employer tax rises, broken promise, the ‘triple lock’ on pensions is ditched, broken promise, and to top it off those working beyond normal retirement age (now 66) get a 25% tax penalty, via another broken promise. Oh, and if you are mug enough to save, then dividends will get hit too.

Again, there is a real problem but this is by no means a logical answer either: I guess the Treasury were applying heat on excess debt, and this is sand kicked back in their face, but it shows no sign of anyone solving anything. The UK has both high debt levels and no supportive currency block around it, sure France and Italy look bad, but they have Germany to help. The UK does not. Hence the anxiety.

So, Boris has had a fine Cameron-like bonfire of dozens of electoral promises; the worm turned on Cameron (and Clegg) when he couldn’t keep his word, and so it will turn on Boris. This time he won’t have Corbyn as the pantomime bete noir to bail him out. Indeed, Kier Starmer’s response linking this problem to inflated property prices is remarkably prescient, even if his typically confiscational solution is not.

These tax levels (as a % of GDP) have not been seen in fifty years, for an economy with a noticeably less effective grasp on government expenditure and a rather less globally competitive commercial base.

This is a clip from a published UK government source showing local tax increases anticipated in 2021-22

While tax rises are emerging everywhere (see below), and public service reform has become a simple money equation, need more service, spend more money, a dangerous one-way road.

Source: from this primary report

While notably, ‘buy to let’ is again left untouched. London house prices have doubled in this century, the FTSE 100 has moved from circa 6800 at its late 1999 peak to 7030 now and remains below pre-pandemic levels. So clearly this is not the time to hit the investors in jobs and business, who have had a 5% nominal gain (that is a 60% real loss) in twenty years and yet to leave the buy to let rentiers trading in second-hand hopes, with their 60% real gain in that time, untouched.

And don’t give us the dividends argument; the buy to let plutocrats get plenty of rent and all their sticky little service charges.  This measure simply hits the workers and investors in business and pampers the bureaucrats and the rentiers. It makes very little sense, unless you are a senior civil servant or a retired prime minister, like Blair, of course.

Chinese insularity - the new version

Meanwhile China I feel is now detaching itself from both the rule of international law (in so far as it ever bothered) and more interestingly the world financial system. It may indeed end up better off, but for now (and this is also a change from much of the last 50 years) it does not feel it needs to attract external capital.

So much of its trade and capital markets engagement has been predicated on securing capital; this is an odd and novel twist. Although perhaps a logical response to the West, who rather than conserving capital as a scare resource, are immersing the world in torrents of surplus cash and inflation.

Much of China’s policy about their own global investment (so outside China) also used to have the same theme, driven by the desire for returns, influence and to hold their own export-based currency down.

But no more, it seems, and their inherent desire for autarchy, the hermit kingdom trope, has only been emphasized by Trump, WHO and the madness of the internet. It apparently wants to be the new Germany, (no longer the new USA), so it will be insular and conservative: cautious, not driven mad by debt and the baubles it procures.

Well, if true it will be different, whether it can really be done, without a wave of disruptive defaults is unclear, but don’t doubt the length of vision, so unlike our own government. While a theme of this century has also been where China leads, the rest must reluctantly follow.

Even a dog has its day, but for investors both the UK and China now feel significantly more canine than at the start of the summer.


ALL QUIET: Covid and UK Property

A brief glance at an excellent first half for investors:  thoroughly “risk on” for the first quarter, but a slower but still an upward grind thereafter. Not that such arbitrary dates matter. What does count is what can make it kick on from here?

Covid patterns

So, first a glance at COVID, or rather our reaction to it. The disease itself is now less important in most OECD economies, they have the capacity to deal with it, vile though it is, and the vaccine numbers are rising steadily, faster than we expected in the UK.

This is a screenshot from this website at Johns Hopkins University : https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html

In raw demographic terms, in most places it is barely a flicker on the remorseless upward march of global population growth, but the extraordinary evasive action being taken mattered much more, and I see little sign of that abating.

Watch a dynamic map of all births and deaths at this site: https://srv1.worldometers.info/world-population/  (these figures include all deaths, not just from Covid 19.)

One of the key issues is that, for whatever reason, it is prone to sudden spikes, the only defence to which is almost complete (90%?) vaccine coverage. Indeed, the spikes can clearly ride quite widespread vaccination, higher than originally thought. But the spikes last weeks, perhaps a month, and for most of the year, most places are not experiencing them.

