Bearing in mind the closing time for applying for shares is midnight tonight, is anybody having a punt?
Or are perhaps you of a mind that it's not quite the done thing, shall we say?
|
I thought about it but decided against......
....it does look as though it will be oversubscribed though.
.... I bought Barclays instead......
I am looking forward if this happens it is certainly worth going for
tinyurl.com/odkfrky
|
It's a no brainer - free money !
I stagged the BT shares, British Gas etc etc you name it. Didn't make a fortune, but a few hundred quid in those far off days was a nice bonus.
Having got a taste of it we opened dozens (yes dozens) of building society accounts before they all hit the market with shares. Then we had the building society takeovers too.
All in all, mostly with the building societies, I reckon we made around £7000 with not a lot of effort.
Capitalism - love it!
|
|
did british gas, BT, and copped three Building society sell offs, but not going for the Royal Mail.
|
|
Kind of hovering over the do it button...hmmm...tick tick tick...
|
Thanks for the reminder.
Applied for self and boss this afternoon, took some time to get through to HL on the phone. I hope I get more than the £100 worth of lastminute.com I got.
|
>>Bearing in mind the closing time for applying for shares is midnight tonight,
I think you'll find that it's midnight tomorrow.
|
|
£750 minimum is too rich for me.
|
|
And for the new, New Labour to re-nationalise without compensation....don't think so..
|
"And for the new, New Labour to re-nationalise without compensation....don't think so.."
You don't hang on to the shares - you sell them next week and take the profit.
Labour or any government won't re-nationalise the Royal Mail. They will be quietly pleased to be shot of the problem and be able to blame the decision on the coalition but regrettably will find it too expensive to reverse.
|
|
new NEW labour have already announced they wont re-nationalise. The problem is they are due to go on strike shortly after the shares go on sale. Not a good time to sell, they may have to be a "holder" for a month or two,
|
>>new NEW labour have already announced they wont re-nationalise
Not quite, IIRC. They said something like it would be ridiculous and/or irresponsible to commit to doing so since it was too far into the future. Not quite the same thing.
>> Labour or any government won't re-nationalise the Royal Mail. They will be quietly pleased
>> to be shot of the problem and be able to blame the decision on the coalition but regrettably
>> will find it too expensive to reverse
Whilst I expect that to be an accurate assessment, nonetheless if they saw significant political advantage in doing so, it would be done in a heartbeat - hang the expense and previous comments/commitment - but I doubt that there would ever be sufficient advantage.
|
Changed my mind.......
I have opened an online account and stuck in an application for £3000 worth......
|
Think I've decided against, but not because of moral reasons or anything else - more because I can see that for me in my particular circumstances it's going to be one of those More Hassle Than It's Worth games.
Be interested to know whether your three grand makes you anything in the end, helicopter, if you want to share when the time comes.
|
>> because I can see that for me in my particular circumstances it's going to be
>> one of those More Hassle Than It's Worth games.
>>
Same reasons here, plus the fact they will be 10 times oversubscribed and it seems you wont get what you apply for.
|
I shall hold on to the shares as I think they will be steady earners, regardless of the initial bonanza.
I was considerably miffed over the sell-off of Railtrack, or whatever it was called. If you buy equities you have to take risks. I sold at a small profit before the big price drop. Then the Government stepped in with compensation for the loss other investors had sustained.
|
Well the price will be set somewhere between £3.00 and £3.30 according to todays Telegraph because of the demand and ' traders were last night betting the shares will start trading at £4.03 ' so it has to be worth a punt and .....
....as to oversubscription Zeddo .....at least a third of the shares have to go to small investors.....
....as to hassle it took me under ten minutes to open an account with Hargreaves Lansdown , transfer the money by debit and apply for the shares ..... where is the hassle in that.
Even if I only get 50% allocation at say £3 each the potential is there for a quick £350 profit...
...compare that to the building society and it is a no brainer...
I will let you know how I do Crankcase if and when I sell .....
