Blencowe Resources: Aspiring to become one of the largest graphite producers in the world. Watch the video here.
What is most frightening is that this stealth taxing those with, to level up those without, not only extends to our own workshy who use breeding as a meal, house and life 'ticket' but now brings the world to enjoy leisure time at 'our' expense who soon 'when in Rome' do the same after being firmly established, so then HMG allow in even more to 'replace' those recent, established in a home, with a child, no longer finding work pays, with ever more.
All in a misguided ruse of looking after the elderly, but truth being many of them need care from young age via universal credits, free rent and c.tax, child allowance, thus costing us for their entire life before they too age and require a pension.
So these Citra homes will be a magnet for 'future claims' some we can guess like damp, dangerous window catches, stairs, fire, lifts, and many yet to be 'dreamt' up by future HMG 'advisors'
Worse than that, this is WITH a Tory gov.
Imagine the hit on any wealth when Labour are in no 10 soon.
Lloyds is just another 'arm' of the Social Security , a buffer between the poor and HMG, hence years of 'bank bashing' by HMG.
And I also said, and saw that before others on here too.
Dylan once sang 'You don't need to be a weatherman to know which way the wind blows'
Here is what I said. "So likely very 'tempting' then for the canny board of directors to then either slow, end or even CUT the dividend paid out to shareholders to fund their salaries etc, and of course to fund HMG's wishes via stealth taxes or 'fines'."
BIG difference in 'chid saying they would cut the dividend' I rightly inferred that they would have to put aside cash for the new stealth tax ie Car FCA cost, and suggested that it would be TEMPTING for Lloyds board to cut or stagnate the div, instead they have limited the buybacks.
EITHER way they have 'cut' returns to shareholders, as I not you, I suspected would be the case.
As for Citra living, I also said 'WAIT' until it is filled with low life, who will then claim for ever mould spore, every broken window catch, and sue us, along with a future Gov forcing 'rent caps' on the scroungers rent, so another double whammy to follow as we get hit by more costs to meet new demands for safety, but the income is capped for future landlords.
AGAIN imo, a HMG scam to house the daily flotilla's content and their then filled wombs content at our, cost not HMG's.
SEE the problems before they occur, then you and Lti would not be so bitter when your surprises arrive 'challenging' your poor investment choice. I admit on that I WAS wrong, very wrong.
Lti, no matter how you try to spin this: " monies set aside for dividends are determined by profitability and policy NOT a share price", such doesn't alter the FACT that to maintain the 'current yield' now being paid, should the share price double, then Lloyds would have to dedicate double the share of the profits to pay such.
Hence it is easier for them to have a 'low' share price by constantly bending over to Gov inspired stealth taxes to KEEP the market from placing a higher price on Lloyds share, so then they can still be 'seen' by buyers as a reasonable buy.
Whereas should the share price double, then UNLESS they made £b's more in profit to pay out to maintain that dividend yield, the yield would fall to half if ONLY 'earning' what it does now.
So again I say Lloyds prefer the lower share price.
As you will be rather busy today, 'Defending the naked Emperor' from those who have more vision and can bring themselves to admit what a poor 'investment' this has been for Lth's, then I am not going to spend hours disagreeing, for I know you enjoy twisting the meaning of posts in a vain attempt to prove yourself right, as to be seen as anything else, to you, would be 'unfathomable'
My predict yesterday was a 2.2b buyback, and 10% hike on div and was assured, wrongly by many that a provision would not be 'right' to be set aside for the Car scandal, which I wrongly assumed they might be right. They weren't, my initial thoughts were, and they did. Rolling over, yet fools will 'still' think we will be 'getting that back as a 'special' one day.
Just a tiny first instalment imo
Time and fools will tell no doubt.
Yet most all were telling of 'NO provisions' being set aside for the Car scandal.
Yet there they are, first to roll over, first to silently admit guilt, and the final cost will likely be double the estimate, by the time all scammers have had to have their claims either paid, as it is cheaper to do so than have it investigated fully etc.
