Member Info for GumT

2 minutes left. Perhaps there is still time...

Seriously, who takes this blogger Aidan seriously???

Posts have been removed. Admin selects what to delete, what to leave. @Dollop, 5p was the opening price. Check with Brtidaq, if you can't remember. There are other things that you have to check too, but I'd better not mention them to keep this post from deleting. @ Knowbody, better than nothing is correct, just as stating the facts the way they are. Bloodaxe and Co are incessant rampers with little thought about reality. GL to you too!

Oh, I see, the spell army is out there. How about posting something connected to Whet and WRN and all the garbage that most of you have littered on this bb over the nearly 4 years instead of scrutinising every single letter in a quickly posted comment? Obviously you have nothing to gainsay. Whet is a dud. 5p , that's all we got after 3+ years of lies. This isn't a literature evening. It's a bb, who cares what you think about spelling? How about this one? Yuor minds are tswidet bcuase ouyr are sputid prvertse.

Andy216, it looks like you agree that Whet is a dud. Your advice is to sell and move on. Selling now would net me several thousand �,which isn't much in my heck of the woods. I've given much more to charity previously. The point is, as Knigel says, shareholders are entitled to raise issue and as I do, to state the obvious (Whet is a dud). Your attempts to stifle a constructive discussion is not only in breach of the rules of this bb, but also a clear sign of indeveloped mind. Mind your own business and accept that you can agree or disagree with others, but you cannot change my opinion, neither the fact that Whet fiasco s an absolute dud!

Whet is a dud. Most shareholders in WRN were locked at �1-�2. Whet at 5p gift makes paper loss of 20-40 times less than the invested amount. What is there to cheer for? This gifting of shares is truly peanuts. It doesn't even begin to offset the losses that Doug & Co caused us.

The periods of 500% return are tully over for me. I simply don't have the nerves to hold onto a share neither do I see these kind of opportunities that often. It was easy back in 2009. I'm not sure where you source your information that "plenty of people" make money with IG and only "few" , the ones who know nothing about risk management, suffer losses. The reports say quite the opposite: Almost all retail clients suffer significant and unexpected losses. Anyway, you keep your IGG shares, I'll hold my bank shares.

Hi STeve, Warren Buffet isn't someone we can compare with. I am talking about the average investor , not one in a life time mammoth investor like him. You asked what I see worthwhile investing currently. Well, I have had shares in many companies over the years. I see Lloyds as a good investment now. I'm fully loaded. The rising interest rates will do well for the banks. I have shares in other banks too, but Looyds in my view is priced at the lower end at present. Technically, Lloyds is in a slight down trend but as I bought at the lower 50s, I'm happy to hold. I bought and sold Lloyds and other companies many times in the years followng the financial crisis. Some brought me several times over in return, but since the initial boom, I've learned to be satisified with 40-45% return. Not good to be too greedy. Once I am at 35-40% in profit, I start watching carefully and rebalancing. This way , when I lock n profit at some price, I don't care that the share may have further to go, as I am satisfied with my earnings. I recently reduced my holding in Sainsbury's. It went up to the levels of 2014. I was ok with that, despite that some expect the price to carry on rising. As I said efore, IGG isn't an ethical business. Whatever return it may produce, I will not touch it ever again. I was concidering CMC Markets when it was 150p. It's somewhere in my past posts. I was right as the price went up 25% and will go higher, but after looking at their business and actually I talked to them, I see that they they are no different to IGG - profit at the expense of their cutomers. This isn't a real business. This is a legalised robbery. Good luck to you!

Stevegrass,for once I agree with you. Traders can be said to be short term investors. Normally traders perform better than investors because they sell when there's panic in the market instead of holding and hoping. A good trader can make many times over the return of an investor when riding the market rollercoaster. There's no such thing as beating the market though. You buy at a price that you consider a good entry point for you, all things considered. If the market rises, obviously you'll have done well. But just as likely, what may seem cheap today, may become even less valued tomorrow. Talking about IGG, how many investors do you think may have bought in at 900+ only to see SP crashing to sub 500p and still sitting on the red as of today? Hoping to at least brake even. And when that happens, new hopes may make them hold on to the shares for a further increase that may never materialise and they lose again. Conversely, if one makes a profit, they feel excited to have "beaten" the market. It would simply mean that they happened to have hit the right entry and exit. That's all. SO at any given time SP is the result of what's known and expected based on a deep analysis of the fundamentals and prospects of the business. SP reflects many factors. Naturally, trading that involves nanoseconds transactions may lead to what some term overreaction, but this is simply a normal behavior of today's market. Regarding advice, even though I won't give one per se, I may share some options once back from my overseas trip. I'm also glad that the conversation with you has become a civilised and constructive. Let's keep it that way. I'd do my part. GL

Stevegrass, any city trader, that is, anyone who knows a bit about trading, unlike retail investors and "traders" will tell you thst the market is always right. Or at least most of the time. SP of any share is what the market values it at that moment. The price reflects hundreds of considerations that you may not know anything about it, but they are the elements that make the price be this or that. What the price doesn't tell is where it will go forward. It may go up or go down. It depends on what Mr. Market will decide based on new coming data. Looking at price action one can work out (sometimes) the probability of the price direction. Probability, not certainty. You ask me to tell you what to invest in, if you sell IGG. I'm not here to advise you in what to invest or whether you should sell your shares in this company or buy even more. This is a forum to express opinions on the business, not a school playground as it looks from some of your posts and those of some others. Neither it is a place where one can receive a reliable investment advice ( from unregulated person).

