St. James's Place Share Discussion Threads

[dexdringle] 02/5/2024 17:25

I'm not sure. I have a feeling that Partners pay a separate annual fee to SJP to cover the cost of that. I'm sure JGoldby will be able to confirm when he next visits this BB.

[the millipede] 02/5/2024 17:14

So how is FCA authorisation and regulation paid for? I might be wrong but I can’t imagine each partnership handles their own compliance.

[dexdringle] 02/5/2024 11:12

SJP don't take a percentage of the Adviser Fee for compliance. The adviser gets the whole 0.50% (or 0.25% if he has discounted it). SJP get the 'Product' Fee plus, presumably, a small slice of the Fund Management Fees.

Clients who have not been serviced will either be those of ex advisers where the client is an 'orphan' and SJP should have switched off the fee OR those of 'live' Partners from whom SJP will claw back any refunds (assuming it is clear that the client wasn't serviced and SJP haven't simply refunded for an easy life where a dispute remains between the client and the Partner as to whether servicing actually took place - which is likely to be a record keeping issue).

[the millipede] 02/5/2024 09:46

The main theme of the complaints is the ongoing adviser fee charged in the absence of any ongoing advice.

SJP is likely liable for some of this as they take a percentage for compliance.

But I still think, based on cash paid out so far, complaint levels will turn out very low.

[dexdringle] 01/5/2024 13:14

scemer. Interesting. The PARTNER paid the 2 x £250. Or maybe SJP paid it and debited the Partner ? Either way SJP didn't pay it !

[scemer] 01/5/2024 08:19

Jak sounds like you read too many conspiracy theories I deal with a partner he's paid 2 £250 claims he's been doing the job 20 plus years you're way off the mark on every level

[jakleeds] 30/4/2024 22:17

The £450mill is going to be less than half of what is required. And these complaints will go on for decades.

SJP are having to take on loads of staff to cope with the level of complaints they’re receiving. They have to train them and give them equipment and support. Not cheap. Very expensive, in fact.

The one thing the market hates, is uncertainty. There is so much uncertainty here.

You’ve got self employed players running practices, employing more self-employed players, who then want to be at the top of the pyramid, so they’re employing their own players , including family members, to keep themselves afloat.

Oh my gosh.

There will be more serious repercussions here. Things will get worse and worse.

It seems that many of the players have borrowed money at several percentage points above the base rate. That might have been manageable when the base rate was 0.5% . Not any more though.

Nobody is gonna take over a company with so many self-employed players, and so much company-specific bad news all over the place.

If you haven’t seen it, watch the Wolf of Wall Street. Wow.

[dexdringle] 30/4/2024 21:22

The number of clients who have a genuine case for having been charged something for nothing will be small. They will be refunded and their ongoing charges reduced by 0.5% per annum as a non advised client. They might then transfer away. Or they might not. Who knows.

The £450m provision for redress will prove to be much more than is required.

[fenners66] 30/4/2024 19:49

There are 3 components surely.

New money inflows - those customers that are building their "wealth"
Increased market returns , the markets are up this year , even the FTSE near all time highs !
Outflows , from those that either have hit their targets and now want to spend some, if the returns are landing in their wealth account , why not ? And those that think their funds are better placed elsewhere.

The markets being up is going to encourage some to take a slice off the table , but is less money coming in and going elsewhere ?
Are there clients now aware they have been charged something for nothing and feeling wronged are going to move it ?
If they do not provide sufficient redress to those that complain - or if they get 40% ripped off by some sharks I can see them getting upset and moving...

[dexdringle] 30/4/2024 19:39

He's lying then ?

"Meanwhile, outflows remain at an elevated level, continuing a trend we have seen across our industry, as clients continue to draw upon their savings to meet continued financial needs"

[jakleeds] 30/4/2024 17:45

“ The whole wealth management industry is suffering lower inflows and higher withdrawals “

Really ?

Hargreaves Lansdown, the UK’s largest DIY investment site, reported £1.6bn of net inflows over the first three months of the year on Tuesday — in line with last year. And SJP rival Quilter last week reported £810mn of net inflows over the quarter — about double the previous year’s.