Just what HMG the puppet sting puller wants, as HMG doesn't care 'where' or how wrong it is to gain the cash to try to keep the feeble economy on life support, just so long as it is not taken from their reducing coffers.
Odd how the negative comments but more accurate are 'highlighted' yet all the 'specials' increase in buybacks, etc are dropped like a hot King Edward.
Another 'typical' results day for Lloyds who I assume are keen to keep the share price from rising, as then, the YIELD they pay out on a low share prices 'looks' better, for IF the share price doubled, then to maintain that same yield they would need to 'double' what they pay out to investors in divs.
Hence there will always be 'something' another hurdle in an endless line of such.
Next big one is Labour getting in and taxing us to keep us a 'Penny share' forever.
Re: " why can’t Lloyd’s "
Because HMG hold the puppets strings and find it far more beneficial to distribute much of the cash, which could otherwise be allocated to the shareholders, to spreading it out amongst the spenders in society, who will blow it all keeping the high street tills pinging, albeit slowly, rather than give it all to shareholders who for the most part, will just 're-invest' it, doing HMG little good in the publics eyes.
A huge portion will be spent in buying back its own shares, which also keeps the capital within the businesses thus allowing for larger bonuses, expenses and pension pots.
What's the betting IF the share prices rises on open if will fall greatly soon after, or, visa-versa.
No doubt lots of ' But Barcs, had worse results and yet......' etc etc
Only heard it for a decade and a half or more on results day, why should that change with known FCA / Car issues AND a coming Labour Gov.
Surely the time to be selling, not buying? So, IF and big IF it were to rise, then surely many people will bail out and the s.p will drop rapidly after any 'new' unleaked good news, should there be any, is broadcast.
IF as people likely correctly say, that Companies won't make any provision yet for the car fiasco, the I will guess 2.2b wasted on buybacks, and the div to rise by 10% only.
I will hold, as people on here know more than me, but just voicing my inner thoughts, and YET to have them proven wrong.
Tears before bed time tomorrow me thinks...
.... or as it is more commonly known as, 'second hand' equipment, to go with a second hand mine.
Let's hope the Americans aren't laughing at the dumb British buying up their 'cast offs'.
Let's hope the board of directors aren't also laughing at investors whilst they live well for years on a good salary as we watch our capital dwindle and daily trades less than all our fingers and toes total.
Confidence is paper thin, and Bible paper at that.
Watched UKOG go the same way, the expert, the hype, the rise the fall, play out for years now its share is in the hundred or maybe even a thousand to a penny now. Just because a share is low, never assume it can't go far far lower.
Aim is always a huge risk even if a board member is 'close' to the directors, and as I have said before, IF I were so sure it was a dead cert, I would keep such to myself and buy up as much stock as oft as I could at a lower price, not big it up thus perhaps raising the price on hype.
Don't be afraid to ask the 'right' questions and read the white spaces between the black with more care.
Father99
But the yield is ONLY good because the share price is so abysmally low.
Had the share price had risen to say 80p the yield would be half what it now is.
So by keeping the share price low, via never ending new ways of HMG inspired stealth taxes, then Lloyds can still 'crow' it pays a good level of dividend, which would not be the case if the share price was where many assume it ought to have been by now.
Whilst such hacks views may ease the sleep of the ever hopefuls, I for once, take on Lti's view that 'The Market' places the valuation of Lloyds, not an individual (last three words my own).
So as Lloyds are nearing their 'big day' announcement, and the other banks have risen on good to fair results, then to see Lloyds stagnating at this time, is hardly heartening.
So it seems the wider investment world is wary of Lloyds, and a wider viewpoint is usually more accurate than an individual take on such.
So imo, the rise on the day for Lloyds will be brief and with the car scandal and Labour leader choosing new curtains for No.10 only a good year for the 'roses'.
Hardup, no need to apologize for disagreeing when I stated that NWG had no material exposure to the Car finance scandal.
