Royal Mail shares

[Davros]

I wasn't actually directing that comment at you lb.

It was (as you identified) directed specifically at Barna. His quote from MacMillan reeks of hypocracy and I am desperate to know how selling our gold reserves was a better move than selling the Royal "family silver" Mail.

.

Because one sale was conducted by the reds and one sale by the blues, and this unfortunately appears to cloud Barna's opinions on a lot of matters.

Sometime i think it is more important to step back from who made the decision to sell, and just ask, was it a good decision. Ulitmately, both probably were not (for entirely different reasons), especially with the amazing world of hindsight, however, for the time being at least, the sale of the gold seems a far worse piece of business than the sale of Royal Mail. If that remains so, is down to where the share price is in a years time i suppose!

 

[superblue24]

Ones that don't lie. And before you go on about them all being liars, you need to go back to 1997 when Labour got in for the first time in ages. They handed out credit card sized leaflets with bullet points of all the things they said they would achieve by the end of their first term. They gave these out to all the press.

Funnily enough none of the tory press brought this up and the next election. Why? Because they achieved every single one of them. Moreover, just before the 1997 election the then Chancellor, Ken Clarke, issued a budget and Labour said that they would keep to all his promises. They did, and Ken Clarke even admitted after the election that he had no intention of keeping to it. It was just an attempt to win the election.

Kept their promises whilst plunging Britain into debt. You do realize that the treasury was loaded when Labour came into power, right? Sometimes the unpopular decisions are for the greater good.

I wonder if the Tories would be making these relatively unpoular decisions had Labour not used the tactic of trying to buy their way out of trouble.

I suspect we should all trust in a government that leaves a note stating "Sorry there is no money"....That offended me more than anything I've seen in politics.....It showed a real lack of concern and respect for our country.

 

[united we stand]

This makes no sense. How can you reflect future profits in a current price? Crystal ball?

Even if there was a way of doing this, how many people would buy shares knowning that they never stand to make much money on them? Especially considering the fees involved in buying and selling, not to mention the general hassle ...Oh and what's that other word...... Oh yeah, risk.

I note how none of the bleeding hearts have cared to comment on the fact that the actual rich (i.e. not the so-called "rich" who have £750 lying around in savings) were shut out of the process.

New issues happen on a VERY regular basis , its just Government New Issues/privatizations that are rare. It is not 'normal' within the industry to see profits like this on the first day . When it does happen is is accepted in the industry that the shares where undervalued. Politics aside It doesn't matter one bit if Joe Public invests or not, the institutions will invest , as will High Net Worth individuals. This is what they do every day , this is their job. If investing in Royal mail will return a better profit that where they are investing today they will switch .

Also re the basic maths, anyone of a certain age who has invested before in government new issues would have assumed that they would have got a fraction back of what they invested . Therefore for a lot of people , say with £10,000 to invest who intend to sell straight away does it really matter if you get a small amount of shares and make a large profit per share, or get the full entitlement but make less per share ?

PS the shares also appeal to professional investors/institutions as they are stamp free (0.5% ) and commission free (% depends on what fee your broker/bank charges)

 

[Neil_F]

What a load of ****. You came on here telling other people they didn't understand supply and demand.

I told Barna he didn't understand supply and demand at a price (I don't believe he does). My comment was not aimed at anyone else.

The point is that if the price was right supply would equal demand. I'm not talking about this situation in specifically, just the way you came over as rather arrogant, whether you meant to or not.

And I addressed the point in my original point by saying that floatations typically don't aim for the equilibrium price for fear of over-estimating and therefore under-subscribing. I don't understand what you are quite so exercised about.

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

It's precisely the government's difficulty with pricing that demonstrates why a business like RM should be in private hands rather than government hands.

 

[superblue24]

 

[South Bank Hank]

...like RM

Christ, he gets the blame for everything!

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

Christ, he gets the blame for everything!

Read it in context: that couldn't possibly be referring to Ron Martin as it was preceded by the word like.

 

[chapperzUK]

Christ, he gets the blame for everything!

He wouldn't have understated the value thats for sure :winking:

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

I wasn't actually directing that comment at you lb.

