Cobus Loots, CEO of Pan African Resources, on delivering sector-leading returns for shareholders. Watch the video 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.
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 ?
and if you want some more lies and spin on reality go and indulge yourself at factcheck uk.
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.
Let's hope theres a bounce after election
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.
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.
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.
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
"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.
Mickey1 - that’s funny right? You paraphrase all the propaganda in one go
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.
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).
"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!' "
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.
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."
It's a lot more than just "basically Openreach".
They said they want:
1) Openreach
2) Enterprise
3) Consumer
4) and parts of BT Technology.
Openreach has circa 33,000 employees
The total number of empolyees in the above divisions is currently - well over 65,000 - up to 70,000 so 2/3rds of all the employees in BT go over to work for the govt under Labour's proposals. Then there's another hit to consider.
This from Shares mag out today:
"... Then there’s the huge pension scheme issue. BT has previously highlighted pension costs as a material obstacle to a potential Openreach demerger while analysts at investment bank Jefferies believe that the BT pension scheme trustee would ‘logically demand very substantial upfront compensation’...."
I take that to mean as 2/3rds of employees flit over to a nationalised industry that BT will have to pay over to the govt 2/3rds of the outstanding pension deficit too.
The meddling poltical finger in the pie is set to increase even if Conservarives win with:
"Analysts at investment bank Berenberg believe BT could face being politically leaned on by a re-elected Boris Johnson, increasingly the political risk, ‘even in the event of a Conservative victory’. "
And that would lead inevitably to this:
" A tactical cut to dividends, perhaps 20% or 25%, would make a lot of sense.... . . .. Such a move would also send regulator Ofcom a message that the company is willing to be flexible in meeting the various demands of all stakeholders, playing its part in developing a faster broadband network for the nation while giving investors a return on capital. . .
. . . Finally, it would draw a line under an issue that has dogged the company’s investment case for several years, namely provide some certainty over the future dividend policy.....
‘We think it would be the right thing to do to take some dividend off the table, potentially a 30% to 40% cut, and reinvest that money into Openreach,’ says Adrian Gosden, head of Strategic UK Equities at fund manager GAM. ‘That would bring a whole new raft of people to the story and you’d still get a 5% yield.’
PS.
".... That would bring a whole new raft of people to the story and you’d still get a 5% yield.’
Yeah, if you buy in brand new at this area's SP of 180p-odd, yes it would make sense.
Shame about the ultra loyal, ultra long term holders in BT as they're in £££'s above this lowly SP - they won't see anywhere near 5% yield, will they?
Thanks Velo, but sometimes less is more. A simple proposition worth £2 bond for £1 keep share worth £1. Would that work and be a starting point giving everybody what they want. Manifesto states
We will establish British Broadband, with two arms: British Digital Infrastructure (BDI) and the British Broadband Service (BBS). We will bring the broadband-relevant parts of BT into public ownership, with a jobs guarantee for all workers in existing
broadband infrastructure and retail broadband work.
BDI will roll out the remaining 90–92% of the full- bre network, and acquire necessary access rights to existing assets. BBS will coordinate the delivery of free broadband in tranches as
the full- bre network is rolled out, beginning with the communities worst served by existing broadband networks.
So no mention of exactly which bits, let's keep it simple.
one way or another, 'selling' open reach, passing partial current value to shareholders and leaving the remaining BT free to compete has it's attractions and right here and now is possibly a better growth prospect than the treacle it's stuck in.
I'm not sure it's even worth speculating on the subject of nationalisation. The probability of Labour gaining an overall majority are almost non existent, even if the Conservatives do extremely badly, with the Lib Dems winning the remain Conservative marginals. The Lib Dems would never agree to a nationalisation program. Lets imagine the SNP win most of the seats in Scotland and leverage an Independence referendum against supporting Labours left wing agenda, many Labour MP's could never support that and would rebel against their leadership. Corbyn and McDonnell know all this, so their promises are undeliverable and they know that too. Funny thing is, most of the electorate realise all this too. Labour know they're facing an election defeat and are making promises to a section of the electorate that have an axe to grind against society for a variety of different reasons. In my opinion the only people who'd vote Labour are the ones that either freeload, are lazy, never save for their future/retirement, or think the country should just become a free for all looney left lethargic failure of a country. It's a pity the many young Labour supporters can't be given a taste of the 70's.
"The 1970s shipbuilding and aerospace nationalisation provides an illustration. The pledge was contained in the Labour manifesto for the first 1974 general election. It took nine months of internal deliberation before a Bill was presented to Parliament. This proved highly contentious, both in the House of Commons (where the Government had a majority of only three) and the House of Lords (which rejected the Bill three times). The Conservative opposition strongly opposed the Bill, and the support of the Labour backbenches could not be taken for granted. In the event the Act was finally passed in 1977, after multiple amendments and significant reductions in the scope of the businesses nationalised. Very shortly afterwards, the Government lost its overall majority.
The technical and political hurdles in the way of a nationalising Act of Parliament should not be under-estimated, particularly for a Government without a clear majority. That has consequences for the legal framework of any potential Act. The longer it takes for an Act to be passed, the more difficult the valuation questions become"
https://www.cliffordchance.com/content/dam/cliffordchance/PDFDocuments/nationalisation.pdf
Excuse my ignorance but is Taste of the 70's some sort of compilation?!! Glam rock or punk rock?
well there's a double negative if ever I heard one!
You shouldn't keep underestimating yourself. If you don't recognise your own achievements no-one else will and whilst most wouldn't aspire to be a DIY sex god you must claim whatever you can..
"Fleccy,youve come down on my mad person richter scale"
There's a thin dividing line between Genius and Madness, time will tell whether my investment decisions make m money long term. Either way the probability of Labour pushing through a nationalisation program encompassing BT assets are Zero, the likely Parliamentary compromise will be to get transport infrastructure nationalised at best, because everyone agrees that transport privatisation isn't working. I don't think the above is likey either really, as I just don't think Labour have a chance anyway.