why is my percentage ownership of lloyds not increasing?
What was the MC up until late last week compared to now? If the MC say dropped down to 25B due to reduced sp and you still had the same vol shares your level of ownership in monetary terms has reduced.
LTI
You have no idea show often I read the board and here you go again, doing your playground bully bit.
It seems other people agree with me so there must be some truth in your behaviour. Perhaps you need to change your profile to PGB, sounds more appropriate for you.
LTI
What I find interesting about you is how you behave like the playground bully. If someone says something you disagree with you you just respond in most cases by using ‘ffs’ and try to belittle what they say. It really is about rime you grew up and stopped being the playground bully and had some respect for others, even if you may not agree fully with them.
LTI
“ My percentage ownersip of Lloyds banking Group is increasing - it feels good”
So how does that work out with all the buy backs and the MC was 34B last week and now it is 31B?
I fully understand where you are coming from with regards to less shares equals higher SP but that only works in a perfect text book world if the MC stays constant. If the market decides that it wishes to lower the SP then MC will be less with respect to share vol, but then the MC is not a true reflection of a companies value, the MV is the true value and this is only determined by the bean counters scrutinising the ‘books’.
I was led to understand that SVB UK was standalone from SVB US but the way it seems now is that funding in the UK may still have originated from the US, is this correct? And any deposits made in the UK did they stay in the UK or did they get transferred to SVB US? If it is going into insolvency then it can’t be standalone in the UK as it would have funds here.
The way it seems now is that we are effectively bailing out the SVB US for the UK arm, so will any bank here get out of it which is a bonus and makes it attractive to keep going?
“Lenders including Barclays PLC and Lloyds Banking Group are among the parties to have been approached by the board of SVB UK over the weekend to see if an emergency takeover deal can be reached”
Oh well, there goes the rest of the buy back funds and our next divi ha ha.
Just hope if anything happens the small print doesn’t include a clause that the UK branch has to help out the US main bank and the US government steps back and says all yours now.
“Final Dividend payment saved to date.....................£2,145,631.25"
If my working out is correct the dividends saved by this and last years buybacks will pay for half of next years progressive dividend increase. In reality LBG is actually not having to dip into the profits to much to keep us fed.
Prior to covid and the cessation of the dividend the last couple of years the divi was over 3p and LBG was paying for the PPI issue. I couldn’t see why we couldn’t continue from that point as PPI had finished, instead of going back to the 2015 level. Just saying……
LTI
“So you really think that the market could possibly instead of valuing Lloyds at £35 Billion today, the market would value Lloyds today at over £39 Billion with an extra 8 Billion shares in circulation.”
The number of shares in circulation is irrelevant when the share price fluctuates daily/monthly. It is domestic and world forces that determine the share price and not the volume of shares in circulation.
We only have to look at the time when shares were in the high 20’s, the number of shares in circulation didn’t double to reflect that price.
LTI
“The more bought and cancelled the fewer the shares to receive the returns from profits.”
It will be interesting to see the size of the divi pot for ‘23’ compared to ‘22’.
If for ‘23’ the profits are the same or greater than ‘22’ then the expectation should be that the reduced shares in circulation will be boosted by the divi of ‘22’ plus progressive growth plus the differential saved by those cancelled shares. I suspect this might be of a value seen by the BOD’s as too much and they will reduce the size of the pot accordingly to provide a divi in line with ‘22’ and so called progressive growth, thereby denying shareholders of a real growth divi, just saying…..
Buybacks don’t guarantee what the divi pot is going to be just because less are in circulation. If the BOD have other ideas on how to spend the profits then they can easily allocate a smaller pot to the shareholders divis.
Just because Valencia may be OK doesn’t mean that the rest of Europe and UK is in the same position.
This is an interesting website to have a look around
https://www.fresh-market.info/fruitsandvegetables/vegetables/cauliflowers,1