Proposed Directors of Tirupati Graphite explain why they have requisitioned an GM. Watch the video here.
Guys did you hear what the CEO said in the full yr results ? " Now that the ordinary dividend has been normalized there will be no need to supplement it with special divis ."
That is the end of any special divis ....he also added that with the buyback there is no need to pay special divis
Asperger1 , first of all thank you for all your research/ info on LLoyds - very useful .
For yrs all Antonio talked about was returning excess capital to shareholders - the board has made promises year after year ......It looks like to me its failing miserly at keeping its promises . The problem is we will have to wait for ppi to finish to get what we have been waiting for...but therein lays the problem ....when ppi does finish there will no doubt be another problem/reason not to pay out .
As a long suffering shareholder ....its always jam tomorrow with Lloyds
Can only pay 1.07 interim divi whilst RBS can pay 2p straight off the bat ....
Absolutely staggering isnt shareholders have been given a might 0.7 increase in the divi ...thats from a company making billions . Look what its done for the share price = nothing , & thats with a rate rise .
Antonio is clueless and its about time he went and let somone take over who knows what good for shareholders . Its a disgrace as all the board every talked about was returning money to shareholders - for-yrs ....well were is it ?
For yrs and yrs the board promised that they would return all spare cash to shareholders - thats all they ever talked about .
The divi is a joke 1.07 why couldn't they make it 1.10 or 1.15 - not the frist time . The divi is the Holy Grail and they wont be many investors encouraged to buy in on this divi ......They gave out PPI money quick enough & yet the shareholders are still waiting ....
This board cannot be trusted to keep their word
Mr longtimeinvestor , well, of course, the buyback has nothing to with new shares being issued !!! The top staff are being paid absurd amounts of money that of course we the shareholders are paying for ...But just look at the share price performance ...I know we've had problems but the performance of the share over over the last few yrs has been truly shocking
Part of the thread from iii http://www.iii.co.uk/investment/detail/?display=discussion&code=cotn:LLOY.L&thread=12321465&threshold=0&it=le
Does everyone on here realize that the buyback program so far has not kept pace with the number of new shares being issued for bonuses etc . This has been well discussed over on the iii loyds blog ....in fact there have 50 odd million new shares being issued more than the buybacks. The buyback program is so far not keeping pace with new share s being issued is the bottom line
Santa2 , yes you can take them to court . Good luck with that and you must have done very well in your job if you can afford to cover RBS 120 million legal fess should you lose the case . No precedent has been set by the way as RBS have never admitted to any wrong doing - even though they settled .
RBS braced for fresh trial after investors raise legal fees by: Emma Dunkley Royal Bank of Scotland and former disgraced boss Fred Goodwin are bracing for a trial over the state-backed bank’s 2008 share sale after investors managed to gather millions of pounds at the 11th-hour in an attempt to push ahead with the court case. The RBS Shareholders Action Group, which represents thousands of individual investors, secured a £2m deal with high net worth funders on Monday night, taking their total funding pot to about £7m to cover the cost of the trial, according to shareholder Neil Mitchell. Mr Mitchell said that the claim is “now fully funded” and that “claimants are willing to proceed to trial”, which is set to begin on Wednesday. The development is the latest twist in the case which last week saw shareholders come close to a settlement with RBS at 82p per share, double the bank’s original offer. The case has been adjourned three times in as many weeks as a result of the ongoing talks. But the bank and investors were locked in stalemate at the end of last week after a meeting was held with RBS chief executive Ross McEwan and no conclusion was reached, according to people briefed on the issue. RBS refused to raise its offer from 82p, one banker said. The claim has been brought by RBS shareholders who allege they lost nearly all of their investment in a £12bn rescue funding launched by the lender in June 2008 — only months before it received the biggest bank bailout in UK history. RBS has settled with other groups representing various shareholders, offering a total pot of £900m. A number of investors recently told the Financial Times they were unwilling to settle because they wanted to see Mr Goodwin, who was stripped of his knighthood in 2012, held to account and for the “truth” to emerge. Mr Goodwin has rarely been seen in public since RBS’s near collapse and agreed to reduce a £700,000 annual pension only following a very public battle. He still lives in Edinburgh. RBS declined to comment.
