Member Info for GumT

IG is the only company that coerces its customers in replying to the impending regulatory changes and actually putting words in their mouths by scare tactics. No other business, small or large , are doing it. If you reply, make up your mind and reply to ESMA directly. It is possible that replying to IG as they say so they can forward your answers would be tainted with their own moderation of your comments. It is unbelievable what IG is doing, frankly!

IG came up with great results yesterday. Bombastic RNS! You would expect that the market would leap for joy and send sp skyhigh. But ney! It says 2 things: 1. The results were factored in the recent price rise. 2. The Market doesn't believe pompous boasting about immunity from the new regulations. Going forward, IG can still be a profitable sble business, but as I said previously, they have to break clean from the current bucket shop business model. If they become a true broker, they would prosper. Otherwise, tough. At least within n EU and UK. Going to other geographical areas like Asia may prove beneficial for a short while, before China et al close the loop with their own regulations. And make no mistakes, Chineese chop off heads literally, for non compliance. I see IG suffering losses in the short to medium term. IG were the only ones to admit their distress at the new regulations. Plus500 and CMC were a lot more upbeat and they have made a number of changes already. IG has only done some cosmetic alterations and if you read between the lines, you will realise that they a s*it scared, planning to push retail investors into the 'professional' category. Lower leverage means a number of things: lesser losses for punters, hence less profit for IG; lower overnight charges, 5-10 times less, hence 5-10 times less profit for IG from those charges; other implications that I may not know... Plus500 and CMC offer much better trading software than IG, likely that some customers will migrate. In my view, and this my unqualfied view, you all do your own research, IG price as it is , is very high. Plus500 is very expensive too, but they are better positioned economically - much more flexible than IG on account of necessary changes as demanded by regulators, open and honest policies, they can even relocate outside EU altogether. CMC however is the best value for money, imv. Low sp with a potential to grow. cMC were the only ones who changed their terms well ahead of the others and are ready to do more as required. Ultimately, it's your money, you decide. GLA

MatttheCoward, 2 weeks of skiing in the Alps!Ultimate snow blizz for any ski fanatic! If you don't know what skiing is or where or what the Alps are, go online. It's not candy, btw. You have started a pointless discussion that is of interest to no one on this bb but you. Yet, to address your unhealthy curiosity and hopefully increase your IQ to double digits, I'd refer you to my posts that you quote as it suits you. I said that I bought near the bottom. Not at the bottom. Again, there are online dictionaries and thesaurus to help you understand the difference between the two. Look at the trading chart, early 2013, sp was 460. I was of the view that that price would be breached paving the way down to 400. Plus500 had a majour tumble at the time too. However, IG stabilised at just under 500 early 2017. Followed by a slightly higher low at just under 500 early April. Forming double bottom, a sign that the fall was done. I realised that, no problems for me to admit that I was wrong in my expectations. This is when I invested and then sold before the endo f last year at just under 700. I'm not greedy that I missed the rise to 800. Almost 40% return would be a dream for any find manager. Add to this my conviction that IG is an unethical busness , I'm pleased that I'm out. I suppose thst this thread would be deleted so I am going to post elsewhere re IG. For the record, I'm not interested in your childish bickering.

Rhambo, thank you for your input. This is what IGG wants people to believe . But this is only smoke and mirrors. IGG openly admits that they don't hedge all their exposure. If you actually knew how much of that 70/30 on DowJones in particular, they hedge, you may be amazed that it is actually next to nothing. Why hedge when DJ has been rising for a year? I don't know if you bet on their platforms but if you do, your losses would go to their income account. IGG were the only cfd company that wailed at the top of their voice when FCA came up with proposals, knowing very well that they will not be profiting as much when people will be losing less. Plus500 and CMC were a lot calmer in that aspect even though they profit in the same way. The difference is in transparency, execution, nasty tricks and so on.

I'm glad that I invested only a couple of thousand £ in this crap. Sp has to rise to £60-70.00 for me to break even. No chance.

On what basis is this lift up going to arrive? On the imposed limits of mugging retail customers? CMC is by far the fairest of all CFD business, unlike IG. That's why CMC wasn't alarmed as much as IG by ESMA's announcement the other day. CMC have already implemented a number of changes to their businesses model and ready to do more whatever is required. IG is fighting the changes and tries to bully their customers. I've just sold my IG shares at a decent profit and may buy in here, but not before I've seen the impact of the new regilatory regime in the new year. I expect a share price drop initially, though I may be wrong of course. IG and Plus500 are more likely to see significant losses.

Thank you both! I knew there was something wrong in these numbers.

FCA say that retail clients don't understand the intricacies of CFD and incur substantial losses. Clicking agree may be good for nothing if the business is found to have been clandenstine in their practices. Anyway, you do whatever you believe. I am selling my shares this side of Christmas. The xmas rally may help prop them up a bit, before a further slamp in January or after the next update.

I managed to buy near the bottom. I have been nervous since then as I expected that the market would turn but not till the beginning of next year, because of ESMA's expected proposals in Jan. They came up a bit early though. You ask about fundamentals - then read my comments.

polsk, there are 400k shares at present at 5p, making the company worth £20k. 25mln or so might have been before 1/5000 consolidation.