Last edited by: helicopter on Tue 8 Oct 13 at 09:42
|
>> ....as to oversubscription Zeddo .....at least a third of the shares have to go to
>> small investors.....
Who are oversubscribed 10 times.. If you get 3ks worth and sell, yes there a profit, if you get 300 quids worth any profit get taken by brokerage costs. That to me is "waste of effort" territory.
Last edited by: Zero on Tue 8 Oct 13 at 09:44
|
Simple economics Z .... copied from Investopedia....
The law of supply and demand is not an actual law but it is well confirmed and understood realization that if you have a lot of one item, the price for that item should go down. At the same time you need to understand the interaction; even if you have a high supply, if the demand is also high, the price could also be high. In the world of stock investing, the law of supply and demand can contribute to explaining a stocks price at any given time. It is the base to any economic understanding.
If the share subscription is 10 times oversubscribed that means that the law of supply and demand comes into play Z old chap.....
and IMO the price must surely rise when they go on the market ......
....lets consider if you were offered ( worst case scenario ) even £100 for 10 minutes work would you consider it a waste of effort....?
|
You have completely bypassed the maths in your quest for rules of economics. And also bear in mind because the shares are 10 times over subscribed does not mean they will increase to 10 times in value.
>> ....lets consider if you were offered ( worst case scenario ) even £100 for 10
>> minutes work would you consider it a waste of effort....?
No, but I surmise I wont get 100 quid profit. So yes I think it may be a waste of effort. I'm sure you'll be happy to prove me wrong if it comes off.
Last edited by: Zero on Tue 8 Oct 13 at 10:04
|
I think Z is probably right. The demand means big scaling back - the DT suggests £750 allocations for private investors. And most of those applying won't be interested in buying after the IPO anyway.
I put the applications in as a one way bet - the chance of losing out seems low, and it might yield a bit of profit for the sake of a couple of phone calls.
There's also a sort of principle there somewhere. I don't think it should be privatised and I don't think value belonging to UK taxpayers should be donated to hedgies, so if I can't stop it I'll try to get the benefit of my bit.
I did actually lose out on lastminute. The allocation was so low it wasn't worth selling, so I filed it away until it was worth about half what it cost me, then sold it in a tidying up exercise!
|
I'm sure you'll be happy to prove me wrong if it comes off.
In the words of Churchill OOH YES! :0)
|
|
Can't say I even noticed there was sell off until I read this thread. Must have passed me by, has there been a lot of adverts?
|
>> Even if I only get 50% allocation at say £3 each the potential is there for a quick £350 profit.
What tax would a higher rate tax payer pay on that quick £350 profit?
|
Oh fiddle de dee and blast. Now he tells me. Sigh.
The tax implications was one of the reasons I didn't bother. I'm such a financial innocent.
|
>> None It's not income.
but its a taxable gain.
|
|
I'm going for a lie down. I'm baffled already.
|
|
As zero says capital gains are taxable but you have an allowance of £10,900 before you need to start paying capital gains tax. Provided you have not made more than that amount in the tax year your gains would be tax free,
|
Ok, that makes sense. But I assume you'd have to fill in a tax return to make it all happen correctly,and touch wood, even though I'm lucky enough to be a higher rate tax payer, I've never even seen a tax return. Scary.
|
|
You don't have to tell the tax man unless your capital gains exceed your allowance.
|
|
I have to say that's one of the most useful things I've learned on this site. Thanks for that.
|
>> And for the new, New Labour to re-nationalise without compensation....don't think so..>>
A certain Ed Miliband says he will impose a 20 month freeze on energy prices in 2015 if his party is elected.....
I've already frozen my dual fuel energy costs with nPower until the end of September 2016 and, if I follow it up, could do so until the end of March, 2017.
Apart from the fact that Miliband doesn't seem to understand the potential minefield he proposes to enter, it's hardly groundbreaking policy making...:-( :-(
|
Who knows what will happen with these shares, either in the long run or on the first day of trading.
