The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from WS Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
Hardup,
No there is plenty more I could say, but again, the fear of repeating my repeats may be even a step to far for me, if all achieved in one evening.
I prefer to spread the joy throughout the week and years, adding new assumptions, thoughts, views and takes on reading betwixt the lines of what I read, hear, and importantly 'think' what I would do if HMG, or the CEO, which will often be very different to what us shareholders want or get.
As I say with buybacks, whilst less shares mean Lloyds CEO / board 'can' then pay out more div's, Doesn't mean they will, when HMG and they may likely have more beneficial uses for that money themselves.
Apart from 'me' who else suggests that very valid point? Why they don't is because they don't want to think it could happen, but doesn't mean it won't, and likely has hence same old 'increase' level in div's, DESPITE the buybacks causing less shares to be in issue.
Mind the great pretender will surely be on soon, to pretend, mis-quote or otherwise attempt, badly, to twist any posters words to make them 'appear' foolish, but, no matter, deep down, only my opinions, and time, along with the odd 'big head' will tell 'who' was right or wrong.
TFE, thanks, (I think) for the interesting, but depressing information of 88p being a more likely for me, b/e price.
I assume I would have to take off the few years that Lloyds have being paying a div from that total to give a more balanced break even assumption?
Also with inflation I one was going to buy a home, then they have risen greatly so unsure if it is ever possible to know over so many years where the true b/e point is.
Thanks for info, a good starting price, and one, I likely will never see, at least before another decade of inflation has eroded the value of 88p to then make the 'then' b/e even higher!
Great being a realist, if not a tad depressing for those who like 'sandy eyeballs'
Hardup
Actually don't find that offensive, just very amusing.
My posts are actually far more thoughtful and thought provoking than most on here.
As most people say the same old thing time after time, but I add REASON, to why I say as I do, not just cut and paste others views.
I was first to suggest PPI was just a way of keeping the tills pinging, little to 'do' with HMG caring if it were abused, and I suggested that this Car scandal will be used in the same way.
I suggested Tories are prepared to lose the GE so as to allow Labour in, knowing they will trash the economy, so they, few years later can call a vote of no confidence, and ride to the rescue but only if the battle weary public agree to some new deal with the EU, VERY much resembling the old deal in most everything but name only.
I suggested that the time to be concerned re Lloyd was 'when' HMG left, as then, with no skin in the game, they would and have imposed stealth taxes on banks, and are free to impose fines and public money redress such as PPI and car scandal issues.
I will suggest things like now, people all expecting Lloyds s.p to grow from now onwards, but there are two ways of getting people to buy shares IF the large holders want out, and raising the price is one way of such people 'getting out' whilst taking a goodly profit or less of a loss, should the car scandal implode on Lloyds.
I have suggested Citra living could be an issue if HMG then place a rent cap on property in the future, but, keep adding more and more burdens onto Landlords, and Lloyds, being seen as a rich 'cash cow' could be sued for a endless new claims from trip hazards to mould etc by the 'sue' culture, to again give Helicopter cash' to the great unwashed.
Today I suggest when calculation break even, then allow for the years of holdings true inflation BEFORE you 'crow' you are in profit.
Many on here repeat rubbish, mine is new thoughts, YES often said, but new people come and go, and IF my posts bore you, then just read nickname and filter or don't bother to read. Stick to your upbeat, but usually wrong posters, who are never chastised even when 'wrong' because it is what YOU wish to hear, wish to believe, and usually such posts don't require thought, which perhaps you struggle with a little.
One certainty is I will repeat this is a dire share for lth's, and I am certain that that will be repeated and rebuked by those who don't like the truth damaging their fragile egos.
SUF, is your 'broker' one and the same person as your Parrot?
Would explain a lot as to why you keep buying ever more Lloyds shares, as Parrots repeat the same words, so if the Parrot overheard your wife saying to buy more Lloyds shares, then, it would explain the 'addiction'.
What do you think your ave is, as mine is around 60p, but whatever yours is, don't forget to add years of inflation to make it plausible. Ps my 60p ave is WITHOUT a decade and a half of inflation, so heaven knows what I would need now to 'truly' be 'in profit' .
Today of Lloyds shares. Yet as the price dropped, guess the selling pressure was greater than the buying pressure, so is it a case of 'That's all Folks'?
Perhaps usual service will commence once more.
Anyone buying Gold to exchange for a mouldy Loaf from a Russkie, as I feel offering Lloyds shares may mean a trip to the Gulag .
Suf, so long as the 'board' doesn't just 'use' the buybacks as a way of STILL paying what they would have paid out to shareholders anyway, without the lesser shares then in issue, and just use the lower number of shares, thus dividend pay-outs to feather their or HMG's / FCA's whims.
