Member Info for Richox

It's been a well known city maxim for years: If you can't think of anything else to short then short Aviva. They never get things right, but boy do they pay their executives well.

You're doing OK caddy. The price is around half of what it was 20 years ago and you can expect most of the BOD to get bonuses of around the entire lifetimes earnings of Mr Average.

The BoD are using the hot summer as a fabricated excuse for their poor performance. They are losing money because they are losing customers, nothing to do with the hot summer.

People do not use less electricity/gas because of higher summer temperatures. Their heating is switched off regardless of the temperature. They heat water for as many baths/showers, do as much cooking/washing/vacuuming etc, have the lights on for the same amount of time, charge their cars just as much, and use the same electrical gadgetry however high the temperature. Meanwhile their fridges/freezers/fans/air conditioners etc actually work harder and use more power, not less. People only use less electricity/gas in warmer winters, not in hotter summers.

The BoD's focus is more on boosting their bonuses through share buy backs that don't help customers or shareholders one jot. When things go badly they look for something to blame it on that is out of their control. When things go well they tell everyone that it's because of their brilliant management skills. That's the way drastically overpaid executives work nowadays - and not only in SSE.

If you really want to yawn it is back to where it was on 9th February 1995, and no doubt on dates well before that

What skills does he have? He's delivered a 50% fall in SP during his tenure and has also taken time off to help BT deliver a similar drop.

Currently driving my second Sharan which is now approaching 100K miles without ever a problem. I drive my Boxster when I want more fun. Both cars deliver exactly what I expect of them and I would never complain about the performance of either - horses for courses.

I bought my Aviva shares in March 1993 (when its direct predecessor was know as Commercial Union) at £480.20 per share and topped up in May 1996 at £7.29 per share. Today they are worth £4.93 per share. They dropped to around £2 during the 2007/8 financial crash and have since just about managed to claw back to around their 1993 price. Over the years new directors have been heralded as superstars with world class managements skills and the ability to drive the company to new heights, and have been paid accordingly They have produced voluminous glossy annual reports full of self congratulatory claims, promising jam tomorrow and blaming anything they can think of, always outwith their control, when the jam continues to be tomorrow. Sure there have been some reasonable times, and that's when they take the credit. Will Mark Wilson be any different? Time will tell but I'm not one for holding my breath any longer. The share price is still roughly where it was 4 years ago.

I think you'll find there has been a steady increase in the FTSE 100 index since the US presidential election nearly 2 years ago, and maybe even a slight increase in Aviva's SP. I am not convinced by your suggestion the election of Trump has been disasterous for the global economy, and far less that it distances Aviva's directors from responsibility for the share price. If a scapegoat is needed maybe the next annual report will agree with you though.

Sure I did nothing when Aviva shares peaked in May, but these shares represent no more than occasional dividend cheques to me. I have nothing but praise for the performance of my people carrier. I just can't say the same about Aviva's directors, past or present, and don't think they deserve gratuitous excuses from the people whose interests they are supposed to be serving.

Anyway I wish you well with your strategy and with your recently purchased Aviva shares.

You sound like an Aviva director. When the share price does badly it's because of factors outwith their control and but for their expertise would have done even worse. If it does well it's purely because of their brilliant management expertise and they deserves even higher bonuses. Absolute rubbish. The board is responsible for looking after shareholder's interests and they are responsible for at least its relative performance.

You sound like an Aviva director. When the share price does badly it's because of factors outwith their control and but for their expertise would have done even worse. If it does well it's purely because of their brilliant management expertise and they deserves even higher bonuses. Absolute rubbish. The board is responsible for looking after shareholder's interests and they are responsible for at least its relative performance.

No use to PIs unless the SP collapses. The main benefit is to directors who use the figures to justify even higher bonuses. How much did this totally unnecessary exercise cost?

Ofcom is HMG's tool for keeping telecoms prices down. Forget any suggestions of fair free markets. The strategy has always been to keep BT on its knees ,and thereby restrict prices charged by rivals. HMG sold their BT shares at £11+ before fully unleashing Ofcom on BT. The rules of the game are unlikely to change regardless of consequences.

What we need to do is incentivise the directors to do better. Why don't we vote to give more of our money to them in higher salaries and higher bonuses at the next AGM. Might be interesting to compare the percentage increase in director remuneration with the percentage loss of shareholder value over say the last 20 years.

OK, if you want a bit more detail: Shares that started life as Commercial Union shares have progressively been reallocated to CGU, then CGNU, then Aviva without any change to the number of shares. Norwich Union shareholders however received 48 CGNU shares for every 100 Norwich Union shares they held when Norwich Union merged with CGU at the end of May 2000. There was no reallocation of shares when CGNU changed its name to Aviva at the end of June 2002. Whatever the history however, CGNU shares were �10.02 on 1st June 2000 and had dropped to �5.25 on 1st July 2002 when the company was renamed Aviva. So even if you disregard the loss of value during the period that Aviva was known as CGNU the share price is now more or less where it was 16 years ago, and indeed 10 years ago just before the financial crash. It rose back up to �5 by April 2014 (following Mark Wilson's appointment in early 2013) but has never gone up much above �5 ever since. Past performance may not be a guide to future performance but it can affect your expectations.

Dear C3PO, Severn Trent shares are around �20 (Twenty pounds) not 2 quid. That's about 8 x their 1989 price.

Dear John, You may be interested to know that this share was over �6 in 2008, before the crash, and over �8 back in 1987 when it was know as Commercial Union. The FTSE was around 700 then. The dividend has a bit of a rocky history as well.

Looks as if the merger did little to help the SP. 8 months on and 15% down.

Do you still think so?

How did you guys manage to get shares below 70p. I can't remember them ever being that low on the open market.

Anyone know what the BOD are doing to try to restore market confidence in this share? In fact, apart from picking up their not so modest pay cheques, anyone know what they are they doing about anything?

Deutsche Bank's price target was 585p last July when Aviva's price was about 530p. If they think things have improved then why have they not increased their target? It seems that the investing community just does not agree with them, but who knows, one day they might be able to say they were right.

Directors prefer buybacks. They make the figures look better and boost their bonuses. They produce a negative effect for shareholders more often than a benefit.