Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Std Life Aber LSE:SLA London Ordinary Share GB00BVFD7Q58 ORD 12 2/9P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  +1.80p +0.57% 319.00p 319.00p 319.10p 319.30p 314.40p 317.20p 3,693,556 15:47:16
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
General Financial 16,980.0 964.0 29.8 10.7 9,503.78

Std Life Aber Share Discussion Threads

Showing 701 to 724 of 725 messages
Chat Pages: 29  28  27  26  25  24  23  22  21  20  19  18  Older
DateSubjectAuthorDiscuss
17/8/2018
11:58
If true, he might just wish to diversify. In my experience the problem with company reward schemes is that you can become over exposed to a single equity.I recently sold part of another holding due to this.
mavis5
17/8/2018
09:16
I'm not clued-up enough to be certain but it appears to me that Hugh Young, a director at SLA (on the investment side) has sold a tranche of shares given to him under some reward scheme - £162k worth. If I'm correct in my assumption that he has sold these what message does that give as to the future direction of the share price? I'd welcome being corrected on this if I've got it wrong.
mcunliffe1
16/8/2018
11:09
Life sector doing well today. After adjustment Standard up 1.8% and the other two ex divis Aviva and Legal and General also up 1.65% and 1.16%. Lloyds also ex dividend recovering 1.5% from the recent rout. Royal London's excellent results will have helped.
stewart64
14/8/2018
23:23
Pierre, Pierre, Pierre, just when we were getting a decent discussion going with lots of differing views, suggestions, information etc. you have to bring the tone down. Why? And, it was I who stated "I often go/went against the crowd". Not with pensions though. It always struck me as a safe form of saving. And of course my use of the often is still valid. Let's get this back to constructive discussion.
mcunliffe1
14/8/2018
22:42
No, my various work was nothing to do with calculating tax. Still don't undertsand the 2nd sentence - it's not self explanatory to me.
pierre oreilly
14/8/2018
22:37
I guess your work did not have anything to do with calculating tax . the rest is self explanatory as a counter to your "don't let evidence get in the way of your pensions belief."
fenners66
14/8/2018
22:35
I guess you did not work in a tax role then... I can let experience support the reality though. Sorry, I don't understand that, could you rephrase it please?
pierre oreilly
14/8/2018
22:30
I guess you did not work in a tax role then... I can let experience support the reality though.
fenners66
14/8/2018
22:27
fenner, don't let evidence get in the way of your pensions belief. You are basically working to keep the city boys in Porches and sla shareholders in divis. I suggest you increase your pension contributions! Whatever you'll manage to extract from your pension over your life, the administrators will have alrady taken about the same amount. (that is as i worked out must be the case all those years ago - i prefered to keep the lot for myself at a cost of some big tax bills for a few years.
pierre oreilly
14/8/2018
22:16
PO - you could have of course done both and enjoyed the 40% tax deduction Sounds like you dont have someone else working on your behalf making up to 40% pa with your money, the govts 20% , your employer's 8% the govt's contracted out rebate........ Ok so its their gain....
fenners66
14/8/2018
22:11
668 fenners, thanks for stating the obvious that buying shares drives the price up (from where it would otherwise be). Good luck explaining that to others on this thread who argue the toss that it doesn't. But then you go and spoil your post saying a sharebuyback isn't a return to shareholders (agreeing with most on here). Does it bother you that an rns states it is, that institutions state it is, that the whole finance industry states that it is? To me, your are stating the equivalent of 2+2 doesn't equal 4. Anyhow, on to pensions. Someone (can't remember who) recently stated he often went against the crowd and current thinking. But on one of the biggest received wisdoms seems to have gone along with the crowd and took out a personal pension, probably unquestioning of the beneifts or otherwise of doing so. Pensions never made sense to me - even though everyone i ever spoke to assured me they were a must have in order to avoid poverty in old age and also to maximise tax relief. I met no one over many years who agreed with me. I decided to bite the bullet, pay some very high tax bills, and invest for myself in tax free shelters for a future tax free income. To cut a longish story short, the financial situation i found myself in at age 49 meant i realised i could retire and keep myself and my family of five in a very decent lifestyle from the tax free income from what are now isas, so i retired, while everyone feeding their pensions was and is still working away until 65 or later. Pensions is a major area where you shouldn't follow the crowd, imv.
