Davidsb wrote:Mr Pidgley decides that BKG shares are overvalued at £31.10 each.....
Maybe, but all we actually know is that he decided to sell. Believing shares are overvalued is a possible reason to sell, but by no means the only possible reason. In particular, there are quite a few reasons why someone might need cash, have to sell
something to raise it, and decide on the thing to sell on the basis that it's the least undervalued asset of sufficiently high value that they've got. Possibly with personal factors taken into account - for example, the family mansion might be less undervalued but selling it would involve considerably more personal inconvenience. Or one might be very uncomfortable having so many of one's eggs in one basket...
Selling is not symmetrical with buying in this respect: there are far fewer reasons why someone might be a "forced buyer" than why they might be a "forced seller". So if someone buys shares, it is usually fair to deduce that they think they're undervalued, or at least not overvalued - but the equivalent deduction from selling shares is fair often not a fair one.
Finally, I should say that I'm talking about possibilities in general, so please don't take any of the above as coded hints about Mr Pidgley's personal circumstances. I know nothing about those circumstances beyond the facts in the RNS - I've made no attempt whatsoever to enquire into them for this post, and don't intend to do so in the future.
Gengulphus