Rainbow Rare Earths Phalaborwa project shaping up to be one of the lowest cost producers globally. Watch the video here.
fleccy, I have stated similar on here before.
It was obvious that few if any Politicians wanted us to 'leave' the EU.
Even the US then President didn't want it.
Project fear up to the vote was intense from all angles, and when it was proven not to work, all those who never wanted us to leave then had to 'ensure' that as many of their 'dire warnings' which were ignored by the majority of voters, would then be 'made' to happen.
Likely imo, partly as a 'punishment' to the UK to prevent what they all feared most, 'contagion' if the UK were seen to be more successful 'out' rather than 'in' to stop others following our lead.
Also, imo I think it may run even deeper, and those top powerful 'reaminers' will ensure that the UK is consistently now dealt a 'bad hand' to bring down the Government, to ensure Labour get a term in office, who will 'ruin' the economy completely to then make way for a new Tory leader who will tell the nation that we 'need' to rejoin the EU fold, but in a slightly different way and terms to make it 'seem' palatable to the then demoralised electorate.
As I truly think the worlds master plan is way stronger than UK politics of Tories v Labour, and as such will 'use' such to get what 'they' the worlds leaders wanted.
Democracy is ONLY allowed if it coincides with what 'they' wanted, and with the Brexit vote it 'didn't' so we can't have dim common people upsetting their plan can we.
Truly worried for Lloyds prospects as sadly Labour due to the above, are imo likely to get in next time.
Hope I am wrong, and may take the earthed baco foil cap off to be as dim and naive as the rest of the populace soon.
Bought these at a similar time to buying Lloyds shares. But only a handful of these and too many Lloyds. What a massive mistake that was.
Can't remember what I paid for these but likely under three pounds, and have paid good divs' whereas Lloyds is still way below what I paid for it some 15 years ago.
So, the reason this board is quite imo, is people holding are content, whereas Lloyds is one of the busiest boards, perhaps for the opposite reason, all trying to convince one another that given enough time....
Bankrupty, thank you for your polite reply and reasoning.
I fully respect others views and have no desire to persuade anyone either way as I don't know what the outcome will be here.
I respect that several replies from those more in the know have responded, but as we see on such programmes as Dragons Den, some people stick doggedly to what they believe in whilst others question their wisdom
I have no distrust of the board, they have skin in the game and seem decent, just have seen many aims collapse.
Respect your views and am a small investor so hope all comes good in these weird days of finance.
Replying to both Purple and Bankruptcy
Purple, as with most aim stocks, all investors, at first singing from the same hymn sheet, as early doors, share price rises, not issues whether intention is 'long term' hold or make a 'quick buck'
But given time, and a slow steady decline in share price the board is bound to be divided, but should be seen as healthy, not sinister.
I could 'argue' that People suggesting they are not concerned over the share price as in for long term, are foolish, as they say they are always 'topping up', so to them, NEVER a bad day.
Yet in reality unless playing with a few pounds, NO real investor buying in 'alleged' large amounts would be 'happy' or not phased if the share price drops to HALF that level, EVEN if a long term holding plan. Why?
Well clearly because they 'could' have bought DOUBLE the amount of their 'alleged' holding, and, should a div ever be paid would then have DOUBLE the yield.
So to say you are not worried, means either lying to yourselves or others or just dim.
IF the latter fine, if lying to yourselves find, but if lying to others, to get them to keep buying on the pretext 'your happy and 'topping up', or the other aim adage 'wish I had the funds to top up' then not so 'innocent' imo.
So serious concerns should be heard, voiced to prevent gullible falling for the 'nice' well educated, well informed, posters who 'seem' to have 'others' best interests at heart, when maybe all are not as they seem.
If you are innocent then just filter such chat, but others may not be, and new / current investors have a right to read views from people who have been in aim, where EVERY one was a no-brainer, until it wasn't.
I ask relevant questions, lack of trades, why did the rich, all seeing Americans not take this mine over etc etc.
And will continue to ask such and not be driven off the board by those who 'may' have not so 'innocent' agendas as they want their 'happy' group to believe.
Click the filter if it annoys.
I think that few argue that the buying back of shares should raise the returns for investors.
Problem is as with all things where money is concerned with human manipulation applied the 'hoped for' results aren't necessarily forthcoming.
For against the obvious 'conclusion' that if half the shares were bought back the share dividend would 'double' would it?
Would the amount of dividend then being available to be 'directed' to double our div, not, with human slight of hand, find it's way to improve the CEO's and top brasses income, and would not profits then be snatched away by a desperate Government to fund the wider economy instead of 'giving' it all to the shareholders.
Buffers would be improved, stealth taxes imposed higher, more shares could be issued without so much whinging as shares are removed from the market
So it is not as black and white as some suggest.
