Member Info for LLucan

It may hit �9 but it will not be this month! As for brokers, I would ignore what they suggest. Do your own research. This is a very slow share with a cautious well paid CEO. I am confident this share will not reach �16 this side of 2025.

I am going to sit on my investment for the foreseeable future. I think the far east is great place to have a bank plus SC seem to be well in with the Chinese. The results are coming from a more stable bank than they were a few years ago so as long as TO and profit keeps improving which it should then the SP should not fall too far. Plus with interest rates going up in the USA and worldwide it should be a much better environment for banks to make money. So it could actually do very well in say 5 to 10 years.

The results should have been a lot better. 3.5% ROE is pretty bad. I think it is unlikely that the SP will fall a great deal but likewise it is unlikely to hit �10 in 2018! Bill winters took over when the SP was �11.50, so he has a way to go. Plus he had a rights issue �5 billion. He is going to take an awful long time to get the bank back to a $18 billion TO.

It is usually about 1.30 am GMT. 9.30am Hong Kong time.

Which ever way you look at it these are bad results. TO is only marginally up only because commodity prices are up. Some commodity prices have doubled. The productivity of the company has deteriorated considerably. The divi is up but only as a bribe to stop share holder revolt against management. The debt of the company has not fallen very much at all. They will lose a chunk of money on shale disposal. Hopefully management can pull their finger out for the year end but these interim results are a dissapointment. The free cash in the first half only just covers the dividend.

It was from here: Management is confident of turning the business round. Indeed, despite net debt of �460m and leverage of 1.8 times EBITDA at the last half-year end, the board said it remains fully committed to continuing its progressive dividend policy. However, some analysts question whether Saga�s broking issues are more structural and if we�re looking at an ex-growth business, while a dividend yield of 7.6% at a current share price of 117p suggests the market isn�t entirely convinced the payout is safe.

https://www.fool.co.uk/investing/2018/02/08/saga-plc-isnt-the-only-dividend-stock-on-the-danger-list/

I think the CEO needs to be replaced. The price is now below where they came in at. Something is very wrong in the direction they are taking the company.

This is quite a fall I think the original placing was at �1.85 so well under water! I read that there is a big concern that not all the bad news is out. The Insurance arm which makes most of the money has been rumored to have structural problems and matters are going to get a whole lot worse. I am not sure I believe this. Besides the cruse division is doing well. The results will be out in two months and hopefully matters will be clearer. they do not seem to be that good at communicating with shareholders and they do not seem to be a very ambitious company.

You are off the scale of nuts. Investing by gender is the surest way to go bust. No investor cares about the gender of the directors or staff. As long as they make money. If fund managers thought that women were better investors, no man would be employed in the city. No one has ever cared about the gender of an employee or director. It is all down to how much money they can make for the shareholders. GSK is run by a woman who is a walking disaster. Interserve is run by a woman who is doing a fantastic job with a crap hand. BLT is run by men and are doing a great job at the moment. Although it could be argued Rio is doing better.

Given that Standard Chartered is always being talked down by brokers, this may be relevant, basically you make more money by doing the opposite of what brokers advise: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/investing/shares/dont-listen-analysts-want-make-money-stock-market-report-finds/

This is just a stupid investment approach: You are nuts and will go bankrupt. BLT has a men in charge, not that it matters. Ken MacKenzie (Chairman) Andrew Mackenzie (CEO). GSK has fallen by 20% since they appointed a female. Not that this matters since in my opinion GSK have gone off in the wrong direction. Couple this with Anglo American which was nearly bankrupted by Cynthia Carroll, a female. Investing in companies by gender is the dumbest thing a feminist has come up with. I and 99.9999% of investors do not care the gender of a company CEO as long as they make me a sackful of money. I have bought Interserve recently, run by a woman and doing a better job than GSK.

Reply to crazy post. You are nuts and will go bankrupt. BLT has a men in charge, not that it matters. Ken MacKenzie (Chairman) Andrew Mackenzie (CEO). GSK has fallen by 20% since they appointed a female. Not that this matters since in my opinion GSK have gone off in the wrong direction. Couple this with Anglo American which was nearly bankrupted by Cynthia Carroll, a female. Investing in companies by gender is the dumbest thing a feminist has come up with.

Some of the brokers are obviously trying to talk the share down. Barclays today a reiteration of sell with a target price of �5.75. Very pessimistic. obviously they are trying to talk the share down. I suppose they are a competitor. There is an update on the SC site. It all seems to hings on what hap[pens in 2018. Possible there will not be a dividend for another year, or if there is it will be very small. They are predicting 5% to 7% annual growth in Income from 2018 onwards.

The announcement was the day before the September results. https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/standard-chartered-appoints-ben-hung-084527537.html I suspect unless the results start to get better soon then Winters will be ousted as well.

Someone that knows the share and has some sense. So it could be that they are storing up better results for February 2018. Divi I am still not convinced they will pay one. The expenses could have been front loaded as they said or it could have been "double speak". Bill winters personality has always been a "steady eddy" so even if they had spectacular results these would be manipulated down. His target in 2018 is 10% return on equity which would be a bout a �4 billion net profit. Although I think this has been talked down to 8% to collect his bonus. I think that he should be doing a lot better than he is. Other banks HSBC, JP Morgan have flown over the past 2 years. Having said that the brokers really do seem to be talking this share down. Goldman Sachs is the house broker so they are obviously talking it up. I will sit tight for another 9 months. August 2018. But that is it, if it has not improved by then I am out!

So interim results are out. The share is down 7%. The increase in profit is nearly all as a result of writing back provisions. Not a real profit. Expenses are way up and tier 1 capital has fallen. These are bad results. Yesterday Bill winters reshuffled (read that as fired) senior management. Obviously he knew the market would react badly. There is little chance of a dividend being paid in 2018 either. As he said himself the best option may be to put the the bank up for sale. He was sold as the wonder kid but to date he has at best stabilised the situation. But after two and a half years at the helm, 5 billion of new capital and a 30% fall in the share price from the moment the took over. This is not looking good at all. I am going to start to reduce my holding. I have lost confidence in this investment.

I do think there will be a waive of broker upgrades now on the back of these results. If the bank makes £3 billion pretax for 2017 then it should be valued a tad higher than it is currently.

The results seem to be broadly good. I think the loan issue is also a positive. Any bank can male loans but if they are going to go bad or are not profitable there is no point. I have followed this share for about ten years now. The non payment of a dividend is annoying but the money is at least staying in the bank to be reinvested. It is kind of pointless paying a 5p or 10p divi anyway. Bill Winters is much better than Peter Sands who was sending the bank towards bankruptcy. I am sitting tight for another couple of years. My personal view is that it will continue to make steady progress now.

Disagree entirely. The amount of money staked on these machines is miniscule compared to the amount staked online. There is nothing morally wrong with the machines. You might as well say all gambling including the national lottery is morally wrong. If people want to use them they should be allowed to.