Surely & stevegrass, the market is supreme in setting up the price of any asset. Sp 480p was the correct price at the time when the market realised the threat of regulation for IGG. If one feels that 800p is a good price now, then fill your pockets. The market clearly judges that this is correct at this moment. I'm out of this share because I consider that the business has not seen anything of the effects of the regulation yet. It's all about expectations , promisses and calming investors. The actual results are yet to be seen. No business likes regulations. Bitcoin cost in recent past a fraction of the price that it was a few months ago. Thevreturn from almost 0 to almost �20,000 is the largest increase any investor in the world has ever experienced. However, threat of regulation and other factors have since reduced to price to sub $7000. You can only decide what to do with your money and reap profits or suffer losses. GL whichever way you go!

All you show is that you've read a couple of headlines. Reading the text in the body must've been too difficult for you to graps. It's not surprising since you failed to understand spoon fed information in my informative posts. But you are making an improvement admitting inter alia, that without regulations, participants do as it pleases them. Thanks, as this is precisely my point that you missed so far - spreadbetting businesses have to be regulated. Otherwise, they cause havoc. Despite the above, another point that you contunue missing, is that the participant is ultimately to blame, not the regulator, be it FCA or as formerly titled FSA since you are being so stupidly petty, just as the criminal is to blame, not the police.

Mat, you are the first one gullible enough to blame FCA for past financial crisis. Never heard of this one before. On account of intelligence - a schoolboy will beat you any day.

Your naive posts show that I'm the only one here who understands what IGG is. I was among those who supported regulatory intervention in the retail CFD ages ago. We couldn't do it then. The lobby was very strong. I'm glad that FCA and other authorities finally decided to act. In your view, FCA knows nothing about spreadbetting either. You are a joker! PS. Your latest post reported. Too repulsive!

asclypius, you believe what you wish. One can lead a horse to water but... you know the rest. Likewise, a fool to facts and logic, but he'll have none of it. It's not my loss that you failed to understand how the business that you are invested in, operates.

A well deserved retirement after a good career trying to bring fairness for consumers like you. That's why I become passionate when I see businesses presenting a different face to the public. Anything you have to say about IGG? Or you now take more interest in my retirement?

Good luck to you too! I worked in the financial industry. Enjoying my retirement now. Hopefully you have used the opportunity to learn from my posts. For free.

Wrong again. IG has only resemblance to a financial business but in nature, it's a straighforward bookmaking business. I fail to see your comparison with banks and insurance sector. These provide plethora of services that are very different to betting on price movements and events, e.g. the outcome of the EU Referendum or Italian elections. I'm going to attempt to understsnd your logic and will have to agree with you that banks can operate just like spreadbetting businesses if they profited from customers losing their savings and deposits, while the banks outgoings will be the unlikely event that a customer happens to win a small sum on a scratch card handed over by a cashier. Do you know of banks doing business like that?

No one is discussing your fat profits. They are yours, enjoy them. At least you had the decency to admit that you understand now that IG profits from their clients' losses. However, I disagree that all companies profit from making customers poorer. Customers pay for a service or product. If those are shyte then, yes, the business gains by providing substandard service/product and the customer is bearing a loss. That's why there are laws to protect consumers from such practices. Spreadbetters whole business model is based on gaining from clients losses. This is quite different from the above scenarios. A customer places a Buy bet on a market. The market goes down. The customer makes a loss. Where does this loss go? In IG's bank account. Another customer places a Sell bet and makes a profit. Who pays him the profit? IG. Do you see how IG is there to collect (most of the time) and dish out (on some occasions) money and not, as you believe, to happily collect spreads only? If that second customer is too greedy and waits a bit longer for the market to decline even further, he may miss on his running profit and eventually close at a loss too when the market turns around. Both customers with opposing bets end up realising a loss. Data shows that this happens to at least 80-90% of customers. Why would IG need to hedge perfectly winning for them customers' losses ? And if they hedged it to the last penny, how would that change the business model ? It doesn't - the actual process of making a profit is still = customers losses being the norm - customer miniscule gains on rare occasion. Has anyone tried spreadbetting for real? Or you've only done the more prudent thing to invest in shares only?

asclypius, very very poor education... Do you think that going back to school may assist you in understanding basic sentence structure, context, terms, meaning, logic?

Mat, one positive thng about your latest post - that you decided to be less rude. This is a huge improvement. Even better - no need to be rude. The rest of your reasoning ' I'm afraid to point the obvious, is patently wrong. a. I never said I sold at 665p. Your assumption that maths isn't my strong point is a mere childlike attempt to insult, clearly not based on anything that you know about me. In other words, absolutely pointless. b. What you have allegedly established is all in your mind. Completely detached from reality, hence utterly pointless rambling. Leave my investments aside and focus on what this board is all about - IGG. c. More of the same incoherent rambling, but what you say that I say makes no sense yet again. I say that FCA found that 82% of retail clients lose money. What I say is that if you were to do a proper research, you would realise the simple truth that spreadbetting companies make money from clients' losses. Whatever hedging may occur, be it 1% or 100%, is there to protect the business and doesn't change the business model as established. IG are not intermediaries making money from each transaction as a real broker does. Their profit is the difference between the money clients lose and the money clients make. Ask them, they'll tell you. Ask them. Since you can't be bothered to do a research yourself. They will tell you how they hedge and they want their traders to be successful and blah blah, but press them on the actual system of operation and you'll glean the truth from their answers . I'm getting tired of this discussion but I'll not cease to rebut anyone who spatters nonsense that IGG are real brokers.