Member Info for tophat

TFE

The OBR rules include one that says their forecasts must be based on stated government policy at the time of the forecast. While other forecasters can anticipate changes in government policy, the OBR can not, even when the changes are widely known. I suspect that changes in policy account for much of the discrepancy.

The Liz Truss "mini budget" was anything but mini and was described as "mini" specifically to avoid the OBR from publishing an analysis of its impact on government finances. The OBR have a legal duty to publish their assesment of the impact of budgets so this was a way around that. The "mini budget" and its aftermath didn't make the previous OBR forecast look good.

Incidentally, Truss was so determined not to release an analysis of the mini budget that she sacked Tom Scholar, the Treasury Permanent Secretary, for "old fashioned thinking". We now know that "old fashioned thinking" was insisting that the markets would be expecting an analysis and that they would fear the worst if one wasn't published.

Panderman

"Inflates the earnings per share, which leads to heavy bonuses to the directors who are awarded the new shares. "

No. The EPS makes no difference to the bonuses paid by Lloyds.

I didn't take part in the 2023 competition but have made a donation in any case.

Casapinos

IF the Sky News report is correct then Lloyds are seeking to sell just the bulk annuity business of Scottish Widows, not the entire company. Lloyds will be retaining the vast majority of SW.

SW started the bulk annuity business in 2015 so it was not part of Lloyds original purchase and is a small part of SW.

Getting rid of it makes sense because it is business where scale really does matter for a number of reasons. For example the cost of managing a $100bn asset portfolio is nothing like 20 times the cost of managing a £5bn portfolio. A larger portfolio also allows for a proportion of the fund to be invested into riskier, but higher returning, assets which would be totally inappropriate for a small fund. Added to the fact that it is easier to optimize the regulatory capital held by for large fund than fora small one then the business is more valuable to a big player than it is to Lloyds. Hopefully this will allow them to get a good deal.

The important issue as far as shareholders are concerned is the impact of the sale on the capital position of SW. A sale would free up the capital held by SW against the business either for use against more profitable business or to pay it as a dividend to the Lloyds parent company. That is a decision to be made by the SW board.

Affmaead

I have no problem with people making money trading short term.

It is the people who trade short term, at well below book value, and who complain at the lack of progress with the SP without realizing that they are contributing to that lack of progress.

Affmaed

^But when you make a good few grand profit and watch it disappear, the divi does not seem to cover it ."

affmaead

What do you mean?

If you didn't sell then you lost nthing.

Affmaed

Also the main Issue for me is the people who complain about the lack of progress of the SP but are part of the problem themselves.

Over the years and on many boards I’ve seen so many posters complaining about the lack of progress of the SP while saying they will sell at X while X is well below book value.

I wonder how many of them would sell their house or car at a significant discount to book value!

Affmaed

Different people have different objectives with their investing strategies. However I make a distinction between short term “gamble’s” which can be more profitable but riskier and investment which produces a more reliable outcome in the long term.

LeeRex

I totally agree.

So many posters are obsessed with the SP, presumably because they are looking to sell at a profit.

Companies should be run for long term investors rather than short term traders. Unfortunately it is the short term traders who determine the S P.

Driftking27

I suspect that the SP would be higher if BP hadn’t had to pay out (from memory) about $70bn in penalties and compensation for the Deepwater Horizon disaster!

Tomjones2

In my case DWP did not inform HMRC of the state pension so no deduction was being made from my company pension.

After four months I informed HMRC to avoid a large tax bill and other people should check in case they are in a similar position.

People in receipt of the state pension need to understand that it is usually paid gross, i.e. without the deduction of any tax due. As far as I can tell DWP and HMRC don’t talk to each other, or at least it seems to take forever!

To avoid running up a large tax bill with potential penalties on top, the state pension should be declared to HMRC by the deadline for returns in the appropriate year.

Gary59

It will make virtually no difference to ordinary shareholders but it does give instututional investors more confidence in aplying for the new security.

There should be another RNS after the expiry f the stabalization period announcing any market intervention by the SM's.

I've seen many of these but so far have never come across any case where the SM's have actually intervened. It seems that the mere threat of intervention puts off many of the potential shorters.

Rothers

Aviva are issuing new Tier 2 securities and JP Morgan, HSBC and Morgan Stanley will be acting as stabilization managers to prevent shorters or others from forcing down the price of the new issue.

The mechanism works like this. The prospectus for the issue will have a clause allowing them to issue up to say 105% of the amount to be issued. For a period, in this case 60 days after the issue, the SM’s threaten to short the excess 5% at the issue price! If anyone tries to force down the price then the SM’s will buy the 5% excess on the open market at a price lower than the IP thus supporting the price and allowing them to close the short at a profit.

On the other hand if the price rises above to IP which threatens the managers with a loss on the short, the issuer will issue the additional 5% to the SM’s at the IP allowing them to close the short without loss. The SM’s normally charge a fee for this.

Asperger1

“With full year results just 3 months away, I present the case for a 2015 style Special divi”

I suspect that there will be a special div this year for the following reasons.

1) LBG have committed to paying down the CET1 surplus to 13.5% by the end of 2024.

2) The pension deficit is known and comparatively small.

3) They have already taken some provisions against the forthcoming changes to RWA weightings which are yet to be finalized.

4) Although it makes sense to make buybacks while the SP is lower than book value I think that there will be enough surplus capital for both buybacks and a special dividend which would please those retail investors looking for a cash payout.

Seany123

If you don’t want to register for the webinar, a recording is usually made available on the Lloyds website shortly afterwards.

Incidentally William Chalmers is hosting a fireside chat at the UBS European Conference at 9am tomorrow, 14th November 2023. The link on the Lloyds website is given below.

https://www.lloydsbankinggroup.com/investors/financial-downloads/event-presentations-webcasts.html

The introduction of an equivalent of SDRT for CFD’s and spread bets may encourage more people to invest in shares rather than gamble on SP movements.

Sorry I should have said at least 19c plus half of the Q4 EPS.

Secretdev950

You are probably right that there may be a very good final div.

At full year 2022 HSBC said they were targeting a 50% payout ratio for 2023 and 2024 and reiterated this at the Q3 results so it’s very likely that they will do so for at least 2023.

Although they have announced divs of 30c so far this year they have already accrued 49c per share for the ordinary div. So unless something drastic happens then the final div should be 19c plus half of the Q4 EPS.

William Chalmers made a couple of interesting comments regarding the capital position during the webcast this morning.

He reiterated the intention to pay down the CET1 capital ratio to 13.5% by the end of 2024 (currently it is 14.6%) but added that he expected that it would be a smooth transition rather than a lumpy one.

On the uses of excess capital he raised the possibility that in the future they may make on market buy backs for employee compensation rather than issuing new shares.