But, anybody who thinks that because the shares are oversubscribed, they will certainly rise at the start of trading, badly misunderstands markets.
Have a look at Facebook for example. Hugely hyped and hugely oversubscribed. On the first day of trading they clung on to $38 because the banks backing them had flooded the order book at that price, propping up the price. After that it was free-fall.
Of course, if you'd held on while they lost over half their value and went down to $18, you could have seen them now rise to $50.
You might get a pop at the start of trading (like Facebook), and be able to cash out, or they could double in the first week, or once they become available for shorting they could halve in a few days.
But don't assume that oversubscribed means that the only way is up!
You might take some comfort from having an idea of the fair value of the shares based upon fundamentals, which might put in a long term floor, but I haven't seen anybody here mention what they think a fair value calculation is.
|
Well I do not think anybody ( particularly me ) assumes that the only way is up for these shares -
I have been burned before and in early 80's lost a couple of thousand I could ill afford investing in a company for which I worked at the time...which went bust. I received the share certs on the same day as the redundancy notice.
...and indeed as a result now I tend to be very risk averse and I did originally consider buying Royal Mail and decide against however ........
....happily SWMBO and I are retiring next March and after discussions last week with our Financial adviser we found we had a bit of money spare....
£3K is a fairly minor punt for me these days and as it does not matter to me desperately I can wait and sell when the price is right be it short or long term.....
I have also bought a few Barclays shares to top up my existing holding.
Last edited by: helicopter on Tue 8 Oct 13 at 13:47
|
>> Who knows what will happen with these shares, either in the long run or on
>> the first day of trading.
>>
>> But, anybody who thinks that because the shares are oversubscribed, they will certainly rise at
>> the start of trading, badly misunderstands markets.
True. If the price falls below 330p when trading starts, will all the people piling in now want to buy some more, as they logically should? I don't think so.
>>
>> Have a look at Facebook for example. Hugely hyped and hugely oversubscribed. On the first
>> day of trading they clung on to $38 because the banks backing them had flooded
>> the order book at that price, propping up the price. After that it was free-fall.
Different sort of business. Shades of the dot com bubble.
>> You might take some comfort from having an idea of the fair value of the
>> shares based upon fundamentals, which might put in a long term floor, but I haven't
>> seen anybody here mention what they think a fair value calculation is.
Based on the dividend promise, a yield of 5%-6% should put a floor under it unless it starts to look unsustainable. If I were to get a reasonable amount (looks very unlikely), and there was quick profit opportunity I would consider selling half and keeping the rest, topping up if there's market weakness later on.
More likely we will get a few hundred quid each in which case we'd sell for a profit if there's one available.
|
|
We've just applied for some. A few minutes on the PC - easy peasy.
|
Not convinced on there being a quick buck to be made here, although happy to be wrong.
I fear that the unions will take advantage of the new ownership structure and look to capitalise for its members
|
>> for its members
Who will also be shareholders.
|
>> >> for its members
>>
>> Who will also be shareholders.
>>
>>
Which may make a difference for some, but many will be to shortsighted to understand the implications
|
www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24442861
Quite likely I'm missing something here, but why would you opt out of free money?
|
>> www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24442861
>>
>> Quite likely I'm missing something here, but why would you opt out of free money?
Thats *some* of the more rabid union shop stewards, (they have more than that, so a lot have swallowed their principals for the lure of filthy lucre)
Thats a kick int he teeth for the union.
|
So have we got another of the country's asset here which is failing and no use for the country and we can't make any money out of it? But investors are tripping over themselves to buy shares and early indications are they are selling it off at 1/3 less than the market is willing to pay for it?
|
|
The state has no place in delivering parcels from Amazon.
|
>> The state has no place in delivering parcels from Amazon.
Not sure about that. Remember bus deregulation in Sheffield? Competing buses racing each other on the same routes, all under occupied and belching smoke because the operators couldn't afford to run decent equipment.
