Gsk Share Discussion Threads

[homeboy35] 18/7/2015 07:03

Maybe missed the boat - better off trading the supermarkets atm

[homeboy35] 18/7/2015 07:02

I'm always looking for a quick 5-10%

How long do the rampers think this will take to get back to 16 squid?

[montyhedge] 18/7/2015 06:42

They won't cut Dividend, GSK and Astra Zenecca the ones to have.Still both the biggest holdings in top fund manager Neil Woodfords Income Fund.

[tradermichael] 18/7/2015 06:37

Yesterday: Reinvested my now substantial dividend @ 1369.82 .... looking forward to another xd in August .... impressive how it compounds ..... ;0)

[cyberian] 17/7/2015 18:55

Does anyone know what the new UBS price target is for GSK? Maybe not too many posters here care too much as we all know the strategy is in place for improved results in 2016 and beyond.

[sicker] 17/7/2015 18:18

PUGDOG, 13TH August. :-)

[daveofdevon] 17/7/2015 17:03

Click on Financials above and find out for yourself

[pugdog] 17/7/2015 16:05

When does this go next Ex Divi

[jarrow3] 15/7/2015 13:06

Spread Betting and CFDs July Magazine edition now online at This month's premium features includes: The Naked Trader; Robbie Burns Reveals his Favourite Takeover Candidates - Jim Mellon explains why now could be the time to go Bargain-Hunting in Greece - Victor Hill offers a Historical Perspective on Sovereign Defaults - Low-Down on the Mid-Cap Market and much more.

[speedsgh] 15/7/2015 12:54

Glaxo is turning tide, says Barclays -

GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) could be about to break its recent habit of revising down earnings, and some nice surprises may be around the corner, according to Barclays.
Analyst Simon Mather reiterated his ‘overweight’ recommendation but reduced the target price from £18.20 to £16.50. The shares edged 6p higher to £13.93 yesterday.
‘Post the 6 May capital markets day, GSK has underperformed both peers (-8%) and the wider market (-6%) as a consequence of earnings downgraded, reduced shareholder returns and confusion over long-term guidance,’ he said.
‘We argue, however, that the trend of negative earnings revisions is set to reverse with multiple opportunities for earnings surprises above what we believe to be conservative five-year guidance. GSK is trading at a 12% discount to peers despite its superior earnings growth, while offering a 6% dividend yield, a de-risked investment case and the potential for a further £3.85/share net present value upside via more positive assumptions.’
Mather added that near-term dividend cut concerns were ‘overplayed’.

[blueledge2] 15/7/2015 08:15

Dividend reinvested. Price can go down now.

[badtime] 14/7/2015 11:53

Yes looked at AZN on recent low ..just fancied GSK on this occasion ..no doubting AZN is quality

[montyhedge] 14/7/2015 10:38

Well done.


Looks better.

[badtime] 14/7/2015 10:24

Bought at 13.35 and holding.

[montyhedge] 14/7/2015 10:18

Coming back into pharma, but for me the one is Astra Zeneca, approval of lung cancer drug, yield 4.5% and growing. GSK I feel going backwards.

[2hoggy] 14/7/2015 10:12

It became so widespread that even civil service workers were using companies to escape national insurance costs,if you are a limited company you do get benefits from the state and any employee's you have on retirement,you can dissolve the company and let the state pick up the redundancy payments.

If you are self employed and retire you have to pay all these costs out of your own pocket.There was the added benefit with a company that you can hold back profits from one year to later years.

[minerve] 13/7/2015 16:37

Small company owners have the advantage of using dividend policy in order to mitigate tax for their own benefit. Employees cannot do that under PAYE. Small shareholders cannot do that with their ownership of a small holding in a FTSE 100 company, for example. Why should, therefore, small company owners have this tax avoidance facility when others don't? Many footballers and celebrities effectively use these methods to mitigate tax. For goodness sake, many small company owners are already 'on the take' as far as I am concerned, offsetting this and that for supposed business use when it is anything but.

[racg] 13/7/2015 16:10

For taxation purposes they are identical and this so called 'manipulation' what on earth are you on about. I think you've drunknthe kool aid if you think controlling your own dividend policy is 'manipulaton'. We ve gone from attacking tax evasion and corporate avoidance by the google fraternity, to taking small company owners more than under labour. Marginal rate of tax for a company owner is now 58% - very motivating. Not!

[minerve] 13/7/2015 15:59

A close company is completely different to a listed company because one can be completely manipulated to the benefit of the owner/small number of shareholders as it is not subject to close scrutiny or those rules dictating corporate governance. There are one or two exceptions where families are still able to manipulate dividend payments on listed companies such as ANTO, but these are few and far between.

[racg] 13/7/2015 14:45

I m not going to get into some long winded tirade back and forth about who is right. My opinion is the dividend change is/was a flagrant tax grab producing double taxation merely dressed up as being more fair because they tied themselves in such knots preelection when they did not expect to win. If this measure only applied to personal service companies I would not object so strongly. I cannot agree that a listed company is any different to a normal trading close company. I withdraw the use of claptrap. It was said somewhat angrily but those are my views.

[anhar] 13/7/2015 14:33

I will gladly agree to disagree. However you described most of what I said as "claptrap" so you might care to explain for the benefit of readers here where you think I'm wrong, because I don't want people to be misled by my comments. So where am I wrong, factually? There was little or no opinion in what I said, it was just facts I think.

Even if you were not referring to personal service companies and I was, that doesn't make what I said "claptrap" as far as what I said is concerned.

[racg] 13/7/2015 14:16

Claptrap barring the last paragraph. However, let's just agree to disagree. I m not talking about personal service companies, I m talking about small trading companies that employ and take risk. I wouldn't of minded if it was zeroed on personal service.

[anhar] 13/7/2015 13:58

Pay where is the qualitive difference between owning a trading business personally and having shares in a listed trading business?...

Simple. With personal service companies, the salary/dividend is entirely within the owner's control and the combination of those two forms of extracting income from the company can therefore be manipulated to minimise tax because divis attract lower taxes.

Holding a tiny minority of shares in listed companies as investments for the divis gives you no control over the amounts paid and certainly no salary element either.

There are other obvious differences too because the personal company is the owner's business in which they are engaged in earning the company's income. With listed investments, the small outside shareholder has no direct interest or influence at all in actually earning the company's income.

So the quality of the salary/divi from a personal company is very different to that of the divi from a listed company. I don't see much "qualitative" similarity.

Actually though there is a quantitative similarity in that the divis from both are taxed similarly, which brings me back to my earlier point that the budget attack on personal company divis, results also in an attack on listed share divis. It wasn't unintended though, it's fairly clear from the speech that they intended to raise taxes on very large dividend incomes from both sources.

[2hoggy] 13/7/2015 13:56

If you are retired as I am, having your dividend income in an isa away from the tax mans eyes is always very welcome,as in time you will make capital gains and it saves a lot of paper work informing him what your income is every year.

Wish I had put more in when I was younger,just my view on it.