[dexdringle] 30/4/2024 15:35

The whole wealth management industry is suffering lower inflows and higher withdrawals. But the last 3 months has still seen net positive inflows and FUM up £10bn.

If SJP make, say, 0.75% of FUM with their Product Fees that's an extra £75 million per annum revenue just from the Q1 FUM change. As many overheads are fixed, a doubling of FUM equals a trebling of profit.

Jeez, there's no pleasing some people 😂

How the share price isn't over £6 is beyond me.

[jakleeds] 30/4/2024 13:53

So net inflows down around 65% and outflows are ‘at an elevated level’.

How the share price is still above 4 quid is beyond me….

[dexdringle] 30/4/2024 09:29

Net new money was £0.7bn but FUM increased by £10bn. Meaning over £9bn of growth. Which is around 5.2% overall investment growth for clients (net of charges) in just three months.

[dexdringle] 30/4/2024 09:00

"The net asset value on the European Embedded Value basis at 31 March 2024 was approximately £15.06 per share (cum div) and approximately £14.98 per share after the payment of the proposed final dividend on 24 May 2024"

If this isn't a takeover target at current prices then I'm a monkeys uncle.

[molatovkid] 30/4/2024 07:10

Business as usual then !

In my experience as a financial adviser for 25 years, what gets people in through the doors wanting their money out of investments en masse, are the global financial meltdowns that dominate the press and TV. Something like SJP's problems most won't even know about nor understand and in many cases nor care.

[dexdringle] 27/4/2024 09:23

《《298;"Analysts are not certain it will be able to, not yet anyway, with a prediction by one broker recently that a £426 million provision is likely to be around HALF THE AMOUNT FINALLY REQUIRED"》
2299;》

....and I wonder what all of the other 'brokers' are saying 🤔

[jakleeds] 27/4/2024 08:25

St James Place complaints to dominate trading update
Published: 12:04 26 Apr 2024 BST
Written by: Philip Whiterow

St James's Place PLC
LSE:STJ

St James Place will be hoping it can soon draw a line under the surge in customer complaints about the wealth manager's charges.

Analysts are not certain it will be able to, not yet anyway, with a prediction by one broker recently that a £426 million provision is likely to be around HALF THE AMOUNT FINALLY REQUIRED.

St James’ share price is down by around two-thirds over the past year, underlining the market’s nervousness and the costs issue will dominate next week’s update.

Longer-term, Canadian bank RBC remains optimistic about St James's Place's future, citing the resilience and attractiveness of its partnership model.

The firm's strategic initiatives under new chief executive Mark Fitzpatrick were commended for positioning the business for sustainable leadership in the increasingly regulated UK wealth market.

How well those initiatives are doing will be something else to note.

[the millipede] 24/4/2024 11:17

Counterpoint: I don’t care if the CEO owns shares.

In a business of this size he is an employee not an entrepreneur.

I would like him to do a good job leading the business.

A shareholding makes no difference to this and might, depending, even be a distraction.

[dexdringle] 24/4/2024 09:24

Ex-Div tomorrow.

Just 8p a share though so not exactly Christmas.

[dexdringle] 24/4/2024 09:17

It should be a job requirement for a new CEO to buy £1 million of shares on day one. And if they don't have £1 million to spare they aren't really FTSE 100 CEO material as they clearly haven't been successful in the past.

When the new guy took over the shares were around £6.50. So he'd now be under water by around £300k and would at least have some idea of how the owners of the business were feeling.

[jakleeds] 24/4/2024 08:33

Should be a trading statement here in the next few days, showing Q1 inflows(outflows??) and FUM. Was on 27/04/23.

I expect to see the price drop to £3-£3.50 on the day.

The new CEO still hasn’t bought any shares.

[dexdringle] 19/4/2024 09:37

Why on earth would they want to raise cash at all let alone at these levels ? They have the ongoing profits that are no longer being paid out as dividends to fund the fee structure changes and any compo.

If anything, they should be borrowing to do buy backs at this price not selling new shares !

[porsche1945] 19/4/2024 08:25

Get ready for dilution, capital raise coming, target price 2.80. Its exit from ftse 100 won’t help.