Jilson, you describe accurately what has been happenning so far. We'll run the business properly. With volunteers first and like a charity. Once it generates profits, we can start paying wages and distribute dividends. I personally can afford to volunteer my time (I am sure that just time won't be sufficient - ££££ will be needed too). But wasn't it that there is a major shareholder? Do you know what is their holding and what is the free float? I am sure that is is all there in the RNS but I haven't followed this saga closely and remember reading that you seem to have a great deal of experience in running companies.

If you bothered to look at some specific bet ratios that IG executes, you will see disparity between those who are long and short. For example, 70% are long, 30% are short. £30% of one can balance 30% of the other, but another 40% is left as a risk for IG. If IG thinks that punters got it right, they may go on the underlying market and hedge. Or make money in some other way, but statictically, retail clients very rarely are correct in their bids and so IG has nothing to lose by not heding. Simply wait until customers' accounts are busted and scoop the money from them. For this reason IG is very cunny in their tricks so as to maximise customer losses. The fact of betting against a customer may not be that evil per se. All betting houses do it. The problem comes with conflict of interests where in CFD and spreadbetting there is unlimited potential to take advantage of customers without them realising it. This is what ESMA and FCA are on about. I don't know what Goldman does and may not be that honourable either, but one cannot avoid the reality that CFD is taking a whole makeover , long over due, and unless IG and the other companies adapt to the changes, there will be losses for shareholders. You will see a rise of legal claims for compensation. These payments and legal costs will errode IG's profits. It's only the beginning of a few tough years for IG (assuming they are flexible enough to change), for claims to be finalised. Remember PPI missold claims? Losses from CFD are the new PPI opportunities for lawyers and claims management firms now. I still believe that IG can stand out and stand proud. They simply have to admit liability, accept that they got it wrong, pay to whoever claims reasonable losses and then move on. This will increase the trust of customers in them and in the long run, the business will still be profitable. May be not as much as up to now, but nevertheless, it would be a good investment. (the big banks had their shares slump from £7 to 10p during the financial meltdown and will never recover to the previous highs, but importantly, these banks are still in business today having been found in so many regulatory breaches). I am all too concerned that IG first reaction was to say that ESMA findings and proposals are disproportionate and that IG knows better. As well as that half of their clients would be happy to be reclasified as professionals - next step would be to entice, bribe or bully and force retail to agree to such reclasification.

Do you work for IG? Because this is what they keep saying to make people believe their lies, and if you work for them, you will naturally repeat it. But if you worked for them, then you would know that they hedge very little. They only hedge when there is a perceived risk for them to lose money. 90% of the retail customers lose money and retail bets are rarely hedged. Hedging only comes into play after IG has taken most of the risk themselves, but experienced professional clients with track record of calling the market right, make IG hedge over the risk that IG is prepared to accept. Read there contract terms and all other materials and you will just about get the feel of how crooked this business is. Under a heavy layer of fluffy cozy blanket. You believe what you will, I am telling you what I know from those who work in the kitchen.

You are right that they 'also' make money on spreads and other fees for what not. But the core of the bisiness is profit from losses on bets. Add to this that there is a huge deception in how the business works, structured in a way that customers have no chance, unlike horsebetting and casinos and you can see why many find it immoral to do so. If there was nothing wrong ESMA and all other European financial regulators would not have been interested. IG can still come out good if they act as proper brokers, not as bucket shops. The conflict of interest is way too big of a temptation to make all work for IG's business interests , exploiting ordinary people's naivety and inexperience. My shares may go down, but why should my morals follow ?

IG is a bucket shop. It is good for the business and shareholders when they make profits, but the other side of the coin is that those profits are results of losses from retail clients who cannot understand how the whole business works. IG pretents one thing on their website only to trap customers who later, often too late, realise how badly they can lose hard earned cash. I am not sure if I should be happy when my shares rise in value on the back of increased revenue, since this revenue comes from clandenstine robbery. ESMA and FCA should have looked into the matter years ago, yet IG should have known better in any event. IG says that only 5-15% of the revenue is from professional clients. The rest are just the average Joe public, who are lured into this trap, CFD, only to lose all and even more, and IG scoops the jackpot. Years ago I got rid of shares in a diamond mining buisiness when I found out that they used child labour and enslaving conditions for their workers. I regret not investigating enough about CFD and spread betting. I might have decided not to invest in this immoral business. The share price isn't bad anyway, so selling my shares is still profitable. It's just that I feel bad for those 90% of clients who lose their money so we, shareholders can enjoy good sp rise and dividends. Just IMHO of course. GL all.

Is this all? Market capital of £20k? Or am I missing something? Shall we take over the company then? We'll sack everyone on wages till the business becomes profitable. Jilson, are you up for it?

Well put!

You said it right, Pound shop junk.

All companies have seen decline, not only the big supermarkets. The state of the economy isn't as rosy as presented in the official reports. We are still struggling to get off the bottom that we hit during the last recession. People's real earnings are lower than what they were 10 years ago. What a growth in one of the supposedly leading economies in the world? The prospect of getting into another recession is quite high. Tesco SP isn't that bad after all. It will not reach 350 anytime soon, 200p is a very very good level if it keeps around it. The German 'disconters' are rubbish. Bad service, bad display, low variety, low quality, only poor people buy from there. ( a bit snobbish, I know, but it's true).

OK Jilson, go ahead. I'll keep an eye on this bb.