And if the purpose of Lloyds buying back shares is to save a lowly dividend of aprox 5%, that is a long time to regain the COST of buying back each share for Lloyds, and to me, if a top financial institution can't DO BETTER with it's profits than just 'make' 5% a year on spending it's capital, when inflation is double that, then hardly 'inspiring' use of funds to me.
More about keeping their bonuses up, and keeping the wealthier large investors happy rather than those small investors relying or hoping for a better dividend.
They know they need not pay out more as 'they' Lloyds have already sold the shares, so they do what suits them best not those investors already in.
Hence when they did the two Right's issues, they had to please new investors, but once sold, the 'need' to appease is gone.
As with most aim shares a huge gamble. So, as long as you don't put too much in then not a problem.
Just seen is sooooo many times before, calculated subtle ramping to 'get' them in, *** packet figures to give estimates of minerals, gold etc, times the best drilling sample by a million acres or whatever and come up with silly hoped for prices.
As I have said. I have a few gold Britannia's, worth around £1600 each.
Yet IF I were to dice it into small fragments, encase those individual fragments of gold in solid rock, then have someone drill countless holes over an acre and drop each fragment into each hole, no one would give me anywhere near the £1.600 for permission to extract that 'certain' gold.
So with rising fuel, wages, insurance mines burn cash rapidly. And this is not cheap labour land, and litigation health and safety are costly.
As I have always said, IF it is sooo great, then surely an American company would have taken it on very quickly.
So always suss, hence lightly invested, as board has skin in game, but then they are likely drawing a good salary too as long as they can 'spin' this out. Just hoped 'and still hope they are not the usual type and truly do have more substance, but figures mean little without full certain funding, and lots of it.
Hope for all our sakes it comes good eventually. Not lost hope fully... yet, but have seen shares in aim in pounds end up tenths of pence.
Only ten pence more on the share price and will be back to where I entered some decade and a half ago!
But that won't be break even point, as have to factor in all those years of inflation, and a double digit inflation in latter year.
So heaven knows what price Lloyds would need to be to give the same 'spending power' now as it would have done 'then'.
Asperger, as you are an optimistic , and I tend to err with good reason as proven above on the opposite end of the scale, I never 'assumed' we would 'get' the dividend you considered we are owed as a dividend payment as to pay it as such a lump would be unfair on those who had sold, or overly generous to those who bought after the date, and far too costly and complex to trace those off the register etc.
So I fear they have likely refurbed the offices of top brass, new cars, increased pensions etc, and 'used' the remainder as buybacks, to boost their bonuses under the 'guise' of 'giving' it back to us.
So give up all hope of seeing it in a special it will never happen.
Also does anyone use the CHIP app for savings?
I downloaded it, then changed my mind as too intrusive for my liking but pays good interest but wondered if anyone else has had experience of using it. Seemed a good idea to auto raid all banks accounts and hold the case to give interest upon, but instantly pay it back into current accounts when needed.
Yet lots of bad reviews etc.
Anyone know anything about it?
Suff I thought your assumption, along with others was it will only boost the price on the last one bought back, and it is only this 'wise' bb that could see the potential in buybacks and the massive investing world were out of step, not 'us'.
Remember the div yield at around five percent, per year, will take Lloyds twenty years to 'get back' the amount they have paid out for each share they have bought back.
I know other factors come into play, but that is the rough *** packet sum.
Hardly a great 'return' for the UK's finest banking investors.
Try seeing it differently.
If a festival promoter arranged a festival expecting 100k people but the line up he choose was so dismal, that tickets never sold at the rate he wanted, so he buys a few thousands back himself to reduce the amount of those in circulation to keep the 'less than hoped for' demand up, and thus the price people were willing to pay, but STILL people were not impressed enough with his 'line up' so he has to drop the ticket price, This will in some way explain the not fishy, but sad reality of why 'fake' demand fools only fools, hence most people with money are NOT taken in by such moves.
Gazing at the share price just a shame more aren't buying into the articles welcome news.
Still countless isa's will be filled tomorrow, and with buyers aplenty, the share price is bound to rise for a day or two before true direction, whatever that is returns.
Re: " I would be less confident without buybacks because the number of shares in circulation will grow year upon year from new issuances for staff rewards."
IF the buyback cash was instead paid out in the form of a much increased divi, then then number of shares wouldn't be such a problem as more people would buy in thus mopping up the huge amount of shares in issue, and more of us, IF the dividend pot was 2b greater would likely add more ourselves to reap the visible reward.
As it is, instead of filling me with confidence, the opposite occurs, as I feel now the board can issue more shares without so much ruffling of existing share holders feathers as the number in issue drops despite them issuing more p.a.
But any 'gain' in share price is soon lost by world events bringing the share price down with it.
IF the buyback money was all issued within the divi, then WE could decide when to add more shares taking advantage of any major dips, whereas now, because the buyback 'value' is added into the shares (so we are led to believe) then that gain is vanished and forgotten about when the shares plunge.
