Member Info for TheProviVan

Coincidences can only happen so many times, then they become a probability. The probability is, I will keep that to myself but something isn't right here with the pricing and movement of these shares.

Yes Andy, exactly. Please take a look at the trades listed today, the three trades that took place at 12.13.32. The first showing a spread, bid 94p, ask 99.60p ( 5.60p) within a second the spread changed to, bid 93.20p, ask 94p (.80p). How on earth can a spread change by so much within a second? Again at 12.14.32, the four trades. The ask price goes up 4p and back down again within a second. From 12.34 to 12.37, thirteen trades took place and nine of those were for 3 share buys each time. What the heck is going on with these shares?

There you have it in a nutshell. They carried out a UT at 8am this morning to set the share price. The share price was set at 98.20p. That's 4.20p higher than last nights close. This being the third time a UT has been carried out at 8am to set the share price and on each occasion the share price has gone up. Is it a coincidence a UT was done this morning after I pointed out an anomaly yesterday, no as it has happened three times now. IMO the market makers are sometimes setting the spread prices out of line with the actual share price.

There is something just not right with this companies share price. Nothing seems to add up and when that happens, it points to other things going on. Just have a look at todays trades. LSE web page states the highest price of the shares today was 94.20p and the first six trades of the day were higher than this figure. At 12.21 as per the trade index, the share price was 99.80p The next trade was at 15.08 when the shares dropped to 94.20. That's a 5.60p drop on one trade. How is it possible that the shares never reached 99.80p, when it clearly shows trades taking place at this price.

Totally agree with you. At the end of the day, it has all been down to bad management. Like driving a car in the dark with no lights. Hopefully they will turn the lights on now.

Firstly, the Vanquis board were disbanded as it was their responsibility to launch the new product on time which they never achieved and this impacted greatly on the groups figures, so the PFG board decided to take control. The PFG board should have had the new product in place before they closed PPC down. Big mistake. Secondly, PFG have been hemorrhaging customers over a few years now and it's no wonder why the shares have taken a hit.
I put this post on the ADVFN site on 11th Aug.2021.
My biggest concern with todays report is the amount of customers Vanquis Bank have lost, 157,000 down 9.3%, that's a huge amount and very worrying. They need to increase the customer base quickly and that is why they are going to introduce a mid cost credit product. PFG have always set their customer target at 2 million. They had better pull their finger out, otherwise they are going to have a big problem on their hands.
Posted 5th Oct 2022.
I did try to warn investors on 11th Aug 2021 when the share price was £3.40 and again on 1st June 2022. If PFG doesn't increase the customer base, there will be big problems. A small increase will not be good enough as dead wood customers will have already started to accumulate again, after clearing out all the dead wood the previous year.
Now the chickens have come home to roost.
Can anyone see where the growth is going to come from in the next 12 months?
Nobody could answer that question. That sums it up in a nutshell. If the customer base keeps declining, growth will be impacted.

I've been studying these share trades now for over two months and IMO the spread prices are the reason for the movement on these shares being contained within a defined range. Last night at the end of trading (4.30) the books were not balanced (UT), Why? This morning stats showed a spread of 7.70p and at 11.19 it went down to 0.90p , why such a huge difference? If you look at the first 8 trades today, 7 were buys and one single share sold and the share price went up less than 1p. After that the large spread price kicked in, hence the yoyo graph movement. At 10.01 the shares were £1 and then at 10.02 a single share sell made the price 94.30p. That 5.70p difference killed off the buyers. Nobody was going to buy at £1 knowing the price could drop within minutes by 5.70p a share. It wasn't until 12.32 that buyers came back when the spread went to 1.20p. I'm of the same opinion as other posts on here, that nothing seems to add up. Are these share being constrained for some unknown reason?

The answer to your closed question is no. Barrieprov posts are just fine and if you don't like them, surely that's your problem. You obviously didn't like my comment regarding facts. My posts will highlight factual information, otherwise I will use IMO. So lets stop the sarcasm and treat each other with respect. Thank you.

OIC, Thanks for pointing that out, interesting,. So they are not comparing new customer bookings 2022 to new customer bookings 2021. That means the 225k should increase to include any loans and if that figure doesn't increase, the comparison should have been against 212k and not 199k.

From the Q4 22 trading update (26/01/2023). The Group’s credit card business.
New customer acquisition volumes were approximately 225k for FY’22 (FY’21: 199k) and yet the Annual Report for 2021 states 212k. Strange that 13k has doubled to 26k, bit of a coincidence, but 26k increase looks better. PFG just love telling us how many new customers Vanquis have put on as it sounds good, but looking at the last three years they have lost customers every year. Customer count 1,541m (2021).1,667m (2020), 1,720m (2019), 1,773m (2018). in three years they have lost 232,000 customers and that's the bread and butter business. At the beginning of 2021 they closed 114.000 dormant accounts. Is 225,000 (2022) new customers enough to increase the customer base? Even if it is, they've had two more years for the dormant customers to build up again and that's why they never tell us how many active accounts there are.