It was (as you identified) directed specifically at Barna. His quote from MacMillan reeks of hypocracy and I am desperate to know how selling our gold reserves was a better move than selling the Royal "family silver" Mail.

Personally,I don't see how quoting one ex- Conservative PM commenting on another Conservative PM's privatisations of nationalised industries back in the 80's reeks of hypocrisy.

As it happens, I've always had quite a lot of time for Supermac.He was a genuine one nation Tory and the only Housing Minister (along with Nye Bevan) to build more than 500,000 homes in a single year.

As for the gold reserves debate, it's really not relevant here.I suggest you check out the thread title again.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

I told Barna he didn't understand supply and demand at a price (I don't believe he does). My comment was not aimed at anyone else.

Perhaps you can explain how someone who passed A level Economics (abeit some time ago) doesn't understand the basic laws of supply and demand? :unsure:

 

[united we stand]

As for the gold reserves debate, it's really not relevant here.I suggest you check out the thread title again.

With your track record I don't believe you have the front to write that , but thanks for making my day

:hilarious::hilarious::hilarious::hilarious:

 

[superblue24]

Personally,I don't see how quoting one ex- Conservative PM commenting on another Conservative PM's privatisations of nationalised industries back in the 80's reeks of hypocrisy.

As it happens, I've always had quite a lot of time for Supermac.He was a genuine one nation Tory and the only Housing Minister (along with Ny Bevan) to build more than 500,000 homes in a single year.

As for the gold reserves debate, it's really not relevant here.I suggest you check out the thread title again.

Why is it not relevant? We're talking about governments selling off assets. You brought up the term "family silver", so naturally I refer you to the "family gold" we once possessed.....

It was hypocritical of you to stand by that comment(albeit from a Tory) given that your beloved Labour sold off the gold. I wasn't referring to the quote itself nor the person who made it.

I see you are pulling me up on a spelling mistake once again. I was in a rush when I wrote that post, what's your excuse for the mispelling of Nye Bevan?

 

[superblue24]

Perhaps you can explain how someone who passed A level Economics (abeit some time ago) doesn't understand the basic laws of supply and demand? :unsure:

Perhaps you can explain why you don't apply that (supposed) knowledge to any of your posts.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Why is it not relevant? We're talking about governments selling off assets. You brought up the term "family silver", so naturally I refer you to the "family gold" we once possessed.....

It was hypocritical of you to stand by that comment(albeit from a Tory) given that your beloved Labour sold off the gold. I wasn't referring to the quote itself nor the person who made it.

I see you are pulling me up on a spelling mistake once again. I was in a rush when I wrote that post, what's your excuse for the mispelling of Nye Bevan?

Touché.(Also in a rush).

 

[steveo]

Got this email today, I know Barna will be pleased:

[TABLE="width: 100%"]
[TR]
[TD]Amount applied for:
[/TD]
[TD]£1000.00
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Number of shares allocated to you:
[/TD]
[TD]227
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Value of shares allocated to you:
[/TD]
[TD]£749.10
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Refund amount:
[/TD]
[TD]£250.90
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

Not sure if I should take a quick profit or hang on and see how they go. What do you think Barna?

 

[superblue24]

I'm thinking about keeping mine (if I get them) and putting the yearly dividends into saving account for my daughter and then giving them to her when she's 18.

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

I'm thinking about keeping mine (if I get them) and putting the yearly dividends into saving account for my daughter and then giving them to her when she's 18.

If you're going to do that, you might want to think about giving them to her now to make use of her tax-free allowance.


nb This isn't investment advice and you should take advice before acting etc etc as this may or may not be appropriate depending on your circumstances. There may be costs involved (I'm not the one to ask about these).

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

"Scab bonus."

I see Vince Cable and The Investment Bank that gave him advice about share pricing are likely to be called up to explain themselves before the Business Select Committee.



"MPs said they would call the business secretary, Vince Cable, back to parliament to answer claims that he "massively shortchanged taxpayers" by pricing the shares in the Royal Mail too low. Lazard, the investment bank that collected millions of pounds from the government for its advice on how to price the shares, will also be called to give evidence before the business select committee."

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...3/oct/15/royal-mail-cross-picket-lines-strike

 

[superblue24]

As Steveo says, those who vote to strike, my vote (as shareholder) is to sack them.