Get the density up and the cost goes down. Probably half a dozen parcel vans pass here every day - even if they are all full when they set off, they are doing a lot more miles than they need to.
|
Share price set at £3.30 I see and seven times oversubscribed according to the Telegraph.
Apparently large private investors being greedy and asking for more than £40 K worth may be excluded altogether in favour of smaller private investors....
|
>> Apparently large private investors being greedy and asking for more than £40 K worth may
>> be excluded altogether in favour of smaller private investors....
I heard it might be as little as 10k
However, is a larger investor being greedy, just because they invest more?
If you have a thousand pounds to invest and apply for £400s worth, are you being less "greedy" than somebody who has a hundred thousand pounds to invest and applies for £40K?
Is a billionaire investor always greedy because the stakes they take are proportionate to their wealth?
|
|
Not enough shares for Brits while bids from foreign sovereign sources are being accepted, for example the government of Singapore.
|
Maybe part of the thinking is that a wealthier person can overbid more easily. There's also an element of giveaway about it - a lot of people think it's worth more than 330p a share, and we are being sold something we already own.
The fair shares calculation also says if you want to allow everybody to take a meaningful stake (which if anything means more than £750) then you can allocate £40,000 to one individual, who is perhaps in a position to write a cheque for £100,000 up front to secure it.
|
>>and we are being sold something we already own.
Uh, no. You are being offered to take something into your personal ownership which is currently owned by the state. i.e. Not you. The money you pay will go into the state pot.
I'm never sure what the media mean by "owned by the tax payer".
|
>> >>and we are being sold something we already own.
>>
>> Uh, no. You are being offered to take something into your personal ownership which is
>> currently owned by the state. i.e. Not you. The money you pay will go into
>> the state pot.
>>
>> I'm never sure what the media mean by "owned by the tax payer".
Yes I understand that Mark. It's the perceived "giveaway" element that makes the difference.
|
|
You lost me Manatee; "giveaway"?
|
>> You lost me
I doubt it
>>Manatee; "giveaway"?
People are being encouraged to believe they can sell for an immediate profit. If I sell you a tenner for a fiver, it's a giveaway. It's not difficult to see then why well off people filling their pockets is seen as greedy, or at least unfair.
Just saying.
|
I genuinely didn't know what you meant.
Bearing in mind that I don't see any publicity for this, are people really being lead to believe that its "immediate profit" territory, or is that just what they are choosing to believe?
Who is doing the encouraging? Or is it a media thing?
I agree, that if there is the suggestion of immediate profit, then a rich person buying loads could be seen as greedy.
Although presumably only if someone getting 40,000 impacts your ability to get the 100 you asked for (or whatever the figures are).
But like I said, your requested amount should be your ceiling, and the shares distributed equally up to and subject to that ceiling.
|
>> I genuinely didn't know what you meant.
Apology - take it as a compliment :)
Yes there has been a lot of hype, and the applications shot up in the final 48 hours. Cable has come in for criticism from the Labour guy -
"Shadow business secretary Chuka Umunna criticised the government on Monday for "short-changing" taxpayers."
and popular forecasts up to a week ago were for up to 40% profit. The original price range was 260-330p, since then it has been struck at 330p as far as we know, which stands to reduce the difference a bit.
|
|
Why is a large genuine investor wanting to take a stake in an industry greedy, but a gambler staking £750 is not?
|
|
Only because it is more than their fair share perhaps? If there was an infinite number of shares it wouldn't matter.
|
>>www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24471622
>>I heard it might be as little as 10k
Why have a cut off at £10,000? Surely the investor applying for that amount is just as entitled to an allocation as anyone applying for less.
Some of these decision makers will be looking for votes in the not too distant future.
