LM portfolio as at 29/05/2026:
| Code | Sector | Date Bought | Cost | Value | Gain/Loss |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LM102 | Investment Banking and Brokerage Services |
21/04/2026 | £1530 | £1750 | 14.81% |
| LM103 | Electronic and Electrical Equipment | 21/04/2026 | £1520 | £1680 | 10.67% |
| LM104 | Industrial Transportation | 21/04/2026 | £1560 | £1480 | (5.10%) |
| LM105 | Industrial Support Services | 21/04/2026 | £1520 | £1460 | (3.61%) |
| LM107 LM107-2 |
Software and Computer Services | 22/04/2026 27/05/2026 |
£3080 | £3570 | 16.08% |
| LM108 | Industrial Metals and Mining | 22/04/2026 | £1540 | £1710 | 10.82% |
| LM109 | Telecommunications Service Providers | 05/05/2026 | £1510 | £1400 | (7.54%) |
| LM110 LM110-2 |
Technology Hardware and Equipment | 05/05/2026 27/05/2026 |
£3030 | £3230 | 6.57% |
| LM112 | Banks | 19/05/2026 | £1520 | £1570 | 3.16% |
| LM113 | Food Producers | 19/05/2026 | £1550 | £1540 | (0.37%) |
A lot of changes, again. AEP, LM099, was going great guns and I'd upped the position to 3 units. Naturally it took a nosedive two days after the third unit was added and I sold the lot for a £288.56 loss.
The price has subsequently dropped quite a bit since I got out so I was 100% correct to get rid and take the small hit, avoiding a larger one that would've resulted from any delay in selling.
Easy come, easy go.
Next, LM106 which was a one unit investment into AAF or "Airtel Africa PLC". This was really annoying because the price dropped through the stop loss in ShareScope, I sold at what turned out to be bottom and, naturally, it has bounced back up.
Perhaps this is one to watch in case it starts hitting the highs again and I buy it for a second time. I do currently have a position in the same sector so I won't be buying it whilst LM109 is stil in the portfolio. A few weeks/months down the line I may no longer have any in that sector so if I spot it in a filter (52 week high or all-time high) I'll maybe jump back in.
In any case it was only a £173.29 loss. Yes, these losses are annoying and I would rather they didn't happen but I'm hoping that by keeping them small and letting the winning trades run and run I can compound my money over the long term and make a fortune.
The third loss was in Ashtead Technology Holdings PLC (AT., LM111), a share in the Oil, Gas and Coal sector. It had made a 52 week high but was then unable to hold on to those gains and quickly turned around. Again, just a one unit loss of £163.83. It has continued to fall since I got out.
There's several additions that you can see in the table above; if they are after the last update (07/05/2026) then they are new. I will let you do the maths yourself and, if you were interested, they were all purchased because the share made a new high or a unit was added to an existing position after it hit 20% profit.
So-called "AI" creates nonsense content
I signed up for a website last week that has long been promised by the character who runs it. And I do mean LONG... it's no exaggeration to say that he's been threatening to launch this membership site for YEARS.
The site's finally here and it looks good. He's obviously using some good software to run it as the whole process of signing up, getting a membership then logging in is seamless. The problem is the content; much of it has been generated through some kind of GPT and it is blatantly obvious that he has not written many, if any, of the posts himself.
Considering he's been thinking about the launch of this resource for years you would think he'd want the very best content on it. However, this doesn't seem to be the case at all.
Now I've read plenty of work written by this marketer in the past and much of it was pretty decent. He's not an accomplished author by any stretch of the imagination but he has never claimed to be. His pre-2023 (i.e. pre ChatGPT) articles all read well in a kind of conversational style. He even wrote a book at one point which was OK although it suffered from the usual problem where the writer starts off with plenty of enthusiasm then appears to run out of steam about 50-75% of the way through before rushing the end to get it finished and released.
Pretty much all of the articles on this new site have been written by some kind of so-called "AI". I've purposely put that term in quotes because it isn't real AI - Artificial Intelligence - it's just a large language model, a bit of software that predicts what text should be posted together after analysing lots of other examples. It's all statistical.
So this "Mike" as I will call him has taken some huge shortcuts for the articles of his site and it's blatantly obvious; they all follow the same format and are very irritating to read.
There have been a few posts on this site where I’ve liked the headline, gone to read it but given up when there were large chunks of repetition. For example, there will be a repeat of blocks of text where several sentences in a row start with the same word. It's pretty jarring and makes the text quite difficult to get through - the last thing you need when you are hoping to keep eyeballs on your site.
Some advice I got many years ago, and I wish I could remember from where, is to read over a composition after you’ve written it and make sure that the starting words to each paragraph are varied. I've always found it really helps with the flow.
Mike has taken the shortcut of getting some, let's face it, pretty poor software to write for him and expects his membership to want to read the output. Yet it's all completely artificial.
There's no hook, no personal touch. It's a waste of my time to read this stuff because I know that I could just go and get the same article myself by typing some relevant prompts into a GPT. So why would I bother to read his posts?
It's just so LAZY. If he can't be bothered to put in a little bit of effort write an article then I can't be bothered to read it.
And sadly, it has come to a point where lots of people are doing this now - having GPTs "write" articles and posting them online to add to the overall clutter of useless text on the internet. It's pure "AI" slop being formed into passages of text that, just 3 years ago, would likely have been created with at least some effort and personal touches by someone you could perhaps relate to.
One can only imagine Mike's thought process:
I really need a few posts for the website... perhaps I can put my phone on silent, grab a cup of coffee, a pen and a notepad and spend an hour in a quiet room with no distractions to brainstorm some content ideas. Once I have a list of say two dozen I'll jot down some of the points I'd like to make in each post to be sure that I cover everything. When I've done that, all that's left to do is write the articles and edit them down to a reasonable size ready to publish to the site.
Better yet, I could put them to one side for a day or two then re-read them to see if they need any last-minute editing before they are published. Going forward, if I could dedicate an hour each day to this I'd probably have 20 or so decent, original, interesting pieces to use within a couple of weeks. Post one every couple of days and that's two months' worth of material to use. All I have to do then is rinse and repeat, dedicating an hour or so every day and the content will build up nicely on the site. Solid plan.
But being realistic it's probably more like: I can save LOADS of time if I just get ChatGPT to write all my articles for me.
Mike's membership site is free for anyone to join because he is hoping to translate the freeloaders (like me) into paying customers. The site has several member levels, increasing in price with more features the more you pay. The articles and content are meant to persuade us to upgrade but if all he serves up is this "AI" junk then he's doing himself a disservice.
I've got a feeling his new website will die away like many he's tried before although at least his previous versions were his own work and not the repetitive nonsense he's serving up now.