The trouble, especially in the UK, is our muddled policy response is to take down the economy on a semi-permanent basis, almost as a fetish against the lurking evil. To put in place colossal support measures for spikes that are transient is both cripplingly expensive and turns emergency response into embedded base cost. We are on a constant war footing, even when the enemy has seeped away to regroup.

So, despite Mr. Javid’s optimism, we do expect the bureaucracy to cling onto extensive controls, that limit capacity in public services and many consumer sectors. I had hoped that the ridiculous restrictions would bear down on the elite’s summer holidays, but I now understand they don’t care, as they clearly don’t obey them anyway.   

HOW MUCH MORE DELAY CAN THIS 'REOPENING TRADE' TAKE?

Which brings us to two thoughts, firstly the re-opening trade is shrugging off some mighty setbacks, and very little of the run up from last November was based on controls extending into 2022.

At some point balance sheets will start to crack, and values will then retreat.

Commercial property sector

The other is a more sector specific concern, but also a straw in the wind, in the extension of the UK commercial eviction ban well into 2022. I don’t follow the logic of that, it is a significant ongoing seizure of private property rights, it is not clear to what end. It is not protecting jobs, unless furlough is also to be extended. It appears to assume businesses can occupy premises rent free for an extended time period, although the Government also suggests (slightly oddly) that much of their business support package (mainly loans, with government backing) can be used to pay rent.

Not that I care much for commercial landlords, who have long been over protected in the UK and exploitative, but it is to me, an odd move. We looked at real estate earlier in the year and expressed support for the TR Property Investment Trust in particular, in February, after which it has been on a run. But reading a quartet of March year end REIT annual accounts, I feel rather less sanguine:  those are British Land, Land Securities, Helical and NewRiver.

The trouble here is they got hammered last year, with their March rent collections a mess, and double figure valuation drops on the retail side, they have been hammered again this year, with similar double figure write downs, and now it looks like they could be hammered for the current year too. That’s a lot of damage for the sector.

Office rents are holding up, collections are better, surrenders fewer, but they are running hard to stand still, with typical average lease lengths in single figures; this brings a lot of renewals too close for comfort. Time off debt maturities is also becoming significant.

Some Specifics on British Land, Land Securities, New River.

Equally clearly a lot of London occupiers, in particular, will have spare space, probably well into 2024 and maybe forever. Successive asset write downs, keep eating into the debt cushion, rates are low, so debt service is not an issue, but covenants are tightening, cash flow for development is getting squeezed and banks are not sitting back, just because the tenants have a state license not to pay.

They do differ of course, British Land is fairly serene, based on London offices.  Land Securities having been boring for so long has appointed a new team, from the student accommodation and logistics worlds. Granted both were good performers in the last decade, but they are talking of ditching much of the existing portfolio, to chase development schemes. Brave if nothing else, one might say. Helical is smaller but goes for ultra-high quality office refurbishments and expansions, with tenants who can pay for quality, but each of their complex inner-city projects can take years to get through planning and their growth depends on a steady stream of them. After current ones complete, there will be a hiatus.

While NewRiver, always an aggressive high (and at times uncovered) yield stock, also looks strange. Debt is substantial, and another double figure fall in values could be harsh. Granted that would take more of its yields into double figure territory, in areas where demand (and alternative uses) should really provide a floor. But it also flirted with a badly timed foray into pubs, and their valuers are (to no great surprise) saying valuations for those are in the “who knows?” realm. Meanwhile the finance man is apparently jumping ship to lead a spin-off of the licensed premises, which sends some quite odd signals, although maybe holders have tired of his complex skills.

This leaves a more bifurcated market than ever, but with the risk of overvaluations both in the good stuff (last mile logistics in particular) and storage in general, and in residential.

By contrast UK retail is looking ever more wounded. It has been a great reopening trade, but unless the runway is really getting cleared, take off may now be too late for some.

Meanwhile Boris can’t seem to let go, having gained control, freedom is clearly an unattractive option to those in power. If that stays the same, we can see a perfect real estate storm brewing, if and when liquidity dries up a little.      

The umbrella organisation, RICS, has in the mean time this summary to offer as its full market survey results.

Politics in the constituency of a murdered labour politician

Finally, the odd thing about Batley and Spen, was the idea that the Tories could win. I looked up the odds on Labour last week, at 4: 1 against, I found them most attractive. And that was based on my wrongly writing off Gorgeous George, who mercifully is one of a kind.

Without his strange allure it was and is very solidly Labour. Another non-story, I fear.

Charles Gillams

Monogram Capital Management Ltd