Hargreaves Lansdown Share Discussion Threads

[j0sekl] 09/7/2019 21:54

Dampier should have been publicly sacked imo.

HL has one chance to reclaw some of its reputation (some of the damage is permanent).. and that is to fight like no tomorrow for some sort of recourse from Woodford, like:
A) waivering management fees for the entirety of the lock up.
B) Woodford issuing a discount subscription/option in his fund to holders who were impacted. And that can be redeemed or converted in X years. This gives Woodford a chance to prove his worth and the clients that trusted him.

[ochs] 09/7/2019 15:31

Agreed trytotakeiteasy - additionally even if you could transfer out what would be the point? A different provider still wouldn't be able to sell and HL are at least not taking any fees against Woodford holdings (whereas a new provider probably would).

[trytotakeiteasy] 09/7/2019 15:13

On that FT article. That was always known and obvious to anyone that looked. Certain share classes are specific to HL as they negotiate discounts. So they can't be transferred. Otherwise people would come to HL, buy the discounted share class and then move it to a cheaper platform.

so this story seems like creating something out of thin air.

[jonwig] 09/7/2019 14:52

Possibly Woodford related.
FT just now:

Hargreaves Lansdown customers locked in Neil Woodford’s stricken Equity Income fund have been blocked from transferring their holdings to other investment platform providers, according to evidence submitted to the UK government inquiry into the scandal.

More than 130,000 individuals invested a total of £1bn in the Equity Income fund via Hargreaves Lansdown, which has faced a backlash for promoting the fund on its much-followed best buy list until the fund was forced to suspend trading last month.


Put simply, the HL clients who hold WEIF hold a distinct share class held by no-one else. Therefore they can't transfer their holding out!

Reputational damage persists. A soured relationship, to put it mildly.

[mac15] 09/7/2019 14:47

Any reason for sudden drop? Woodford related?

[the don of dons] 08/7/2019 12:50

Fundsmith was well to distance himself from that list.

[ochs] 08/7/2019 08:54

They never 'dumped' Fundsmith as it was never in their Wealth 150 (now 50) in the first place. Their argument was that Smith didn't have a long enough track record of success (depends how long you want I guess!)

[18bells] 08/7/2019 08:07

Why did HL reduce their star funds down to 50 and keep Woodford in with close communication of what was going on?! HL pushed the woodford fund that in return gave customers confidence in investing in a fund that was going to crash. Whilst the HL platform is brilliant the company needs to be investigated-why did they dump other funds like fundsmith but continue to push Woodford? I dont like how HL made their money so much im buying out of funds that have a HL holding.

[j0sekl] 07/7/2019 09:35

HL will just recommend LT stocks, They are perfect for retail and pension clients. Less risk, steady-eddy names, recurring cashflow.

The important point is what LT does with HL shares. not what HL watchlist does with LT. The reason if they publish it will not be about LT skills.

[mac15] 06/7/2019 14:57

Woodford was a legend in his own mind who turned out to be overrated and not so special. HL have got their fingers burned by association and sustained some reputational damage. Current share price reflects the damage and is starting to recover. As always better to invest in HL than in any over hyped fund.

[growthpotential] 06/7/2019 12:44

Seems very extreme response. Somebody does not like HL. Some funds only publish top 10, better sell all your funds to make sure you don't own any HL indirectly

[ochs] 06/7/2019 10:25

18bells, that doesn't necessarily make HL a bad investment, they are still making huge profits.

[18bells] 05/7/2019 20:08

Sold/selling all my funds that have a HL holding. They spun Woodford and now many are trapped.

[ccnp] 05/7/2019 16:32

Just noticed a crowdfunding piece re SJP. Anyone aware of any crowd funding activities for those who have been so very clearly and obviosuly misadvised by HL re Woodford?

[ochs] 05/7/2019 11:36

Thanks. That seems strange as any potential new client going on the HL website and selecting funds would see the LT funds as currently part of W50 and may invest accordingly.

[lomax99] 05/7/2019 11:16

It's in an email update to HL clients, the change is intended to take effect at the end of the month.

[ochs] 05/7/2019 10:18

I can't see this on the HL website, where is the source?

It doesn't surprise me as with LT now owning 12% of HL they are probably worried it would be seen as some sort of conflict of interest, so after Woodford are playing safe.

[norland1] 05/7/2019 09:32

Strange decision by HL to take off Lindsell Train Funds from their Dodgy 50 list. because the funds hold too many H L shares. Whilst I agree that the figure is on the high side have HL lost confidence in their own share price because of the Woodford implications

[lomax99] 04/7/2019 22:57

The DMO must be asleep at the wheel, they have not yet ‘spun’ the decision by HL to remove LT funds from their Wealth 50 list!

[ochs] 04/7/2019 20:26

Agreed, I think about 1,825p was the low. Be interesting to see how far it can go from here.

[lomax99] 04/7/2019 20:02

The fall was overdone....

[ochs] 04/7/2019 19:44

Where have all the shorters gone? ;)

I'm a little surprised to see the shares recovering so well, after all the Woodford fund is closed for at least another month, so that's more loss of revenue/reputation for HL.

[lomax99] 04/7/2019 19:24

Lindsell Train adding again.