Knowing you are correct is enough for me:
Lloyds has the most exposure to DCAs in absolute terms. Experts say the cost is likely to be material for the high-street bank, whose share price has fallen 14 per cent since the start of the year. By contrast NatWest — the country’s second-largest high-street bank — has virtually no exposure.
So, expect the buybacks to be cut to 1b, and the div to have a token gesture rise or remain static imo.
This as with PPI will be not only so costly to pay back, but paying countless high salary people to sort this out will be very costly and the FCA will force the creditors to contact every customer, not the other way around, and have you seen the price of a stamp? Con artists will jump on this both the cowboy compo firms AND of course the scamming great unwashed with newcomers at the forefront with bogus car companies fake agreements, etc etc, ALL costing Lloyds to sort through, and likely a 'time limit' so over pressure will force even fake compo claims to be paid out imo.
I imagine it will be double the estimated 2b time it's all over.
Hope to be wrong, it has, by law of averages bound to happen 'one day'.
But keep believing those who spout what they 'want' to happen, NOT what is the most likely to happen and I am sure you too will grow richer.
There's us all being told the NHS is crumbling before our eyes, and yet they can supply you with not one but two 18 year old's for support. Are they from Africa or Eastern Europe as I never heard or knew anyone from Stent?
Hope you grand daughter copes with her issues well. I am sure you will make her laugh, which is the best medicine.
Perhaps it would be prudent of Lloyds to end the buybacks now, although of course, such would be seen as an act of admitting they were in the wrong. But with HMG the likely to gain from the feckless for once, blowing OUR money and not having to fork out themselves via the tax payer, it is to me a certainty we will be paying.
Despite the 'certainty ' as we are constantly told, benefits of buybacks, at least without any, the TRUE colours of this dismal, soon to be abysmal share price will be shown to the world that the Emperor is 'indeed' near naked.
As I mentioned earlier, I found an account whereby you could have easy access to your money, albeit only a few times a year, paying 5%+.
Just thought that as I found this account via a Martin Lewis compare type web site, I truly wonder if on his site, he declares just how much 'commission' his company receive by the various banks, and fiscal institutions advertising on there?
Just a thought, can't be bothered to check, and likely the FCA have not made it illegal not too need to declare levels of commission.
But it seems when he's taking the Immoral, moral high ground it would be most interesting to know how 'squeaky clean' he really is.
But anyone seen by HMG 'helping the poor' spending others money to pay the rent on their breeding hutches, is ok now.
Anyone would assume Labour had been in no. 10 for years.
So will be deeply 'interesting' to see how they can possibly take even more from those with a little, to give to the daily increasing numbers of those without. Once the whole is 'levelled up' then what?
NO, Lloyds won't, as pointed out, NWG NO exposure to the car loan issue.
Lloyds the LARGEST exposure to the car loan issue.
FCA has said that the Black Horse 'IS' responsible for paying the compensation.
Also remember that not only will 'we' have to pay it back, but also, not be profiting by such means from now on, thus ending another deemed immoral but lucrative income stream.
Also with Lloyds being the last to announce, any 'good news' is come results day, already priced in, and with a Labour Gov soon, AND the car finance scandal to settle, then surely you can 'see' that all banks are in the same 'sector' but NOT in the same boat, and a certain boat will be at the wrong end of another FCA/HMG torpedo imo.
Perhaps buybacks will be halted to pay for the FIRST instalment on this new debacle.?
If the Ombudsmen have already agreed that the DCA must be provided to loan recipients, and in the case of Ms Y it wasn't then ALL the paperwork and terms will from the 'Dark Horse' will be the same, so to me, it is a given we will be severely impacted by this, again.
Even if I am overly pessimistic, the fact remains so long as there is ANY doubt over it, then why would anyone 'choose' to invest for what is a very poor 5% return, (NOT including the 'alleged' but never visible) return on buybacks.
I got over 5% in a savings account last week where you can take your money out easily several times in a year IF needed.
