Member Info for Scampthedog

Picking up on a couple of your comments, JBTHISTLE: A; the serious incident which will certainly end up as a criminal prosecution was witnessed by several people...it was almost instant news as it happened, B; the high sickness absence occurring at the new hub may well be connected to "New Building Syndrome" -- but not the other...it is several generations old at least.

Thought I would make a few phone calls today regarding RMG's transformation plans...particularly why being behind on schedule; one of the persons concerned works at the new hub in Warrington. He gave me some shocking news concerning several incidents that have occurred over the last 72 hours...so shocking in fact that I will not write about them in any detail. One of these incidents will most certainly be followed up by criminal prosecution. Apparently things are not at all going well at the site...the building itself would seem to be the problem. Intrigued, I made a couple more calls. I found out that in the last few days a high level Royal Mail executive has visited two sites in the area...the new hub being one of them. It transpires that these two sites have one of the highest records of sick absence in the whole of RMG. Boy -- does that say something!! Stress is being touted as the main problem...would explain the friction that is taking place at the new hub (there are also many issues with the car parking facilities that are causing problems for staff and agency alike). It would seem that RMG is no longer going to tolerate this sort of behaviour (regarding the abuse of sickness absence) from its employees...hence this might well the start of a nationwide review ( and long overdue if it is). It would also appear that V.R is no longer on the menu; I have been reliably informed a postie politely inquired of the lady concerned of the possibility of this...her reply - no chance! V.R would, of course, be only for those employees who would be eligible due to meeting the required criteria through age and length of service. Again, good news for the shareholder -- the cost would be astronomical! I did previously comment on what could be the cost several days ago: based just on 5000 people alone taking up the offer the cost was hundreds of million, never mind the added cost of the pension enhancements. So there you have it: my little contribution...something to ponder on anyways.

A wise, thoughtful and generous gesture, JBTHISTLE...I applaud you. And on that note...I will wish you a contented good night. Off to work myself. Good night all!

I intend to hold for at least 8 years...unless, of course, a golden opportunity from "right out of the blue" manifests. Doubtful I would think myself. Point is this: this is a long term investment...and long term meaning just that: five or six years at least. Others may largely differ of course...more than happy if it takes considerably shorter; and more than happy, if so -- to say I was wrong! Which is more than some other posters on here seem incapable of admitting.

6500...helped myself to another 500 today. A small investor myself, unlike Fruitster and wolves, but still willing to buy more, at the right price of course...like today, for example, and keep on adding. Yes, of course, why not? I have always been consistent in my outlook for Royal Mail: a long term investment which will provide a good return over time. You will note that word: "time". Without it Rico Back's Five Year Plan is'nt worth spit! And time is something none of us, including RMG, will ever have enough of. So everyone connected with that Five Year Plan best get moving -- or time will move on along without them!!

The question about the dividend being sustainable or not over the next several years is crucial here. Without that nice little sweetener to look forward too every six months many investors will undoubtedly bail out. What price the s.p then?

By any consideration it looks like there may well be meaningful, constructive talks culminating in mutually beneficial and binding commitments. I do now believe that the chance of a strike has, as of this present moment, been even more greatly diminished...but at what cost? Any agreement with the CWU covering the whole of their grievances is going to involve a whole lot more money -- a massive amount of money in fact!!

The ball has now been smashed right back into RMG's court here -- advantage CWU! Rico is in trouble now...and the CWU know it. RMG won the last battle...but they are losing the war. Herr Back must be coming under tremendous pressure these last couple of hours: a terrible financial quarterly and his own lamentable admission that his grand "Five Year Plan" is, in all actuality, well behind schedule...it really could'nt be any worse. Those dozen or so biggest shareholders will not be happy in the slightest. Back now needs the CWU more than the CWU need him...oh how they must be chuckling back in CWU headquarters. Your in trouble, Rico...real trouble lad.