pierre oreilly
14/8/2018
17:37
A poor opinion of the state of the SLA flagship fund hTtp://citywire.co.uk/money/investors-tired-of-multi-asset-funds-missing-targets/a1146780?ref=citywire-money-latest-news-list
eipgam
14/8/2018
17:21
Helps when you're a retired software developer with some knowledge of payroll :-)
mcunliffe1
14/8/2018
16:43
MCunliffe1 thanks for that comprehensive reply - I am looking at how I can effect a similar regime for my pensions - when I get there and it is useful to see how it works. I was aware of the HMRC assumption of taxing the pension - interesting to see you have found what appears to be a painless way around it.
fenners66
14/8/2018
16:19
fenners66 The W.P. policies were the first my dad sold me (he worked for the Std Life when I was younger before becoming an independant Fin. Ad.). It would be in the period 1984 - 1988. They carry a 4% guarantee on the fund price. It's net of any charges. It does not affect any terminal bonus which I accept CAN be removed at any time. 4% is worth having these days - and until I'm 75 (I'm 61 now). I will not crystalise these three policies until I'm 75 when the guarantee expires. As ALL my pension policies are quite old none of them are draw-down friendly. Hence, I did crystalise one of them moving the realised fund value into the Old Mutual fund. This I can draw-down. I contact the Std Life each time I wish to draw-down. I instruct them to pay me an amount. 25% of that amount MUST come from my "tax-free" part and the remainder from the taxable part. I've instructed HMRC to issue a tax code to the SLA for me such that I may draw-down an amount less than my personal allowance but of a significant amount nonetheless. I draw-down later in the financial year so the PAYE system doesn't attempt to take tax anyway in the naive belief I will repeat the draw-down each month. I've figured that in this way I can draw-down an amount each year that minimises my tax burden and in effect transfers the 75% that would have been taxable into, in part, ISA's, Premium Bonds etc etc. I also continue to pay INTO these same policies at the same rate but below the money purchase annual allowance. This aspect of drawing-down from both the tax-free and the taxable "pots" is not something currently supported by SLA's customer website. A letter or phone call is required - but to be fair they comply.
mcunliffe1
14/8/2018
15:55
Very good post 668 fenners66. Good to read sensible informed comment.
kenmitch
14/8/2018
15:47
Do they still do funds with a 4% guarantee and is that a net 4% ie. after charges? Also your comment suggests that that fund is not available for a drawdown - but is that the case ?
fenners66
14/8/2018
15:07
Thanks to you both (fenners66 and jaws6). The With Profit policies (three of them) all carry a 4% growth per year guarantee in the share price. That's quite valuable. This remains until I'm 75. The three other policies I had (two managed and one UK equity) carry no such guarantee. I crystalised one of the Managed policies and moved the funds into a draw-down friendly fund (Std Life Old Mutual) that had shown great growth over the past five and 10 years. I'm reasanably clued-up about pensions. I've also no particular issues with the SLA returns on my five policies plus the draw-down. I do wish though that they'd be more open about decisions and be more responsive to the web site problems I've identified.
mcunliffe1
14/8/2018
15:00
post 670 is right ,there is lot of choice to invest in pension. most good smaller co and lot fund is there.
jaws6
14/8/2018
14:51
If you use SLA for your pension surely you can chose from a wide range of funds rather than the "With Profits" fund. If you have an interest in the market , though you may not want the hassle of managing your pension fund - you can split it into chosen sector funds - eg US , EM, European small companies etc. then you get to see where the growth is and how the funds compare to their peers.
fenners66
14/8/2018
09:19
It is a pleasure to see some well considered posts on this thread of late. I'm glad fenners66 has seen my point about an investment company being unwilling to "invest" the £1.75bn. That struck me as a strange decision when I first read of the buy-back and special divi. SLA is a pretty good manager of (my) money and has been for many years. They do however have a tendency towards secrecy and I have in the past often pushed them (very strongly) to disclose information I believe I should be given. I feel that one of the functions of these discussion forums is to "out" companies who are not overly open. For example, on the 1st August 2018 the Terminal Bonus on ALL of my With Profit pensions were reduced by about 10%. No explanation, no warning - at the time. My research on the SLA website tells me they have indeed adjusted the T. B. but found this: "Most customers will see an increase in the value of their plan compared to last year." Does anyone on this thread hold an SLA pension, With Profits and seen an increase in their Terminal Bonus? On a related issue, has anyone used the Customer platform to examine their SLA policies? I've been reporting technical issues to SLA for well over a year on this aspect and they are disinterested in fixing the errors and misleading/erroneous data. Sorry for being slightly off-piste re. shares here folks but needing some additional, wider feedback. Thanks.
mcunliffe1
14/8/2018
01:51
I really like the point of this post - which PO seems to have missed entirely MCunliffe1 9 Aug '18 - 09:02 - 639 of 667 So, an investment company uses spare cash to buy back its own shares in order to reduce the share capital of the company. During the buying phase the share price is likely to rise as a substantial number are being bought within a clearly defined period. I'd suspect that at the end of that period the share price will then revert to the trend it has established over the past six months, ie. falling. And that in a generally rising marketplace. I wonder if the executive bonus scheme relies upon a share price to reach a particular point somewhere before 21st Nov ember 2018. If I recall, their year-end is the 15th November. So, why can't an investment company utilise the "spare" capital in a more productive manner by investing it. It's what we pay them to do after all. Pertinent points 1 - Investment company - has surplus cash and does not know what to do with it in order to beat the potential increase in EPS which a buyback may make . WHY not ? Why should anyone invest with them if they admit that best potential return they can get from £175m is 10% ? Work the maths through at a £ 3.21 share price , 1.8% EPS on £964m profit......... So I thought that % was going to be lower ...... and 10% does not seem so bad - but their funds are targeting much higher returns with which to take their cut out of before it reaches the consumer so they should be doing better.... 2, We are talking about where the shares will be after buybacks NOT during. You add demand for the shares on ANY given day and if it exceeds supply they can go up. But tomorrow is another day and anything can happen - just because notional EPS has gone up does not mean a thing if supply exceeds demand the next day. 3, EPS for bonuses - yes all other things being equal an easy way out for the board. No risky asset or business buying to risk their returns - unlike the whole business model that means ALL the customers are risking their capital on the chance that SLA beats the market. As for shareholders voting for anything - most shareholders never vote, shares that are held by institutions mostly never vote against a resolution see the huge bonus schemes at house builders that made it passed. Its always headlines when a vote has a large "against %" let alone if a board ever actually loses. So essentially its the board that makes the decisions knowing full well its very unlikely to be questioned. I had the discussion about buybacks centred around a company with £2.5BN of debt where the debt could be reduced instead. There is the increased EPS to gain from not paying interest and fees on renewing every few years and the idea that since the enterprise value of the business is a function of the debt and equity - a reduction in the debt should lead to an increase in the equity value anyway (win win). Buybacks are NOT a return to shareholders - dividends do that - they are returning cash to EX Shareholders - so a carpetbagger may make a few quid and the investors get nothing but potential increase in EPS. Furthermore they are bought in the market from those who want out anyway they do not know who is getting them from them nor do they care its just a price to sell. If you want share price growth - put the money to good work and grow the business in the long term that's the only way
fenners66
13/8/2018
18:57
ok, i've said enough, people can decide as they like if they are at all bothered. I'll just point out that anyone thinking mcun has posted a list of cotradictions in my posts must be totally illogical (as must mcun for saying they are contradctions). I think the whole debate centres on the inability to understand the quite simple words 'than it would otherwise be'. Last words to you ...
