Aviva Share Discussion Threads

[cjac39] 09/7/2020 19:40

Who knows

She has inside knowledge already so you would think needs less time

However public companies are renowned for following the same playbook: 100 days to come up with plan; 2 years of chopping or buying ; 2 years of hoping its worked or otherwise milking the package and getting binned

Public companies are so poorly run

[1robbob] 09/7/2020 19:29

Are we expecting anything significant from AB with the Interim results at the begining of August? Or it it more likely some time during Q4 together with the much awaited Dividend announcement?

[dbadvn] 09/7/2020 17:43

cjac39,

thanks, that is exactly what I needed to know.

It looked over priced but they are touting there growth profile and higher internal returns. I was not convinced that this was worthy paying so much more for.

I will follow your informed advice and go instead for Polar Capital.

Thanks again,

[cjac39] 09/7/2020 17:19

DBadvn - I’ve only ever taken a cursory look. I’m not big fan of buying old tail liabilities as I’ve seen a few blow up. Looks but pricey as well when you’ve got many other insurers trading at 30-50% discount to tangible book value. I’d suggest if you want decent non life exposure with exceptional capital Compounders you could do worse than paying the fees and buying into polar capital insurance. They’re knowledgeable people and allocate to some great companies

[spcecks] 09/7/2020 16:56

Thanks spud for the article interesting reading.

[dbadvn] 09/7/2020 13:44

Any of the insurance experts here got
a view on Randall and Quilter ?

I know this is the Aviva board but cant find same in depth opinion anywhere else.

thanks

[p0pper] 09/7/2020 13:35

Many thanks to Warthog4 on the LSE board

REMOTE VIDEO CONFERENCE HEARING
Before MR JUSTICE HENSHAW
Thursday 9 July, 2020
At half past 10
FOR HEARING
PART HEARD
CO/2608/2019 The Queen on the application of Aviva Insurance Limited v Secretary Of State For Work And Pensions.


Anybody out there know what this is about??

[eurofox] 09/7/2020 11:41

thanks spud

[cjac39] 09/7/2020 08:04

i dont think its that complicated why someone hasnt tilted at av historically: at £4-5 there just wasnt enough upside. at £3 that dynamic changes but maybe not enough.

the asset mgmt biz is ok but doesnt move the needle. what really does is demerging the gi biz which has become increasingly separated operationally.

the problem with this, whilst compelling from value realisation, is i understand that the solvency cap benefit from diversifying life risk with gi is something approaching the value of the gi business itself.

however having tangible value rather than intangible value is still a trade i would take all day.

therefore maybe the choice of blanc is to accelerate the gi demerger and she heads off into that business and someone new runs the residual life and assets business. retaining the higher growth life markets gives it a chance of ok roe

personally i would prefer they sell all overseas businesses and focus on being a uk composite but thats probably harder and doesnt end up with great roe unless they lever the uk business more.

[woland1] 09/7/2020 07:26

https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/international/2020/07/08/574751.htm

[leedslad001] 08/7/2020 17:59

That would be nice if someone came in for us while share price is ridiculous low

[spud] 08/7/2020 14:28

Absolutely zero reason to rebase the dividend. It's affordable and committed to by the Company with their progressive dividend policy. This can easily be 400 - 500p when it is reinstated and yield circa 7%. spud

[dalep716] 08/7/2020 14:06

It's an observation that small shareholders who in part own the company can have their income cut at a stroke without any recourse. For those encouraged to buy a SIPP this is a bloody harsh reality. Moreover computer trading and shorting so as to rip off small shareholders, with many pensioners on small incomes amoungst them, should be illegal.

[mountpleasant] 08/7/2020 13:53

Why would company be reading comments on this bulletin board? I doubt they know about it, or care what's being said.

The next commentary re, dividend is to he 4th quarter - that to me, meaning December.

Also, if they declare any dividend, its a progressive change, up from zero last time.

[steved] 08/7/2020 13:28

Still fuming over the cowardly pulling of the dividend which should be reinstated without delay and confirmation that the "progressive" policy will be respected as promised. A strategy to get the business in better shape will generate the cash for ongoing distributions.

Walkenchan IMO you're looking at the dividend from Aviva's perspective not ours. Get the company motoring at pace and double the share price then a 10% dividend becomes 5%.

Prudent and brave decision making will win the day for employees, customers and shareholders alike.

[1robbob] 08/7/2020 13:23

In order to justify retaining profits to re-invest in the business. The Directors need to earn the trust of their shareholders that this re-investment will lead to future growth in the business. The decline in the Aviva share price over the last several years - relative to both the stockmarket in general and it's peer group - suggests that no such trust exists, it remains to be earned. In the meantime the dividend policy should be maintained and should the Director wish to invest more than the retained profits they should justify such funds via a Rights Issue and NOT BY CUTTING THE DIVIDEND

[salver2] 08/7/2020 12:42

Why not sustainable pray tell me - a 30 p div would cost them about 1.2 billion - after tax profits this year are carded at about 1.6 billion and for next nearly 2 billion - you forget that the share price has just been driven so low!

[waikenchan] 08/7/2020 12:29

Rebase dividend. 10% dividend is just not sustainable in the face likely declining future earnings. Furthermore I would disagree paying such a high dividend, Personally think its better to reinvest a bigger proportion of the dividend in the business and get compounded rather to pay it a big proportion of it to shareholder.

I understand people rely on income from dividends to supplement incomes so it depends on different circumstances of everyone.

[1robbob] 08/7/2020 12:08

I am sure that the Company must monitor this BB. The very least we can do is for each of us individually to post our demand that the existing 'Progressive' dividend policy be continued and from the originally decalared 2019 dividend level of 30.4p per share

[adelwire2] 08/7/2020 12:03

Progressive dividend please.

[cyberian] 08/7/2020 11:22

Dividend re-base just rumour/press comment/speculation. I agree with others here that the company needs to retain a "progressive dividend policy"...it would be a wrong signal to give at a critical time when Institutional support is very important.