As I have said before akin to a huge fire burning millions of pounds of British banknotes in some drug dealers home.
In 'theory' the loss of those notes, SHOULD make all other notes in circulation be 'worth' that little bit more. BUT the drop in the ocean amount destroyed will do nothing.
IF Lloyds bought and destroyed half the shares in issue we may see action, but a trifling sum removed and the saving of paying a mere 5% dividend would take aprox 20 years to pay for the cost of the dividend saving, so a long time for Lloyds to see that capital advantage.
Hence punters on here with millions like them as not taxed as they would be by increased div if not isa'd, but for most a lame duck
And if that 2b had been
Certainly not alone, as I fully agree.
But there are many on here who like parents who can never see any wrong in their children even if they are awful, can't or won't have a word said against Lloyds, it's management or abysmal share price, so I doubt you will get many agree, and certainly wont be accepted into the blinkered clic
Whilst he Opec cuts are great for my BP shares, i wonder if the increase in fuel costs, will then hurt the delicate stagnation/recovery in every other business, so make me poorer in the long run.
Same with interest rate rises, supposed to be good for banks margins, but not so good if it prevents new comers to the mortgage market or causes defaults.
Always a double edged sword, but the question is, WHICH 'edge' is sharpest and the most cutting?
Brix, as you know, not wise to take advice from a bb, and even more unwise to ever take advice from me, the boards worst investor.
I assumed you were just moving the 20k to grab a div and then re-sell, not hold for capital gain, which then would mean a different choice of share may be wiser.
Assume you also been around long enough to realise that ex divi day the share price normally drops by the amount of div paid out (all else being equal) so no such thing as a 'quick' easy lunch, even at 'spoons' for us investors!
Why Lloyds, when Legen are paying far more div, if that is what lures you in?
RE "UK Gov. confirms COVID Vaccines are deadly with new data showing Mortality Rates per 100k were LOWEST among the Unvaccinated throughout 2022"
Data can and is used to fool the unwary. NOT saying that that report does, as not read it, but, obviously more elderly, so called 'at risk' are taking up the offer of jabs, whereas the young fitter people are not.
So should any of the former group catch Covid, then they by age, illness, vulnerability etc be far more likely to 'die' from it, perhaps NOT because they have had the jab, but because of age, frail dispositions and weaknesses.
As Lti lost a brother to covid, and likely others on here have too, I think more than enough has been said on a Lloyds bb, everyone is aware of risks of having jab and not having jab, best let individuals make up their own minds calmly without constant bombardment of one view, as what is it to you personally to persuade people not to. Are you an expert or just choosing to read and believe what you wish to take from the many article on the subject?
Whilst a balanced view is healthy, as I add my alternative view on Lloyds much to others dismay, to do so more than two or three times is OTT in a day, then becomes a little 'odd'
Asp, certainly div's help, but many other shares held as long as Lloyds are multiples of their value when purchased and they still pay a good div, which like 3i are still paying 2.76 % at TODAYS VALUATION, so compared with Lloyds 5% doesn't seem impressive, BUT the share price has increased by at least FIVE times what I paid, and so the div yield is to me now around 14% or more, as only rough calcs.
As you know, IF anyone had said in the Mr Meerkat days that Lloyds would STILL be in the 40's or even 60's after all this time, they would, as still occurs on here, have been attempted to have been ridiculed from the forum.
I understand there are worse investments, and likely I have had most of them too!
"supermarkets can learn a lot from these people"
I can't imagine Tesco getting away with smearing a little mud or chicken droppings over their eggs, adding a strand of straw to each box and charging double, with fools imagining they are far healthier really working.
Yet I can imagine country people buying supermarket eggs and doing the same selling to townies with more money than sense who fully 'embrace' the best of both worlds wealthy 'country' living.
A Benny hill sketch showed the wisdom of those true country people. A local village idiot was in the market square every week, and other country folk would tell 'out of towners. how thick he was, and, if they were to offer him the choice of a ten pound note, or a pound coin, he would always go for the latter.
When someone from the village asked why he didn't take the tenner, he quickly replied " Because, IF I did, then they wouldn't off it me no more.
So whilst farmers markets have there place, a lot of bull often and just a way of giving less, but charging more to those who then 'feel' they are part and are being accepted into the 'community', when their naivety and wallet is, they are not.
Asp, so almost ALL shares have done better than Lloyds since your valuable and appreciated comparison chart.
Most telling, to those who need evidence as to what a dire investment for lth it really is.
Thought I would add a Lloyds related bit to my off topic post. Thanks for doing your chart though.
Seen it done it, I think you misunderstand,what the poster is saying, which is that by buying in at 401, that is almost the same 'saving' in share price purchased as pre ex day when the share was say 417.
Also IF you buy in after the ex day and the share price did drop by exactly the same sum as the div, you also pay less tax than if buying them for the pre ex day so gain a few more shares for your buck