pierre oreilly
13/8/2018
17:39
Pierre Oreilly I hope you realise that my replies are simply in response to your inaccurate "facts" and are not aimed at you personally. You might be the salt of the earth! BUT the most dangerous posters on ADVFN bulletin boards are not the complete idiots who wreck some threads (e.g Tern) and not worth replying to, but those whose posts give the impression they know what they are talking about when they don't. MCunliffe1 has pointed out some of your mistakes and inconsistencies in the post above this one, so I'll leave most of those to him. And so did scrawl in his excellent reply. Your last reply and previous posts show basic misconceptions or factual errors:- 1. e.g you started by posting that as most people voted for it that's what they wanted. True!! But that doesn't then mean that decision was the right one. e.g The majority voted for Brexit and for Trump. Time will tell (and I'm NOT starting a debate on that!) whether those were good decisions. The majority might vote for something that turns out to be a disaster. Company history is littered with terrible aqusisitions that were voted for at the time that ended up either bankrupting that Company or nearly doing so. 2. In post 649 you wrote;- "unassailably , a buyback increases the price from what it would otherwise have been. If it would have dropped 50p without the buyback then withe the buyback it may only drop 20p for example." That's tosh! Do you really think that before a share is priced a computer or whoever/whatever calculates a share price to take account of perhaps daily buybacks? Impossible. If you want the facts read scrawl's reply again. He explains correctly, as I have too, that YES, buybacks DO mean higher eps than would otherwise have been the case. BUT higher eps does not always mean a higher share price. If news is bad, or profits disappoint, or there are more selling than buying then the share price will drop and again no way are buybacks factored in before the price is marked down. 3. Again a simple factual error and this time from not reading a post carefully. You wrote:_ "I think pointing out a share which had a buyback and subsequently fallen in price as proof they are a poor way of returning cash massively misses the point." That's not what I wrote! I gave examples where that had happened. I could also give examples where a share had done very well after buybacks. I was trying and failing to get you to understand that buybacks do not automatically mean a higher share price than if they hadn't bought back. 4. And as for your "I should have complained to the Board and too late to be whinging now comment," again you have misunderstood. I don't currently hold SLA having sold soon after their merger. I AM now tempted thanks to the much lower share price along with a very attractive dividend (and looked here to see if any useful information). I've made clear that though I prefer dividends to buybacks there are plus points for buybacks too. And I used NEXT as an example of plus and minus points. e.g Next have now bought back more than half their shares and for anyone looking to buy NEXT after the big share price drop instead of holding on during it the share was so tempting at £38 that I jumped in then. With 50% fewer shares in issue NEXT can afford to pay higher dividends on the shares remaining. So I'm happy to accept further NEXT buybacks now as I would be if and when deciding to buy SLA. Finally have you read any detailed research on buybacks? Your inaccurate and confused posts suggest strongly not? e.g admittedly a few years ago, detailed research from Morgan Stanley showing how the share prices of Companies buying back subsequently underperformed those in the sector who did not buy back. That doesn't mean all buybacks or wrong nor that it is always better to have dividends. It's all a matter of opinion but it helps when posting your opinions here if you have some knowledge about the topic you are posting about.
kenmitch
Chat Pages: 29  28  27  26  25  24  23  22  21  20  19  18  Older
Your Recent History
LSE
GKP
Gulf Keyst..
LSE
QPP
Quindell
FTSE
UKX
FTSE 100
LSE
IOF
Iofina
FX
GBPUSD
UK Sterlin..
Stocks you've viewed will appear in this box, letting you easily return to quotes you've seen previously.

Register now to create your own custom streaming stock watchlist.

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

P:42 V: D:20180820 15:03:33