Pullinger is the perfect negotiator for any union...especially a union like the CWU. Herr Back can dictate policy to Pullinger of course...after all he is the CEO, but he would get completely swept away in the ensuing flood. Pullinger is beyond fiesty -- he is downright vicious!! Back would be well advised to make himself fully aware of who he is dealing with in Pullinger; he has a fiery and volatile personality and if the milk goes sour he is not the sort of pussy to drink it. I would not like to be caricatured by Pullinger in front of the worlds media if Rico thinks he can hoodwink him. If Rico does intend to sit down with our mate Terry, I truly hope it is with honest intent...God help Herr Back if he trys to belittle and humble the CWU and a bristling Mr Pullinger -- I would rather face the plague!!!

It might not be as good as you think, JBTHISTLE. Is Herr Back going to "tell" Mr Pullinger something...or is he willing to "discuss" somethings?

Hhmmm...in retrospect I might, now, just have to reevaluate my former assessment...difficult. Very difficult!

I have always thought it would be near impossible to find a dumber poster on here than Redceo...how wrong I was. sKier1, you have just been elevated to the number one position, and hot favourite I might add, in the running to be awarded the coveted "Dumbest Poster Of The Year Award". Truly -- a magnificent effort!! You have hauled yourself up and thrust yourself right out into the lead, son...you must feel very proud as you speed away from the chasing pack. Jeezzz...what a complete ballonhead.

What did I write several weeks ago? Oh, yes: 2.15 -- buy at your peril! Not laughing now boys are you.

Well, well, well. So it would seem Fruitster is'nt some kind of oracle after all, Redceo is just a desperately ramping, deluded, crowing buffoon and wolvesposty is a drunken loon who delivers letters in la-la land. Cheer up though, boys...don't be too downhearted. Just see it for what it is..and what others on here have repeatedly told you: a long term share due to its "Five Year Plan" involving massive reinvestment, whilst wrestling at every turn with the powerful, fearfully suspicious and unconvinced CWU, and having to play catch up with many other highly efficient couriers all competing for the same markets. £5.50 in 2020? Oh, Red -- what a plonker!!!!!!

Goodnight! Hey-ho...its off to ****ing work I go.

Can only guess at Thursday's figures...but I should not think they will be much to shout about; if pushed to comment on any one thing I would say letter volumes might be worse than even RMG expected.

And to further add to the debate about the cost of hiring agency consider this: the daily cost of running and maintaining Angards head office, paying the staff to man it, paying the local business rates, and corporation tax on profits...unless they are some sort of registered charity -- which I very much doubt!

It might be right to say that Reed operate Angard, Isleworth...if you take a trawl through the internet you will find there is some evidence for suggesting this. However, point being, it does not really matter who operates them...whomever that agency is -- they still have to be paid! Like I stated last night (in so many words) it costs, on average, across an Angard workers various shifts, about £12.50 an hour (at least) to employ that person, so imagine how much you would have to pay the agency? Fruitster suggested several pounds over the hourly rate. Not a chance! I reckon you could double that...and even then add some. Whatever the amount...it is an awful lot of money.

Nearly bought more last week...glad I did'nt though. This could drop even more yet it would appear. Still, at sub 5p, tempted though. Will keep a close on things. Might be an opportunity here.

Errr...yes? But not such a good job with the day to day running of the business though it would appear. And pray, what do you suggest they do regarding the diminishing share price as each week, seemingly, it is increasingly nibbled away? Or are you just making a nonsensical comment because you have nothing better to do? An idle hour perhaps? I tell you straight...the only thing that has impressed me, regarding this company, is just how far down the s.p has slid over the last couple of years. Not some fairyland report they have just had published.

Strewth...its just like the Waltons. "Goodnight, -- John Boyyyyeeeee"!!!

Could well be worth taking a punt here? But not fully convinced myself as of yet. I agree with one of the earlier posters with their remark concerning sub 40 pence. If this s.p tests 42 pence then it will almost certainly see the 30s...tragic, but, as several posters over several years have repeatedly commented: you cannot put boffins in charge of a business that really does need highly skilled, driven individuals that possess years of experience between them when it comes to dealing with such keenly competitive markets the likes of which IQE are involved with here; certainly not a business like this one that need needs to be driven by market savvy, P.R specialists -- which IQE don't seem to have!!