We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Type | Share ISIN | Share Description |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Close Brothers Group Plc | LSE:CBG | London | Ordinary Share | GB0007668071 | ORD 25P |
Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
-0.80 | -0.37% | 214.20 | 214.00 | 215.00 | 219.80 | 208.60 | 210.00 | 391,515 | 10:47:04 |
Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Asset - Backed Securities | 1.03B | 100.4M | - | N/A | 323.55M |
Date | Subject | Author | Discuss |
---|---|---|---|
21/11/2024 10:14 | If they don't put a claim within next 38 hours, it will be statue bared, so no chance to overturn court of appeal, the court of appeal made it clear it was futile, in an unusual move, cases to supreme court, fail to get accepted 98% of the time in any case, the odds for this one even less. I will stick with Moody's assessment of up-to 30bn, which is structural problem for close even if it it half that, I'm not confident a right issue would be enough in that event, so the line that the outlook for business is "uncertain", from Close, from Jan that has remained, whilst estimates of liability continue to rise, whilst Close exasperate it adding doubt also to ongoing business out of scope of FCA. An "uncertain" future means exactly that, chance not to have one, or a very different one to now, the estimates rising all year and court case was the writing on the wall, a futile attempt to pled to supreme court will not work, the hours are ticking away on that in case no one got what "imminent" meant, another example of unnecessary ambiguity, they have had all year to frame outcomes, they have not done so, because in fact they cannot rule out a worst case, so we are left with an uncertain future to invest in, so, remains not investable. | chriss911911 | |
21/11/2024 09:17 | exited my trades below £2 - still have two trades left at close to £3 - | tomboyb | |
21/11/2024 08:25 | Now the talk is about FCA incompetence the final provision might not be as bad as I expected. Some hope maybe. Suet | suetballs | |
21/11/2024 08:17 | Positive as they are appealing court decision Otherwise nothing new and priced in | s34icknote | |
21/11/2024 08:00 | Nothing to worry about ffs 😆 | datait | |
21/11/2024 07:56 | Clear as mud update. spud | jonnybig | |
21/11/2024 07:53 | Gping to be a deep red morning here | scepticalinvestor | |
21/11/2024 07:25 | No provision of compensation money , still in dark place . | blackhorse23 | |
21/11/2024 07:05 | trading statement - | tomboyb | |
20/11/2024 11:30 | I agree about the provision - no chance of any numbers imo. Suet | suetballs | |
20/11/2024 08:34 | "Costs for motor finance compensation could reach 30 billion pounds, ratings agency Moody's said on Tuesday, as estimates on the possible financial liabilities continue to rise" Let me see now £50bn book in UK, then Close have just under £2bn per their last public financial statement, so that would imply £1.2bn liability, if Close is average exposure to DCA's. Overall it is good for the economy and consumers to pay only fair amount for work done, and get better accountability, from those in positions of trust managing money, not overpay for parasitic hidden costs that are concealed, not least the windfall money will probably get spent, so will help growth. It's good news for UK equity investors generally as will add nearly 1% added to GDP if payouts are going to be high and I think they will be, if a handful of banks foot the bill and one two suffer severe equity loss, it just means new investors get a stake for a fraction of what people paid this year, the government and FCA are not likely to worry too much about that. | chriss911911 | |
19/11/2024 22:44 | Seems even Martin Lewis is questioning the wisdom of the Court of Appeal apparently extending the scope from just DCA's to all commissions in his latest weekly newsletter "The latest ruling may risk being counterproductive for consumers... I've explained the practicals above, but wanted to add a final thought. The consumer wrongs of DCAs, with a lack of transparency about hidden cost increases and a restriction of consumer choice, are obvious. Yet mulling the Court of Appeal ruling, I find it more difficult to see the unfairness, or that redress is due, where car finance firms with fixed commission were following the regulator's guidelines. If it is decided redress must be due if motor finance firms didn't disclose commission, a fair test would be: was it hidden that there was commission and, most importantly, was the commission charged excessive? If not, it feels a push - even for me - that we move to a model of car finance reclaims where any commission if the amount wasn't known was unfair and should all be repaid. This is especially because it has to be balanced against the risk of being counterproductive to wider consumers, as at its extreme, it's a potentially existential threat to consumer lending, meaning both less availability & higher costs in future." | pj84 | |
19/11/2024 16:44 | CbG V vanq both have great risk. Both have over 400k of motor customers/ CBG with probably a lot more. CBG could be hit by the FCA review and commissions but at least it actually makes money worst case might not have enough money, value 300m could drop more. but people could make huge returns. Vanq is a loss making company even in the last quarter with the 60 million cost saving for this year. Value 100m could go down more but the 100m value will pull a lot gamblers in. If they can turn it around there could be good returns. Depending on the commission situation, there interest is sky high so I bet they pay very high commission to dealers/broker to get those customers on sky high interest. Both CBG/VANQ hold a few hundred million in intangible assets/worthless but CBG actually hold more real money and at least it has banked 400m. I have been in both currently in neither. I am watching both though. | karv1 | |
19/11/2024 15:08 | Blackhorse the only thing you can tip is your hat. Vanq is over 30% down over the last 6 weeks and now you have put the kiss of death on it. | robizm | |
19/11/2024 12:38 | CBG & VANQUIS (VANQ) and I had chosen VANQ over CBG , now looks like good investment, VANQ is blue over Red Sea | blackhorse23 | |
18/11/2024 15:16 | Nothing slow and grinding about it, moves up and down faster than a hookers nickers, was £8 back in Jan, having dropped 75% since Jan is rather fast and furious drop. Has more in common with an illiquid AIM share than a main listed share, let alone what will be a former FTSE 250 stock on 3rd Dec as relegation form FTSE250 is inevitably confirmed, cue, further sell off from tracker funds forced sales. | chriss911911 | |
18/11/2024 14:54 | Carnt see that Ricardo circa £400mill in the war chest already, novitas it's in the mirror also | scemer | |
18/11/2024 12:11 | Slow grinding descent to shareholder wipeout and bank ending up with bondholders. | ricardo montalban | |
18/11/2024 10:58 | If Close don't submit an appeal by Fri this week, it will be more than one leg down, as it all but crystalize a high past exposure, to say nothing about ongoing business post 2020, a partial restart of the business remains a chaotic position at best, so remains not investable, Thur's AGM will bring more volatility than clarity IMO. | chriss911911 | |
17/11/2024 10:25 | Could be a dead cat bounce. Chart looks awful, next leg down this week imo. spud | jonnybig |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions