The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
To think he wants to re nationalise energy including the big six and regional distribution. How on earth do labour think they would perform better than such heavily regulated privatised companies. Where would he get the money from to buy back ? How do labour intend to operate and maintain it ? what is the advantage in owning them anyway ? Fantasy land stuff. Completely put off them by whole thing.
So the proposal is to nationalise the parts of BT involved in BB, basically Openreach. So would this be a method of doing it, ignore personal thaught, in politics, value of the whole is say £2 and the bit to nationalises is worth £1. So you get a bond equal to £1 the share price is reset to £1 and you keep your shares. So would that work, would that be fair and reasonable going forward.
"his distatste for the few not the many"
Was trying to do a short post. Should have been:
" his distatste for the few in 'for the many not the few!' "
I actually, unintentionally, watched live, Labour's initial lunchtime big reveal on free fibre broadband for all, whilst trying to get a timecheck and news update.
After Corbyn spoke (He cracked a corker at the govt's expense saying "Old copper cables? Rewminds you of the Tories doesn't it?") to a hall full of laughing media. Fair play he made a good joke. 1-0 to Labour on jokes.
Eventually he handed over to John McDonnell, who in defending the decision to nationalise broadband highlighted where the blame for lack of financial progress really lay with (by implication).
- Just Googled to make sure what I recall tallies with what he said, so from Labour supporting Guardian newspaper, here's the pertinent bit:
" Since privatisation, £54bn has been paid out in share dividends. That is twice as much as full-fibre rollout would have cost!"
Doesn't that reveal his distatste for the "few not the many" so-called rich in society? Otherwise why highlight greedy shareholders unless you actively despised them?
Does such an attitude auger well for a fair price paid to 'greedy' shareholders, after pointing the finger at them and revealing his thoughts towards shareholders as part of the problem?
I personaly don't think a decent price paid to shareholders is high on his list of priorities at all. They're politician's. You'll be TOLD what the fair price is.
Besides, he doesn't want the whole of BT - only the bits mentioned which I've tallied up in a post way down below. So a fair price would be only a portion of the share price. As shareholders would still be left with a company called BT, Labour is not going to pay you the full current SP for BT, are they?
Their argument is: We're only nationalising some parts of BT, so we only have to recompense shareholders for "some parts " of the share price value.
(Can't yet put a value on those assets he wants, but the assets he wants, employ 2/3rds of BT's current employees on the books -so go figure, but it'll be different from Labour's, I'll wager).
There is nothing funny about it Aus. Mickey has given a succinct description of what Corbyn and his acolytes stand for. If he gets the keys to no. 10 then decent people, who have worked hard all their lives and paid their way in society can be very fearful. I am contemplating liquidating my portfolios prior to the election. Who would have thought that Corbyn and his supporters would have made significant gains last time around? Where did his support come from? It may still. be there and growing undected by opinion polls as was the case last time. A nightmare scenario that I hope will never happen.
Mickey1 - that’s funny right? You paraphrase all the propaganda in one go
"Despite what you are told, this isn’t Venezuela"
Heres a man who thinks Venezuela is wonderful, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2FbWsINjpRY
Houses which are subject to compulsory purchase are purchased at the market price, otherwise that is theft and is illegal.
I'm not letting propoganda influence me, Like most sensible people I'm terrified of the faint possibility of a gang of marxist anti-semitic terrorist sympathisers getting control of this country. Not propoganda, fact.
Heavy I think the stated plan is to pay a price set by parliament. Paying below market value would trigger all kinds of legal battles. Not that there won’t be legal battles. Houses are compulsory purchased all the time & I don’t call that theft, mainly because it’s unpopular but not illegal. I think you are letting propaganda get you a bit over excited. Despite what you are told, this isn’t Venezuela
Amazing how many people bumble along in a naive dreamworld!
Forced takeaway of assets and cash = theft.
If you walk down the street, and I demand the BT cash you're holding in your hand, even if you don't want to hand it over, with the threat of kidnapping (jail) if you don't comply, that is theft. Plain and simple.
Aus3009. "But I’m not silly enough to let propaganda make me call it theft."
McDonnell has promised to take BT back in to public ownership and to pay a much reduced value for the company, along with other companies. That is what I call theft. If you own a house and somebody says I'll give you 60% of its value and you have no choice in the matter because I'm going to take it from you... that's theft I'm sure you will agree.
Then again, that's what the labour marxists stand for.
Funny how paying for shares becomes “theft” .... share price is down, share price has been dropped by countless issues last couple of years, fraud (which is a kind of theft) not to mention record OFCOM fines. I’m against Labours full plan, I’m not sure whether part of its plan could get BT off the hook. But I’m not silly enough to let propaganda make me call it theft.
Let's hope theres a bounce after election
August down to 159p, steady rise then to over £2 until the trots announced their intention to screw the shareholders. Trots and share prices don't go well together.
and if you want some more lies and spin on reality go and indulge yourself at factcheck uk.
OK, BT shares are performing quite badly right now. They were on a nice upward trend from August until the marxist nutters opened their gobs and started threatening the shareholders with theft of their investments. All it takes is the ridiculous illiterates of the labour party to issue threats and share prices will go down. Shareholders who vote labour are simply turkeys voting for christmas, right JR ?