Hargreaves Lansdown Share Discussion Threads

[liquidkid] 17/9/2019 11:20

The exit fee racket

Financial (mis)Conduct Authority (FCA) had expressed a strong dislike for the charge.
In effect, the question is, why should the charges on my pension pay for your (bonuses)?

the fact the client does not pay any charge upfront as much as having to pay a fee to take their money out later.

The regulator placed a caveat, saying it is not ‘at this stage’ going to ban product-related exit fees, which are levied by vertically integrated firms.

But FCA director of (in)competence Sheldon Mills ‘We will need to distinguish between the different types of fees that are in the product and the service to see whether or not some types of activity charges could be characterised as exit fees.’

Either way it regularly leads to poor outcomes for their clients.
If the FCA had any balls/teeth/mettle/power they'd put an end to such high charging but clearly Hargreeds Lansboilerroom keep them sweet somehow

[lomax99] 06/9/2019 15:21

Disagree on insecure, as long as the depositor limits their exposure to any one entity to £85k, then any deposits will be covered by the FSCS.

The cash savings market in the UK was estimated at £1.4tn in 2018, where else can savers access multiple lenders/terms via one simple to use system (one set up, one AML check), and easy to switch between providers.

Don’t disagree in terms of holding any meaningful deposits in cash over an extended period, can think of much better uses.....

[liquidkid] 06/9/2019 15:04

Charles Randall.
Inappropriate investment a major topic for regulators and politicians this year, after a series of high profile failures.
The biggest scam yet to be prosecuted is both Hargreaves Landsdown & Woodford.
The key fraudulent behaviour which should be SFO investigated is the risk weighting applied to the Woodfords Hargreaves Landsdown exclusive z-class issue. Retail pension investors were inappropriately targeted.
HL should be required to provision for a wave of claims from gated investors.

[hpcg] 06/9/2019 14:52

Hmm, as an HL customer I am avoiding active savings like the plague. Chasing cash into insecure rabbit holes for a few basis points of interest is utterly insane IMO.

[lomax99] 05/9/2019 17:44

Absolutely fine if you want to ignore an 11+ fold return on their capital - annualised compound growth of c 22-23% since float!Thanks for highlighting 'Active Savings' though, a genuinely innovative product which enhances HL's offer going forward.

[liquidkid] 05/9/2019 16:24

Total yield of 2.06% would be safer & better return in a bank:

HL Active Savings & Sharia investing

BLME Bank of London and The Middle East plc
2.45% 3 years 11/09/2019
MARKET LEADING SHARIA RATE

BLME 2.35% 2 years 11/09/2019
MARKET LEADING SHARIA RATE

BLME 2.10% 1 year 11/09/2019

& Metro Bank PLC for comparison
1.96% | 2.00% 3 years 11/09/2019

Metro Bank PLC
1.94% | 1.95% 18 months 11/09/2019

Aldermore Bank
1.90% | 1.90% 3 years 12/09/2019

[lomax99] 05/9/2019 13:21

Hope the shorters are looking forward to Sep 26th, when they will be on the hook for the final and special dividends (total 31.7p per share).

[mac15] 04/9/2019 11:14

Positive comment

[lomax99] 28/8/2019 13:41

As stated above, a comparison to Beaufort or SVS is, frankly, ridiculous. HL. segregate client funds and have a strong balance sheet.

From the same article you quote:

Jeremy Fawcett, head of research at Platforum, which analyses the performance of fund platform providers, said: “The Woodford affair is undoubtedly a setback for a core strategy and at a time when competition is getting stiffer. However, shorting Hargreaves has been a painful experience in the past and betting against the long-term increase in demand for online investing is bold.”

So obviously short, knock yourself out....

[liquidkid] 28/8/2019 12:22

That "plenty of cash?"
Ain't yours.
That "load of rubbish"
hodl in your best buy portfolio
Is. Yours.

Short bets against Hargreaves Lansdown, by Lansdowne Partners, have reached all-time highs as the UK’s largest fund supermarket continues to be dogged by the
turmoil surrounding the sudden closure of Neil Woodfeld’s struggling equity fund. Hargreaves, which funnelled more than £1.6bn of investors’ money into Bloford’s now-frozen flagship fund, is under attack from short-sellers following intense criticism of the FTSE 100 company’s decision to continue to promote the highly celebrated asset manager’s £3.7bn fund right up until withdrawals were blocked...
Courtesy of 2019 FINANCIAL NEWS Chris Newlands and David Ricketts
The News Building 1 London Bridge Street, London

[ochs] 28/8/2019 11:48

What a load of rubbish, you can't compare HL to the likes of Beaufort or SVS - have you ever looked at their balance sheet? Plenty of cash and no debt... one of the very safest places for private investors to hold their money and investments.

[liquidkid] 28/8/2019 11:05

Meanwhile back at the ranch,
Like Beaufort, SVS Securities, another Broker goes under with ALL client assets frozen. Here shows the level of sophistication of the typical private investor. The FUCS Financial Services Compensation Scheme is primarily for cold hard cash in banks and building societies. When it comes to brokers, As it could be with HL it is quite nuanced. The bigger they are the harder they fall. Retail are last in the queue. The £85k limit is held with high counterparty risk. Even with clients assets ring fenced, presumed safe & secure, final settlement & restitution will be a long time coming. Beaufort took three quarters. The inexpiable omnishambles of the Woodfeld Hargrieveds Lambsdown racket is yet to have its denouement,

[mac15] 27/8/2019 10:46

Sp up today in a down market, despite from bad to worse news from Neil woodford. Any reason for the rise?

[lomax99] 14/8/2019 13:24

What a load of clap trap LK, short per chance?

[liquidkid] 14/8/2019 13:15

The cash is not large enough. Compared to the customers
Hargrieveds lambsdown have fleeced.
"ALL the investments are held through platform that promoted both Woodford funds as ‘best buys’ right up until Equity Income’s suspension"

[ochs] 14/8/2019 12:23

I guess they're not expecting any legal action, and besides they have a large amount of cash in the bank and no debt.

[liquidkid] 14/8/2019 12:15

That's also a RED FLAG!
Accounting trickery to boost the p&l.
Missed the consensus forecast of £307m anyway.
Unfortunately the FSCS levy of £6.8m was higher than the £4.5m expected.

Another RED FLAG is absolutely no mention of any financial provisions to potential losses/fines/investigations associated with Woodfeld.
HL lawyering up?

[ochs] 14/8/2019 11:44

In answer to 18bells, we don't know what bonus Chris Hill and the finance director gave up, but chances are it was at least as high as 2018, so that would mean approx £1.7m for Hill and £1m for Johnson.

My assumption is this money has gone back into cash reserves so has slightly boosted the reported pre-tax profit for year ending June 2019 - £305.8m, so would have been about £303m if the bonuses had been paid (2018 £292.4m).

[liquidkid] 14/8/2019 11:29

HL is a bucket shop. The waiving of their bonuses is insignificant in the Woodfeld scheme. HL waiving the WEIF fees is a front. Its a double charge. Woodfeld is being paid by its hodlers not HL. The directors salaries & bonuses are a smokescreen.

[porsche1945] 14/8/2019 11:01

Billionaires Pocket $100 Million Dividend As Ordinary Investors Remain Locked In U.K.’s Worst ‘Dog Fund’

HL total scumbags.

[18bells] 08/8/2019 13:00

So the bosses at HL at not cashing their £m bonuses but whats happening about that cash?Is HL willing to contribute that cash amongst the victims of the Woodford saga or inject that money back into the HL cash income to compensate for the losses of not charging Woodford holding fees?