IF so, we are indirectly by having buybacks having what could have been a divi increase to fund a divi freeze in 'real terms'
Brix, The ONLY advantage I can see for a consolidation is to spare the blushes of the CEO and board that after a decade and a half, despite U.S banks rising, ours is still floundering at abysmal pence share prices.
Image, with such, is all, don't you know old chap?
What people seem to ignore, as you say, the lessened amount of shares, PAID for, with what would have been our vastly increased dividend, is then 'used' to pretend that Lloyds have increased the dividend, BUT ONLY because 'they' using OUR cash have bought back more shares.
Also, if 'say' Lloyds are paying out 5% in dividends p.a, it would take 20 (twenty years) to pay for the cost of buying 'each share' BEFORE that saving will be made. ( I know, that it would, in REALITY not be quite that long due to compounding, and hopefully the share price rising, BUT those who aren't just out to 'nit pick' ought to get my drift......Then again.....
Also, due to the buybacks Lloyds can still choose to pay 'just what it would' on dividend amounts, and use the saved cash to spend on anything they, or HMG see fit, as with the car scandal etc. JUST because they 'can' pay out more, don't mean they will to shareholders, when 'brownie points' appeasing the 'string puller' may be more beneficial to the board, but not us.
THINK
IF so, then why shout about it? I would be buying up as many as I could and keep it quiet as possible as more buying pressure means paying more for your 'friends' advice. Bet he will love you for forcing up any new purchases, if he is right or does actually exist.
30 plus trades today, shows the level of those jumping in for the 'kill' and eight bagger then.
Re: "Those views are expressed in a vote. A vote result that needs to be accepted/respected. "
But when Labour are in no.10, even though it will be democracy, I can't imagine you will not criticise the choice, many of their policies, etc. For whilst I am not expecting Lloyds to change their stance of keeping the larger shareholders happy, I can and will STILL highlight issues that I am not happy with.
That 'is' Democracy' otherwise nothing would ever change if people 'meekly' accepted a democratic choice without discussing, and questioning such, for UNLIKE Brexit, Lloyds policy is variable and not a 'one off' choice as Brexit 'ought' to have been but you know my prediction on that.
KK,
Again people on here 'ignore' not just double digit 'newsworthy' inflation but the YEARS of lower but destructive inflation making their 'perceived' break even point, much, much higher than they like to think, and as you say, making the div a lot less for the same reason.
I try to get people to 'understand' but the comments on here are so often simplistic amusing or perhaps sad, but always a wonder how so many people are content as lth's.
I tell them look at your initial investment and think if you were buying a house, car, or a bag of buns would you NOW get better or more of those things if you were to cash in now. But few like to have their investment dissed by a stranger, so maybe that is the reason that denial and hope for jam tomorrow is so apparent on here.
Same as those cheering at the div 'increase'. Akin to cheering because a pint was once £3, but shoots up to £5, and the pub then lowers it to £4.50.
Lloyds share price seems the ONLY thing which hasn't risen inflation alone, which is odd as although inflation is an enemy to the bank, inflation itself makes the 'worth' of the same price LESS, equal to the true level of inflation, so can only assume the banks performance is dismal, or the profits are diverted to 'better causes' curtailing a higher s.p.
Truth hurts, especially where ego's are inflated if not the s.p.
Hence few ever 'call out' past posts from dreamers who constantly predict unachievable share prices predicts, but leap, search and deride any more accurate downbeat posts. Says it all really.
Lti, yes it is, and like your good self, those share holders are holding vast amounts more than most private investors, but in their case where their shares, due to the huge amounts are not isa or other tax avoidance wrapped then the increase in share price which is constantly traded and not held, is likely far more beneficial to them than sitting watching it go up, then watching it go down each year awaiting a divi which may cover inflation, but with the share often lower than the previous year, and having to pay tax on the dividend makes pi's and commercial investors have a different requriement.
The largest holders clearly get what they want, and like yourself, if you have large sums invested outside an isa or similar, then who can blame them, BUT try seeing it from the other side, even if not having any empathy for those on 'bread, not cake', if ONLY to try to understand their 'take' on the subject. Hence we all have different views so will never all agree.
Problem is, the FCA are more of a Judge in a court of law, than the Police whose presence may prevent crime or prevent crime continuing and growing. But it seems to be a 'Kangaroo Court', and nothing kicks like a Kanga
With HMG's blessing what could 'possibly' go wrong for innocent shareholders?
Wake up England, see what is going on.
Same with stopping imm's, IF such were a direct 'problem' to HMG means would have been 'discovered' to prevent such.
But as the elite own land, property and many have family making a fortune from such and being immigration lawyers etc, then living miles away in expensive areas, and having the Party 'funded' by business which desires cheap ('for them' but not for us who then are subsidising their rent, c.tax, education and health care for LIFE, for their 'cheap employees') labour, what WE want is not what we get unless it coincides what the elite wish to occur, on very rare occasions, if it becomes a 'threat' to the elites way of life. As happened with Covid, the invisible threat threated the elite, so lock downs occurred, YET if it had only effected the plebs' and their 'money' as with the ills of immigration, could 'buy' the elites safety and not had affected their way of life, you can bet that the whole would have been very different.