With HMG having to make NWG cast ofsf an 'initial' albeit short lived 'success' with a discount price, then can't see that many steaming in here, knowing the 'unknown' is hitting us, not them; 'this time'.
Johnny.. Re "they all knew what they were signing "
Yes almost all did, the 'Immoral' wording is not how 'I' see it, but how the lawyers will 'play' it.
I truly doubt many customers would have realised that the loan percentage offered by the dealership however was pushed to a higher level by the dealership seller just so he or she could 'earn' a higher commission though.
THAT will be the 'issue'.
I would fight it by saying it is up to the customer to choose whether they feel the final percentage interest is an acceptable level for them, NO MATTER how or why that 'figure' is arrived at and how the income from their payments are divided up.
A more greedy dealership could add a higher percentage and the boss keep the additional percentage, or give it to charity, or share it amongst all the staff etc etc.
The ISSUE ought to be was the full costs of the loan made clear, NOT how it was 'arrived at'.
BUT, the lawyers will argue and win by saying that by the 'salesmen' not disclosing that they received a larger commission from pushing a more 'expensive' percentage wise loan onto the customer, that it was 'immoral' not to disclose such to the buyers.
Whilst the buyers willing signed up for it, the excessive interest added benefited the banks, as well as the salesman, but to me that is 'business' and with some many other means of gaining loans or credit, then to me the customer was free to check out other ways of funding the purchase.
But it will be seen as a means of the salesman, with a vested interest then overly 'pressuring' the customer by the banks greed, to take on the deal by the lawyers and of course the then very informed and briefed 'distressed and impoverished victims'.
As if I am right and this is all HMG orchestrated then we are doomed to pay and pay out BIG imo.
..Lloyds results all factored in from other banks data, so expect a lot to sell up to avoid the oncoming serious hit from the Car scandal and the future Labour Gov.
Add the fact that HMG is selling off NWG which has Zero involvement with the Car scandal, and with HMG needing to make the sale of such a success then why would people take the huge risk of investing here when NWG is safer for those reasons?
Also Lloyds, as it did with PPI earned a lot of money from the immoral loans pushed onto people, giving a larger commission for those dealers able to convince customers to take on these higher percentage debts.
That's why Lloyds did it. So NOW that immoral but lucrative INCOME has gone forever as well as having to pay it, and no doubt billions more in fake claims, added expenses etc etc.
Time to be seriously worried if like me you are a long term holder.
But the hopeful, as with PPI last time around, will convince themselves and others, that it is all 'over done' and the £B or so will cover it. Yeah right it will..... NOT.
Every chancer will be applying and the cost of processing each claim will be huge, and fearing reprisals IF Lloyds are too slow, or make a mistake on paying out these poor ' victims' will ensure that as with PPI, checking will be minimal, and doubt will ALWAYS be given the 'benefit of' to the 'victim' as the CEO will not be paying for this but we will.
All imo, HMG backed to again FUND the high street, to keep tills pinging all be it slowly on OUR money given to those with little, vindicating my view that LLOYDS is not a buffer between HMG and the growing Spongers to fund the latter where HMG cant afford too.
When HMG are fully out of NWG that too may be the 'time' to worry.
"How can deriding, destroying and taking wealth away from a population, then hope to support not only all the previous poor, the never ending stream of newly arriving poor, but also those once holding wealth, then too, made poor?"
Herein lies the certain failure of any Labour Government.
__ Chid 2024
So all know how buybacks are supposed to work. My concern is that such depends on the integrity of the board, and its puppet master, who between them can then come up with an 'appropriate' dividend, which, no doubt, will be JUST tempting enough for new buyers over a 'high street savings account interest level' NO matter HOW many shares are out there.
And the profit then distributed amongst a smaller number of shares can be IF the board decide the 'same' sum as it would have been if those shares had never been 'bought back' and they keep or squander the 'gain'.
Have to over explain for the biased minded to at least understand the point if never able to agree that theories only 'work' in theory.