St. James's Place Share Discussion Threads

[dexdringle] 30/1/2024 21:07

Unfortunately, the management think they themselves are way better and more talented than they actually are. In reality they are pretty clueless.

If you flag something thats clearly wrong or flawed, rather than a "oh my god, you're right, that's bloody hopeless and we'll start working on a fix straight away" you get some wierd kind of "we're perfect so you must be wrong" vibe. Even if it's a total no brainer stupid thing that even an idiot could see wasn't how it should be.

And I bet they are totally baffled at the share price fall from £17 to £6. How dare the market do this !!!!

[quepassa] 30/1/2024 19:35

It is interesting to read reviews for SJP on TrustPilot.

69% are 5 star but a surprisingly large 21% are 1 star.

That means out of a total 1,174 reviews, some 245 are 1 star

[tim 3] 30/1/2024 19:06

Their admin is appalling.Among other things when sorting Dads estate I would phone them up about letters they sent me asking me to contact them and they had no idea what to do and then said they will phone me back and didn't.I once asked for details of a late payment I received and they said there was nothing more other than what I had received even though it made no mention of which fund it was from!Took months to sort.If they are charging those sort of fees you would expect better.

[dexdringle] 30/1/2024 17:02

Yes, most of their people are desperately dull. And way overpaid.

As a client and shareholder, the main problems are:

1. Quality of admin
2. Quality of online functionality
3. Performance of funds vs benchmark
4. To many overpaid senior staff
5. Woke nonsense

NOTE: charges are not on that list.

[quepassa] 29/1/2024 12:53

they do have a youtube channel (sjpwealth)

but frankly they could do with some professional consultancy on improving the content, presentation and quality. lots of topics and interviews but most of the videos are yawn-inducing or mind-numbing in my view.

a big turn-off.

you can put "charges" or "fees" into the search field - but unsurprisingly very little comes up!


all imo. dyor.
qp

[dexdringle] 29/1/2024 12:34

I can't imagine SJP doing TV advertising. If they do, lets hope they don't do one trying to explain their charges as, given their incompetence at doing so, it'll be a 25 minute advert where no one is any the wiser at the end 🤣

[dassera] 26/1/2024 14:21

SJP portfolios performed well on a risk-adjusted basis in 2023, comfortably surpassing the ARC indices. The fightback starts now with an upcoming national advertising campaign, including TV.

[dexdringle] 26/1/2024 12:24

....but have all other FMs not seen something similar (eg Premier Miton).

If so, is this not sector specific rather than SJP specific ?

[quepassa] 26/1/2024 12:11

Two things.

1. The investment returns were ok but not stellar

2. What the market is rightfully concerned about is the big drop in funds inflow from £10 billion to £5 billion.


It's not good when net fund inflows fall off at that massive rate of approx 50% from one year to the next - on top of all the others challenges which SJP faces.


The FT makes this point very well in its article on p.12 to-day

all imo. dyor.
qp

[dexdringle] 26/1/2024 10:52

Taking just pensions, they started 2023 with £74bn FUM, added new money for the year of £10bn, achieved £8bn in net investment returns (circa 10%) and only £5bn was drawn out / surrendered/ paid away in income. At the year end the FUM figure was £87bn. An increase for the year of 23%. How is this bad ?

[tim 3] 25/1/2024 12:08

Basically saying lower inflows and operational review causing concern.

[dexdringle] 25/1/2024 10:24

What the hell was the market expecting?

Most fund managers experienced outflows in H2 2023 so £5bn net upwards for the year as a whole isn't too shabby is it ? This is net 'new money' of course and ignores a further £15bn of investment growth for an overall increase of £20 billion in FUM.

[fenners66] 25/1/2024 10:22

Record funds under management is ok at £168bn
Perhaps punishing SJP because people are making withdrawals whilst their funds are growing faster than their withdrawals seems a bit harsh.

[jakleeds] 25/1/2024 08:08

The market can see through the bullsh!t. I suspect these will end the day below £6 and it won’t be long before they’re relegated from the FTSE 100.

[jonnybig] 25/1/2024 07:48

Decent update on the face of it but will probably get hammered!

[action] 25/1/2024 07:05

Record fund inflow

[dexdringle] 24/1/2024 09:48

.....that would pretty much put the tin hat on it. But, if so, the market already seems to have priced one in over the last few months.

Question is, if the results are good (or normal) will the share price soar ? Lack of news / certainty has been hammering the price here for a few months now.

Ideally, need a takeover here asap. Or at least the emergence of an activist investor stake....

[jakleeds] 24/1/2024 08:09

Profit warning tomorrow morning I suspect……;……

[dexdringle] 15/1/2024 14:25

<<<<<< Davius 15 Jan '24 - 12:23 - 694 of 696

Morgan Stanley raises St James's Place target to 1,020 (990) pence - 'overweight'>>>>>

On what basis ? The market clearly doesn't agree !!

[dexdringle] 15/1/2024 14:19

I'll have a pint of whatever Freedomexpress747 is drinking 🙄

[freedomexpress747] 15/1/2024 12:40

There was a smart group called Tatton that marched with a large batton,Low charges and Super Juicey Performance Upended the greedy juggernaut SJP,Which share would you prefer to hold Mr Investor?!

[davius] 15/1/2024 12:23

Morgan Stanley raises St James's Place target to 1,020 (990) pence - 'overweight'

[tim 3] 15/1/2024 10:02

Yes I noticed after doing a such on them a while ago I was bombarded with adds promoting compensation claims against them.