( I didn't apply for such a large amount, by the way)
|
|
There are a lot more votes applying for £750 than £10,000 or £40,000.
|
|
If I applied for £750 worth and was allocated just half of that amount, I would not consider that to be unreasonable. If I applied for £10,000 worth and received no allocation whatsoever, I would not be a happy bunny.
|
I think the amount you have asked for should be the ceiling of what you will be offered. And that it should be divided equally.
Thus someone who asked for £750 might get all they asked for, but someone who asked for £40,000 might also get £750, or perhaps more if more was available.
|
>> I think the amount you have asked for should be the ceiling of what you
>> will be offered. And that it should be divided equally.
>>
>> Thus someone who asked for £750 might get all they asked for, but someone who
>> asked for £40,000 might also get £750, or perhaps more if more was available.
I don't disagree with that
|
I find it interesting that many are saying that wealthier investors are greedy because they want more than their "fair share".
It begs the question of what a fair share is.
Is it just the amount that you need? Is it the total divided by the number of people?
For either of those definitions, anybody who lives in a decent sized house with a decent plot of land, probably has more than their fair share of housing.
"But we earned it!", they may cry.
So, perhaps the fair share is what you can get through your own, legal, efforts. In the case of large investors, that may be much more than the average man.
I suspect when asked to define "more than a fair share", very many would (if being truthful) say "more than I have"...
Last edited by: SteelSpark on Thu 10 Oct 13 at 15:02
|
>> I find it interesting that many are saying that wealthier investors are greedy because they
>> want more than their "fair share".
The more money you have, the more of whatever it is you can buy. That's how it is, not much point claiming it's unfair even if there is a good argument that it is.
Different though if the gubberment is "giving away" value as has been alleged (and assumed, I think it's fair to say, by just about everybody who has applied).
|
It sounds a bit like begging for money, and being asked how much you want.
If you say £10,000, you won't get anything.
If you say 50p for a cup of tea, you might get it, but be left wishing you'd asked for a pound to buy a biscuit as well.
If you say £2.90 it might arouse suspicion.
|
|
In 1973 a black panhandler came up to me in a park in New York and asked me for 37 cents. There was something so endearing about the request for such a specific sum that I counted it out carefully and gave it to him.
|
>> Different though if the gubberment is "giving away" value as has been alleged (and assumed,
>> I think it's fair to say, by just about everybody who has applied).
Not really.
Anybody who invests in anything, is assuming that they are getting value, and that they will get a return on the investment.
Whether the theoretical return is high or low, doesn't really make a difference. The question is whether you have the money to invest.
Let's assume that this investment is actually "free money". What about somebody who has £75 to invest? Where is their fair share of this "free money"?
Why does the person who can afford £750 get 10 times more "free money" than the person who can only afford to invest £75?
If the person who can invest £750 gets their "free money", why does the person who can invest £75,000 not get 100x more?
Having more money lets you make bigger profits on investments, whether it's bank interest, or house appreciation, or stock appreciation.
|
|
It's beginning to look like £150 profit (after costs) for a £750 punt.
|
|
I bought shares in the Royal Mail more than the £750.Not to make a quick profit but for the longer term.I won't receive the full amount I wanted,looks like the big institutions and the sharks will receive the full amount.
|
|
"Sharks"? Was there a way of cheating with the applications?
|
|
I suppose there always is with any sell off unless I'm naïve.
|
|
Edit: Link deleted.
Last edited by: Clk Sec on Fri 11 Oct 13 at 06:24
|
Well I will get 227 shares under current allocation..... £749.10 at £3.30
Grey trading started at 8 am today..
I just tried to log in to Hargreaves Lansdown site to check to check my account to find that the account is 'temporarily unavailable' ..... no doubt with people trying to sell.
Just a note to those that want to sell quickly , if the price rises by more than 10% on any day over the previous days price then trading will be suspended under current regulations so I would not be selling just yet.......
227 x 33 pence ( 10%) of start price = £74.91
Lets wait and see....
Last edited by: helicopter on Fri 11 Oct 13 at 08:32
|
|
£4.40 right now, good morning's work for the fat cats who would have got the big allocations. IO hope the Little Man also gets a piece of the action when full trading starts next week.
