1) Dishonestly and intending to make a gain, or to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss". 2)They were also accused of having concealed the "true financial position [of Tesco] from the auditors". 3) Significantly, they were accused of having falsified the digital accounting records and the company's draft interim financial statements. The Lawyer in me finds 1) Ridiculous, 2) Maybe, but the auditors are under investigation themselves, & 3) Unlikely - the 'digital fingerprints' would be easy to prove, (an email instruction to 'sex it up', say) & impossible to deny. Wrapping all 3 charges together suggests a shotgun approach. I read a recent report that says FTSE companies pay out 5 times in dividends, their Pension deficits & John Lewis faces a 'nigh on impossible task' reducing its Pension Fund deficit, ballooned by 512 million in 6 months, because of it's Partnership structure, just to put things in perspective.
I dont understand the pension comments you are making, can you link to the daily mail article then maybe my confusion might get clarified. I expect the deficit to rise as returns get lower and would expect more money would need to be diverted away from my dividend hope into a pension top up fund ..... unless we can sell it for a quid!
Is the confusion with SP something to do with size of deficit compared to Tesco market cap? Hopefully profit and fcf might be better indicators hence why I dont think Santa will be visiting with his divi sack this year even though I expect better numbers soon
The daily mail article actually said , then like LennyMac i can only conclude that they are getting confused between the " value " of a company & the " cash " a company has ( or is short of ) to pay their pension obligations .The link below will explain it better ---
I'm not sure how a mechanism would work to actually align the inevitable fluctuation of the sp with its somewhat less variable pension obligations. Either you've misread the information in the article or the definition of pension liability in the article is fundamentally different to the one I've used.
A company's pension liability is the unfunded portion of its pension commitment; the difference between what a company is obliged to pay out and the amount of cash it has actually set aside for doing so.
Pension liability reduces as SP rises. What an odd comment. The deficit is entirely based on value of investments v. Liabilities projected forward. How would this work if the company was not quoted. You are usually so savvy Opium but this time not so Monsieur.
Datafeed and UK data supplied by NBTrader and Digital Look.
While London South East do their best to maintain the high quality of the information displayed on this site,
we cannot be held responsible for any loss due to incorrect information found here. All information is provided free of charge, 'as-is', and you use it at your own risk.
The contents of all 'Chat' messages should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Limited, or its affiliates.
London South East does not authorise or approve this content, and reserves the right to remove items at its discretion.