Thing is eventually unchecked immigration will effect all in a negative way, but all too late to do anything then.
Must say it is refreshing to see people wake up the the risks, albeit decades too late. So I guess the naivety and brainwashing of the media, slows the thinking process of many until the unpleasant side is staring them in the face.
Cathesoames, Crowcast, jayfax, must be distraught to see more of the British wake up albeit to no avail now.
Thank you for those rare words of sanity on here.
It was clear seeing the chap from FCA on the Martin Lewis prog. that the banks were going to pay for this, the only question to me, was, 'how much'.
I have had years of reading of what naive, dim, hopeful, or more likely those who can't ever bring themselves to admit that their 'judgement' could possibly be flawed, so instead of considering what is most likely to occur, instead think only of what they, themselves 'wish' will happen.
The two are often poles apart.
I think the cost to Lloyds will likely be at least double the higher est of 2b. For as we see in your case and more telling with PPI, the compensation culture is just a form of 'Helicopter' dropping money from those 'rare' firms making profits, to give to the feckless, to keep the fragile economy from getting any worse, and for once, without HMG having to fund such moves, which would add to debt or increased taxes on a 'watchful public and media' especially when an elections looms.
I see that housebuilders etc took a hit yesterday on another 'trumped up' scandal, over being shared info on pricing etc.
So it is OBVIOUS to me, that HMG are doing as many of the public have done for years, insomuch as they 'look' if not scour the country for any fault, and then use lawyers to capitalise on the gain to be made from such.
With the great unwashed, just adds to the cost of our Council tax if claiming for a broken paving slab fall etc, but with HMG they can ONLY take from those rare businesses who are making money but have to do so with stealth, so as not to 'kill' the Golden Goose egg layer, so find or create new 'misdemeanours' as the 'old one' PPI, ends.
How long this will go on for is 'how long is a piece of string'? For once a source of easy money is found, as with the great unwashed, aided and abetted by lawyers, it becomes never ending and growing larger each passing year.
No wonder the UK has become less attractive to investors, for if a Tory Gov can use such scams what hope when Labour pull the strings.
Hence I say all those fools hailing 'buybacks' as the answer to our prayers, imo are deluded, for whilst as the 35 uptick post says, the div saved is good on 'paper' there is NO certainty, that that greater sum will be distributed amongst shareholders, and imo, more likely HMG, and Lloyds board will have a 'better' use for such. Yet a larger div, would be under are 'control', HENCE that is why the buybacks is preferred by those who 'call' the shots not those who take the 'hit' from those well targeted missiles, and the navie who still 'trust' CEO to do the 'right thing' Good luck with that.
Re comment: "Chid, perhaps you’ll explain to the assembled hordes here why the share price actually started down yesterday AFTER the buy back was announced ?"
The share price on known large news days often blips the 'opposite' way that it will end that day. NWG did the same, and have seen it many times on Lloyds and others too.
My take is many PI like ourselves, as we seen that early morning of results being published, dumped stock as they read the 'headline news' with no 'special div' no massive increase in div, and no massive increase in buybacks, along with a 'provision' for Car scandal helicopter cash, causes many to react too quickly, whilst the City takes time to digest the finer details with no imminent rush to make a wrong decision.
Hence the drop was brief, and as the City digested and acted, then the KNOWN amount of buyback spending was 'added to the share price that day.
IF Lloyds had put aside 2b saying they KNEW it was needed for paying out the car scandal claims, then we would have 'dropped' by a large amount 'that day' too.
Can't Cherry pick what you want to believe as it is more comforting. SEE it how it is.
Hope this satisfies the 'Assembled hordes' , as I know it won't satisfy at least two, one being you.
As with Lti, point scoring is easy when most of the 'assembled hordes' are all singing from the same hymn sheet as all know what a disappointment this share has been for most Lth's but can't bear being told, or reminded of that fact.
I, after years have learnt to admit my mistake, perhaps others never will.
As with Lti, I won't bother to reply to other 'point scoring' posts as it becomes dull to others, and I have better things to do with my weekend, like cleaning out the log fire dregs. But I am sure thumbs up from any slurs you make will be forthcoming as the truth is rarely pleasant.
As I said yesterday, the 2b buyback 'increase' to the share was added yesterday, on the announcement, as markets are forward looking, so don't expect to 'get it again'.
Would be the same if Lloyds were to suddenly announce a 2b dilution by issuing more shares to the value of £2b, even if they too were 'spread' over a year, the share price again would DROP on the announcement day, because markets are forward looking and any 'known' good or bad news will be priced swiftly in.
