We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Customisable watchlists with full streaming quotes from leading exchanges, such as LSE, NASDAQ, NYSE, AMEX, Bovespa, BIT and more.
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Stock Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gable Hldgs | GAH | London | Ordinary Share |
| Price Change | Price Change % | Share Price | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.00% | 2.00 | 01:00:00 |
| Open Price | Low Price | High Price | Close Price | Previous Close |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.00 | 2.00 |
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 02/12/2016 17:02 by dr rosso Offshore insurer Gable Insurance ordered to stop writing new businessOct 03 2016 Liechtenstein insurer Gable Insurance, whose Cayman Islands parent is listed on the London Stock Exchange's AIM and which has provided apparently sham insurance for at least three investment schemes that swindled investors out of more than £200 million, has been ordered to stop writing new business by its local regulator. Slippery Mike has also managed to swipe a bundle off CTAG pis too,exiting on the hyped up peak |
Posted at 03/10/2016 12:19 by escapetohome Total con job.Better to kill it then let it ramble on year after year sucking and conning investors that its viable business, like some other aim shares i know, just being a trading share never an investment. Perhaps that the silver lining here. |
Posted at 17/8/2016 10:20 by dice1950 Max keep your eyes on CHALLENGER / CHAL Jakarta cash is9m mkt cap is 3m news is due and blue today and yesterday investors taking notice fell from 55p.IM a buyer |
Posted at 09/8/2016 13:29 by thesloth2 Have just read that wealthandfinance article. I must live in another universe as an investor. Hoping that I am going to be proved wrong. |
Posted at 18/7/2016 20:40 by luckymouse francoismyname - the directors shenanigans here cost me plenty so I have some skin in the game so to speak - understand your frustration if your still in - its only natural for investors to either bear a grudge or caveat emptor other investors - thats what BBs are for. And hot tips of course. There's no short game here.Only about 1 in 100 stocks are real stars (genuine 50% rev gains etc) - maybe 1 in 300 for aim where regs are light & extra due dil is required. The rest are frankly either highly correlated to sector/index sentiment of the moment, going nowhere, or a snake pit. Out of all that lot - bit odd that you would then choose to defend one where the Directors may have been less than ingenuous resulting in the co imploding? Most would consider that a straight avoid. No? |
Posted at 18/7/2016 18:47 by escapetohome Im neither bull nor bear.Just glad im not in. If you want to preach Perhaps the truly moral ethical viewpoint is not to go anywhere near companies such as this and suspect leaderships who seem to fleece investors. Yes investors completely screwed. Perhaps that is more sick than some of your deemed " sickos around" Perhaps the real sicko is mr -- - - - - - |
Posted at 18/7/2016 18:27 by francoismyname Dear me the negative doomsayers are out after the bell.It's like now they want this stock to fail so they can say they told you so and have no concern for current investors. Some sicko's around. These are the ones on the motorway trying with all their efforts to see who has been hurt in a car crash on the opposite carriageway. |
Posted at 30/5/2016 08:56 by escapetohome Thanks very much , another piece of excellent research to add to the growing body of research and Garbets , which potrays what seems to be really going on here.To put it all in laymans terms, and at the level of many investors, this can be summed up: A bit of a con job , smoke and mirrors par excellence. |
Posted at 30/5/2016 08:26 by effortless cool I came across Gable by accident the other day and have had a quick look this morning. Like Garbetklb, I know the industry well and like him, I view Gable as uninvestible.With regard to Gable's current situation, it would seem that the Board is highly culpable. They have been signing off internal estimates of claim provisions that are significantly below external best estimates. The company only seems to have stopped this practice due to regulatory intervention. Additionally, the latest announcement says: "The new capital requirements are determined through a risk based analysis of expected future gross written premiums. As Gable writes small niche lines of business its Solvency II capital calculation does not receive material benefits from diversification of risk and this together with the rapid growth profile of the business leads to a capital requirement which is a multiple of that under Solvency I. Gable's own capital base is also risk weighted under Solvency II with certain material balances such as deferred acquisition costs (amounting to some £13 million) being disallowed under the new rules. Having completed this assessment, the Board has concluded that raising sufficient additional capital for full Solvency II compliance is not possible for the existing business, its growth profile and structure as Solvency II appears to be incompatible with small niche European insurance business models". The basis of the Solvency II Standard Formula that Gable uses to calculate its capital requirements was established years ago, yet the new capital requirements seem to be a surprise to the company. This is inexcusable. However, it is interesting to look at the 2014 results: "... the Board is confident that sufficient capital will be in place in advance of the commencement of Solvency II to support its ambitious plans". What changed? Again, the text suggests that the Board has only faced up to this issue due to regulatory intervention. Also, the Chief Executive is ludicrously over-remunerated. This is a tinpot little business, yet he had a basic salary of £440k in 2014 and the RemCo managed to set performance conditions on his bonus that led to a full payout of £440k whilst shareholders incurred a £5.4m pre-tax loss. How does that work? Further, he owns a company that is picking up almost £2m each year through a delegated authority arrangement. One question shareholders may wish to ask is how much profit commission Gable has paid to HUAL over recent years, and how much less this would have been if Gable had booked external best estimate reserves? Finally, the business is incorporated in the Cayman Islands and regulated in Lichtenstein. This simple facts ought to have rung alarm bells for investors long ago. |
Posted at 26/5/2016 15:09 by garbetklb I don't currently own any insurance stocks.I'd be v wary of brokers - tend to overpay themselves. Insurance underwriting is a v difficult business - and I'd definitely try to dissuade my kids from it as a career. Growing is incredibly easy - if you're cheap & "flexible" with conditions, business will come pouring in. Brokers will praise how "innovative" you are. And what can the competitors do except be dragged down? Nobody wants to buy insurance & everyone thinks they are paying too much. Your product is your claims handling - which people (hopefully) get to see rarely and then their expectations are often too high. People (or their brokers) switch insurers for £1. The big companies have got poor control and some of the small companies have "issues". My last 2 holdings were : Hiscox - a really class outfit. Sold because of market conditions. Randall & Quilter - good at what they did (running off old companies). Sold because they diversified into more mainstream business, which I suspect won't be a winner. Admiral is very well run - Englehardt was very good & Stevens very sound indeed and a v decent guy. He & his wife have given away about £100m to charity. Esure & Hastings are probably worth a look. The big international reinsurers Munich, Swiss et al have huge financial muscle, but pretty erratic underwriting. The cat reinsurance vehicles will overpay themselves to reflect their brilliant underwriting (actually an entirely fortuitous lack of big cats), so investors get skimmed. To be brutally frank - why bother when there are plenty of alternative safe & steady alternatives? Or even wild & exciting ones - but easier to understand. Unlike most businesses, cash is pretty much a red herring. Of course an insurer will have oodles of cash. The key issue is RESERVING. Independent Insurance 15 years ago a perfect example. |
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
Hot Features
Premium
