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 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Lloyds Banking Group Plc | LSE:LLOY | London | Ordinary Share | GB0008706128 | ORD 10P |
Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0.36 | 0.67% | 54.30 | 54.24 | 54.28 | 54.48 | 54.00 | 54.28 | 87,843,033 | 16:35:19 |
Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Commercial Banks, Nec | 23.74B | 5.46B | 0.0859 | 6.32 | 34.49B |
Date | Subject | Author | Discuss |
---|---|---|---|
17/7/2019 08:44 | diku - long overdue. UK is supposed to be a G7 member, fast becoming a reality show. max - has a brain and probably his stint in the real world is better than a career politician. | alphorn | |
17/7/2019 08:43 | Better at what Alp? | maxk | |
17/7/2019 08:42 | Labour could put spanner in the works with Oct 31 deadline by having their own new leader contest...tactical delay to Feb 2020...once new Tory leader is in talk of new leadership contest will switch over to Labour... | diku | |
17/7/2019 08:27 | Max - better though than the current lot?! | alphorn | |
17/7/2019 08:26 | Alp I used to think the lesser spotted Milliband seemed like a reasonable choice (not for me) but for the bloke in the street. However, he took the Soros shilling, so all bets are off. | maxk | |
17/7/2019 08:24 | Read that Redwood article - condense it to two points: - The US would like to export and sell more domestically produced arms. America first. - It is not $ spend that is important but quality of spend. Producing mammoth targets aka aircraft carriers with no planes meets the spend criteria but could not be more opposite to having anything worthwhile. Redwood came off the boil some time ago. | alphorn | |
17/7/2019 08:19 | Independence and military co-operation By JOHNREDWOOD | Published: JULY 17, 2019 The main continental EU countries are out to strengthen their military collaboration. Over the years they have worked away at joint exercises, common weapons procurement, common standards, exchange of personnel, unified commands and shared missions. There are now military interventions undertaken by EU directed troops or naval vessels. The UK has been particularly concerned about being pulled into a European army, owing to the legal constraints that operate on a member state once it has accepted the competence of the EU in any given area. Some think the UK has already consented to more collaboration than is desirable and is now entrapped. Others accept that as we leave the EU we cannot be forced to co-operate or to participate against our will. The UK has been keener on joint working through NATO, including our US allies. NATO too has a long tradition of common action, shared defence procurement programmes, common standards and procedures, exchanges of personnel and unified commands for given tasks, exercises and missions. It is clear under the NATO charter that whilst we and the other members sign a mutual pledge to defend each other, a NATO member is free to determine their own commitment to any resulting NATO action. NATO is a coalition of the willing, that makes up missions from members in the light of the needs based on consent. Under President Trump the USA would like the continental countries to make a bigger contribution to NATO defence. The USA points out that European members of NATO rely on US engagement and the common security guarantee for their ultimate protection. Surely, the US asks, the Europeans could at least meet the minimum funding requirement for NATO membership so they are making a bit better contribution to the collective defence? The UK does meet the minimum requirement, and does possess military capability to join NATO engagements around the world, contributing naval vessels, aircraft and mobile soldiers. UK forces have worked hard to ensure they can co-operate with US forces, as well as undertaking training and exercises with European forces. Setting our armed services in the context of collaboration and assistance with others does bring a downside. It might mean that we lack particular capabilities where we rely on others, which would limit our own ability to undertake a mission for ourselves. The UK needs to ensure it has sufficient capability to go to the assistance of our own territories or allies, and to defend ourselves at home, whoever the aggressor and whatever our principal allies might think. | xxxxxy | |
17/7/2019 08:19 | Max - can't be worse than the current crop, on all sides of the house. | alphorn | |
17/7/2019 08:17 | Bliar mk11 | maxk | |
17/7/2019 08:15 | Lots more of the story still to run. Never believe a politician and neither Boris nor Hunt are as white as snow. Actions, once elected, could turn on a sixpence. Nothing bullish about any of the options. | alphorn | |
17/7/2019 08:05 | Tony Blair back , what you smoking :-) | bargainbob | |
17/7/2019 07:09 | Thing is Brexit now looks like being extended by the new EU leader = more uncertainty Boris MUST get England out by Oct 31st or Labour will get back in when Tony Bliar makes a return as the leader. | buywell3 | |
17/7/2019 00:03 | I dont know either graham. Whilst we know where we stand with Hunt. I'm not at all sure of Boris. I wish it were different. | maxk | |
17/7/2019 00:01 | Key words hag C U Next Tuesday treachery hideous poisonous communist treason creature scorched earth abomination But one person thinks she was successful. He says, "She had one task – to derail Brexit – and she succeeded spectacularly." | grahamite2 | |
16/7/2019 23:54 | I don't know. In 1910, the government had the authority of a second election victory to support their proposals - but they only won with a much reduced majority, so that could be viewed two ways. In 1949 it was a government that had already been in power some years and so with no fresh mandate. So I don't think there is a precise precedent. All you can say for sure is that the crown has protected the people against vested interests on a number of occasions. | grahamite2 | |
16/7/2019 23:45 | Nothing to do with age. More to do with, is she up for blowing out a rogue parliament? | maxk | |
16/7/2019 23:36 | As to your question - are you referring to her age? Didn't stop her standing up in a barge for hours not that long ago. This is one tough lady, from a generation for which duty meant something. | grahamite2 | |
16/7/2019 23:35 | Max - have you looked at "In the dying embers of her premiership, Theresa May is still doing her best to harm Conservatism"? The comments are hilarious - this woman is NOT popular with the Conservative faithful! | grahamite2 | |
16/7/2019 23:27 | Perhaps graham, but would she push the button in this case? | maxk | |
16/7/2019 23:26 | Max, look back to 1910/11 and 1948/49. The Monarchy hates being drawn into politics but when necessary it steps up to the plate. | grahamite2 | |
16/7/2019 23:24 | 300 years ago it was King v Parliament, now it is Parliament v people. It's been that way for some years now but has lately become intense. If this present Parliament were completely sidelined that could only be a good thing, both morally right and very popular. | grahamite2 | |
16/7/2019 23:24 | afaik, Boris would need the Queens assent to shut down parliament. Would it be forthcoming? | maxk | |
16/7/2019 23:12 | Shock horror at Boris's plan to shut down parliament. Why the surprise....parliame | cheshire pete |
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