Talks between Royal Bank of Scotland and a group of “diehard” shareholders suing the lender have collapsed after a bad-tempered summit ended in an impasse that could force the bank’s former boss Fred Goodwin into the dock. Three directors of the RBoS Shareholder Action Group met chief executive Ross McEwan on Friday morning at the lender’s headquarters on Bishopsgate in the City of London. They are understood to have asked McEwan to improve on his 82p-per-share settlement offer, which would add about £200m to the £700m compensation bill already agreed with a majority of shareholders. Two people with knowledge of the meeting said discussions became heated, with McEwan accusing the group of turning RBS into the “Millwall of British banking”, believed to be a reference to the south London football club’s public image. Sources close to RBS have categorically denied that McEwan said this. The claimants were represented at the talks by the lawyers Jonathan Gaunt, Nigel Masters and Lorena Aguirre, who have been assisting former RBS shareholders with their pursuit of the bank. McEwan told the trio that he was not prepared to increase the existing offer, an 11th-hour olive branch offered last month as a 14-week trial loomed. The opposing legal teams have now exchanged skeleton arguments, indicating that both sides believe the trial now has a good chance of going ahead. Claimants willing to accept the offer include the pension funds and financial institutions that make up around 80% of the shareholders, who funded a £12bn cash call by RBS in 2008. Trevor Hemmings, the owner of Preston North End football club, who has been funding the “diehard” lawsuit, is another who has accepted RBS’s offer. RBS only needs to secure approval from shareholders representing 70% of the value of the total claim for the settlement to go ahead, but wanted to get broader agreement to head off further disputes. Some diehard group members are understood to be angry at a bespoke deal offered to Hemmings by RBS that would make his settlement contingent on ceasing to pay fellow claimants’ legal bills. While they are determined to force Goodwin into court, the defiant group would have to raise their own funds to take the case to trial. They have raised £4m of the £7m required and are confident of securing the remaining funds in time to start the trial on Wednesday next week. “We will go to the wire,” a source close to this group said. The source added that even an increased offer might not be enough, with some investors unwilling to accept anything less than seeing Goodwin explain his stewardship of the bank.
RBS settlement yo-yos as investors raise millions to continue battle 2 June 2017 • 6:20pm Royal Bank of Scotland, which earlier this week looked sure to avoid an embarrassing High Court trial over its near-collapse in 2008, has hit a roadblock in its settlement with claimants after a meeting over the final payout ended in a stalemate. A group representing the thousands of retail investors suing the bank for misleading them during a £12bn rights issue said on Monday it was "in the best interests" to agree to an 82p-a-share offer from the lender, indicating that RBS had escaped a cross-examination in court. However the tide has turned in the days since, with a large chunk of investors raising £4m to put towards funding the 14-week trial while a meeting aimed at reaching a final settlement ended in deadlock on Friday. The meeting, between RBS chief executive Ross McEwan and three directors from the RBoS Shareholder Action Group, ended without an agreement and consisted of "PR blah blah blah," according to one of the group's members. Fred Goodwin as the Royal Bank of Scotland is bracing for a costly court battle with shareholders that is to see their former boss defend his role in the lender's near collapse during the financial crisis. Neil Mitchell, who claims RBS forced his business Torex Retail into administration, said that there are many "hardship cases" involving pensioners who had invested in the rights issue. Mr McEwan refused to increase the bank's final offer during the meeting, one source confirmed. The 82p-a-share offer is already double the amount accepted by four other claimant groups in December. If the stalemate continues then former chief executive Fred Goodwin could find himself having to take to the witness stand and defend his role in the lender's near-collapse next week, when the trial is due to start. The claimants - who were hit with losses of as much as 80pc when the bank was bailed out during the crisis - have argued that they were misled about the bank's financial health in the prospectus for its 2008 rights issue, a claim the lender denies. The RBoS Shareholder Action Group did not respond to requests for comment.
I should rephrase what i said in my earlier post ....The latecomers have not been offered anything by RBS - yet . I got through to the RBOS phone line & they told me the latecomers are not included in the settlement . Unless a miracle happens this week i shouldn't think we will see a penny . Cheers Bubbles