Member Info for Scampthedog

Fair play to you, Carrington. Feel free to have a pop.

Errr...what??

Yes, thank you, NICODEMUS63, my apologies for any former tirades...must have been having a bad week. Now then, could you give me the wisdom of your vast experience in the fossil fuels industry and let me know your most favourite dogging places? I can just well imagine your little scrubbed-up, pink bottom between a big hairy pair of thighs going ten to the dozen. Errr...noooo...there again maybe not. Lol.

At the very least this s.p is providing me with a little excitement at the moment. Never a dull moment.

we all value everyone's individual opinions of course...but has it not occurred to you yet that everything, and I mean everything, that you have so far mentioned over the last day or two has been mentioned and discussed many, many times over and before during the last 5 or 6 weeks already by dozens of people on this board?

Making comments like:-"aye parcels are booming 200iq but letters aren't - that equates to a net loss which is a declining business" is hardly an earth-shattering revelation now is it?

You might consider your "little pearls" of wisdom intellectual and informative...sadly most of the rest of us here don't.

Cheers!

I will if I run across him...oh indeed I will.

Another thing that needs to be mentioned: the Torys are not the slightest bit interested in the day to day running of RMG...simply because it has not got anything to do with them.

It certainly is a blessing, madasaballon. If only I was so lucky.

Chances of any Tory government (including this one) re-nationalising Royal Mail are absolutely zero.

Chances of a future Labour government (...and there won't be another Labour government for at least a decade or more) re-nationalising Royal Mail? Very, very slim.

They will include it in their manifesto of course...but so what? When (or perhaps more correct to say "if") they actually get the opportunity to try they will soon come to realise about all the massive problems and obstacles they would have to overcome to do so...and not just the financial ones either.

No...it is a none-starter.

Lets us fervently hope so. It would certainly make a nice change from all the hot, inflated gas talked on here.

As I mentioned yesterday...going forward things will be very much the same.

Someone on here commented that the temporary CEO has just thrown us a bone to keep the union happy in the short term...happy that is till the next permanent CEO turns up.

I subscribe to that view myself.

Until an agreement with the union has been hammered out and the analysts are through calculating the cost of it all and the impact on the company's near to mid term profitability it will have...then this s.p is going nowhere fast.

True value of RMG right now? Personally -- no idea!

I very much hope so. However, I am just ploughing my way through he CFO's report at the moment...rather scary I do have to say.

This is exactly as I have always said -- just a punt! A punt with a decent chance of success...but there again...there is always a chance of success in a two horse race is there not?

Love this bit (talk about hedging your bets):-

"The directors are confident that current capital projects are funded and have a reasonable expectation that they could secure additional funding, if needed, to fund additional capital projects. However, these conditions are necessarily considered to represent a material uncertainty which may cast significant doubt over the Group’s ability to continue as a going concern"

There is a lot of "ifs" and "buts" amongst all the other various statements also.

And I still don't fully trust the Georgian government. Just call me a cynical old dog if you will...

Its an age thing I believe.

Oh yes very interesting all of this. But what about the s.p? If it doesn't hold here its all the way back down to 1.58.

Just checked the short position. It has decreased a little (as most of your are probably aware) since I last looked at it a day or to ago. Question is: after the sudden surprise resignation (it surprised me anyways) what do the shorts think about it all? Will they increase or decrease their positions?

Interesting. Interesting times indeed.

Scary thought, 200iq. But...you might just well be right. Hope not!

You will get £4.00 a share, PostmanPorsche...eventually that is. :)

Basically, regarding the paying of any tax on shares sold, this was what I thought I had already covered, Oli.

And now changing the subject: I agree very strongly with your point about Kretinsky buying into Royal Mail when knowing full well the dividend has now been suspended.

For me it shows two things: either he had some inside knowledge (and probably did) of Back's imminent departure...and thus the ensuing effect on the s.p -- or, he is buying in for the medium to long term.

We should not have to wait much longer to find out, methinks.

Seems rather a strange thing to do, 200iq?

Allow me to pontificate.

1. The shares are bought through a tax efficient plan.
2. Because of this, each week you save approx £6.00 when purchasing your shares:-
£6.00 (per week) x 52 weeks x 5 (years) = £1560 gain(approx)
You are now giving some of that up.
3. Your two free shares a month -- you no longer receive them!
4. The present share price: whether up or down (in the short - medium term) it will be, by any law of averages, higher than this in 5 years time.
5. No dealers fees. Every time you sell or bur shares you pay these fees. Buying R.M shares through your wages avoids this. Depending on whom you buy through: 12 (months) x 5 (years) = 60 trades. Another nice saving.

But everyone to their own. Personally, I think you should reconsider somewhat on this one, 200iq.

If wolvesposty has sold all his shares in the Royal Mail share incentive plan then not only will he lose all his "matching shares", given freely by R.M each month to compliment the ones you buy with your monthly contributions...but also he would have had to pay the capital gains that would have been due on them...if any; not sure how this would work if his investment was showing a lose (and they would have been) but your monthly payments are deducted from your monthly gross pay not the net pay...therefore making them more "tax efficient".

The reason the article uses the phrase "been plunged into crisis" is quite simple (as you yourself have touched upon): Back's "Five Year Plan".

Now totally trashed. Or is it?

I have to say that I don't envision that, when they are appointed, the new captain of the good ship R.M will be making a radical change of direction. In that respect it will most certainly be more of the same....and always was going to be.

It is just a question of how all this "change" is going to be handled.

In Back's case - badly!!