I think there are a few takes on this Maynard.
- there is nothing wrong with a 1% position.
- specifically I am trying to point out the dregs, things that have falledn so much they now represent 1%, so have seen a significant fall.
I think there is some sense( for me anyway) of getting rid of the noise. The constant red. Well, that is what I try to do.
The crux of the point being that for a small ‘tail’ positiion to have any meaninngful impact at all on your overall gains are very unlikely. You mention TSTY for example, and have held it down to c~1p It has since 6x bagged from 1 penny… But has that gain in itself made any substantial impact to overall portfolio performance (genuine Q? has it resulted in a material improvement)
I guess what we need to realise is that as investors we all have different takes on similar situations. There is rarely an absolute *thout must do this * rule, and I am hopefully not trying to sway @Snazzytime I respect what each perosn has put forward, and for them to manage it as they feel is best, to them. Rather the intent is ust offer an alternative, and some consideration of whether many smaller positions is a positive use of time, and funds.
For me, the thought of having loads of smaller depleted positions goes against my nature as now I want to be shot of such positions before they langusing as giant red losses in the PF, and also because it then adds extra time and burden in that I still have to check RNS, I still ahve to keep in the loop on the co, and I still have to regularly review these and say to myself "now this has dropped to a penny, do I load up with even more, or just sit it out and hope it will 5, 10, 20 x bag from here’
Indeed, I often start with 2% positions that allow me to scale in if I feel I am validated, and equally I am happy to have a 1% position in complete binary punts (now and again) but if I had a 1% position and let it halve… then I am trying to say to myself is it worth keeping this here…
good chats though - thanks