Can't believe people can't 'see' that, and instead just quote less shares mean higher price, but ONLY if the board adds the saved div's on those bought back shares to 'our' portion of the profit, they call the shots on the profit allocation, so could easily just give to shareholders the same, less or more money no matter how many shares are in issue.
As we see each year, always ways, or excuses to find other ways of spending the expected or hoped for profits, so why should this year, with known car set aside, Labour, and endless dirt poor filling our country, along with war threats and spending on defence be any 'better' than the last?
Just ebb softly away, until something newsworthy makes it drop more dramatically, and then, the said share buy back increase will be gone from the share price as will the value of any miserly dividends in a blink.
Like to see how may investors would invest their capital in an account which pays 6% but scalps much more from their deposits most years. Perhaps Lloyds should start one, ' Lloyds Naive Account' paying good interest but lowering your deposit each year. And if you loose you can always 'sue' us' to recoup your loss and some via the ever hopeful shareholders whilst we, the board pay are unaffected.
Yet despite there being less shares, what is to prevent the board, still paying a proportion of the profit out as a dividend to share holders what it would have done with even more shares in issue.
Just because they 'can' afford to, don't mean that they won't 'find' more lucrative to them, means to distribute the wealth to the board members, pensions, bonuses etc, or HMG 'needy causes' earning them 'brownie' points keeping HMG happy?
So whilst less shares means a 'set' sum distributed amongst such will be 'greater' than if splitting that same sum between more shares, the 'sum' is not 'set' but 'decided' by the board, who can just 'use' less shares to feather their own and HMG's nest rather than pay ever more to shareholders, knowing, as we see that most seem happy with thrupence in their hands.
My assumption on buybacks are as with todays announcement, like any good news shout, the shares 'that day' rise on the then known sum to be bought back and the value then added THAT day to the share price.
But, many on here assume that every buy back each day adds to the value of the share, WHICH it ought, BUT as Lti tells us all 'the market' dictates the value of Lloyds share price. And with markets being 'forward looking' then the announcement today will create the added 'value' NOT each buy, or as others have suggested the last 'day' of the buyback.
Problem then is as the calendar flips forward, with the price already added, if, as happens, hurdles appear, then from the day of the announcement of the buy backs, the negative brings the share price down, as expected, but the daily buy backs then have no new effect on the share as 'already' factored in.
So people assume then, that share buybacks don't work, and although in theory they do if you cash in today on the announcement of buy backs. if you buy in after the day of the rise on the announcement, then for you, there is no 'gain' of such, as it is already 'priced in' the share.
IF you bought the share after ex div day, you would expect, all things being equal, NOT to gain the div sum, as the s.p would fall by the div amount, so it is with buybacks.
So the rise from low 40's to mid 40's was the buyback 'gain' so don't expect to have your cake and eat it too.
But do expect it to ebb away by the undoubted hoops Lloyds puppeteer will be jumping through over the coming year.
And YES I know Lti that the buyback added value ought to be retained within that falling or rarely rising share price, but IF that is the case, then we are even lower than we appear after so many billion spent on buybacks now.
Gateboy.
I am aware of how buybacks work in so much as Lloyds buyback the shares via whoever is handling such. BUT, the money spent by Lloyds on REDUCING the share count, then adds vaule to the company via the increase in share price, so the cost to them all thigs equal, should be zero.
Whereas IF they gave that cash as a dividend only, then clearly whilst many would 'reinvest' by buying more Lloyds shares, many would choose to spend it on other shares, or on holidays, cars, or a bag of buns, whatever, then taking that 'value' away from Lloyds as a company, which 'buybacks' do not (in theory).
Explaining the pay out to shareholders is due to the fact that inflation reduced the 'value' of any buybacks, so MORE buybacks would be needed to maintain the SAME level as the previous year in inflation ridden times, SAME for the dividend, which, as there are LOWER amounts of shares in issue (due to a year of buybacks) , then the amount paid on those lesser shares in issue OUGHT to rise on that fact alone, LET ALONE the lesser value of the divy from inflation, which needs to be taken into account too.
But like many on here, believe what you wish to, as, as with Lti, someone insulting their investment choice hurts, so flogging a dead horse trying to 'explain' to such.
Also try picking an argument with all the wrong positive posters on here. Plenty to chose from.
The share price rises on the buyback news then ebbs away on the countless bad news to come as the year until next full results will march on with a Labour Gov, FCA / HMG playing Robin Hood, and countless more impoverished adding to the UK's woes, as where it goes so does Lloyds.
Whilst they are a low level, so anytime as even massive buybacks and double digit inflation has failed to lift this, and with Labour, car scandal, ever more flotsam, war threats, as Bob also said, 'you ain't going nowhere' Change 'you' for Lloyds
Tomorrow is the more likely answer though.