Last edited by: smokie on Fri 11 Oct 13 at 08:42
|
Well thats £250 profit less £17 or so for broker..... if I sell.
Close to 100 million shares traded in 23 minutes...
|
|
Still can't sign in to HL.
|
|
Had the same on Nat West stockbrokers site a few years back when I wanted to sell RBS which had gone up 33% on market open. Finally got in about 08:20 and only made 27% or thereabouts.
|
"Some 10 million shares were traded in the first 30 seconds when the market opened. Stockbroker Hargreaves Lansdown reported that its website was having "intermittent problems" due to the "unprecedented interest" in Royal Mail."
Robert Peston. BBC
|
The site I use for instant prices is www.moneyam.com/stockwatch/, need to sign up but for free you get instant prices, although requires refresh every 10 mins or so.
That is currently showing 42m sold and 71m bought. Which has always puzzled me, if someone has sold them then someone must have bought, and vice versa, so why don't the numbers match?
|
|
OK, really silly question.. so who now owns and runs RM? have things changed since before the sell off? and how soon will I be able to buy a cheaper 1st class stamp?
|
>> OK, really silly question.. so who now owns and runs RM? have things changed since
>> before the sell off? and how soon will I be able to buy a cheaper
>> 1st class stamp?
If the electricity sell-off is a guide, Royal Mail is now owned by either the Russian Mafia, the Governments of France and Germany and other more shadowy figures: as with energy, you may expect a doubling in the price of stamps and a halving of the service!
:-)
|
as with
>> energy, you may expect a doubling in the price of stamps and a halving of
>> the service!
>> :-)
>>
Maybe, but that's pretty much happened in the last 10 years already.
|
so why don't the numbers match?......
In the current frenzy people are gambling.....
I believe that an awful lot of people will be selling shares they do not own yet ......ie gambling in the hope that by the time they have to settle and transfer the shares the price will have changed to their advantage... a risky business ....
|
>> I believe that an awful lot of people will be selling shares they do not own yet ......ie gambling
A few years ago, Porsche was gambling like this on VW. At the time Porsche was making more money trading than making cars. The trouble was the gamble didn't pay off and VW had to step in and effectively buy Porsche. I think it was technically a merger.
|
Rude dog
To answer your question as to who owns RM it is still mainly the state and me (227 shares)
.....as to how soon will I be able to buy a cheaper 1st class stamp? Never....
..... you should have taken the opportunity to buy as many first class stamps as possible when the price was 46 p and advised as going up to 60p . I spent around £2000 on stamps at 46p each for work and we are still using them.
The letter part of RM is declining because nobody sends letters theses days with email and texts so the price of stamps will rise but the converse is that the parcel service is expanding massively because of home delivery to online shoppers....
|
>>I believe that an awful lot of people will be selling shares they do not own yet ..
Is that still possible? Certainly it was when I first started trading several decades ago.
I seem to remember that there were two settlement days each month and you could buy and sell between them without parting with a penny piece.
|
Hargreaves Lansdown site still down......not good for an on line broker......
There are going to be an awful lot of very disgruntled customers..........
tinyurl.com/lkqo6e9
|
>> disgruntled
Good word. Why does "gruntled" not exist? I want to be gruntled.
Last edited by: Alanović on Fri 11 Oct 13 at 11:01
|
I want to be gruntled......
I'll go and fetch the pigs.....
|
|
Surely, if disgruntled means one is peed off, then to be gruntled is to be happy?
|
>> I'll go and fetch the pigs.....
>>
Please don't change your handle to "Brick Top".
|
>> Hargreaves Lansdown site still down......not good for an on line broker......
>>
>> There are going to be an awful lot of very disgruntled customers..........
Dont know why, you cant sell them yet anyway.
Edit, not till next Tuesday. Lets see what price you get then.
Last edited by: Zero on Fri 11 Oct 13 at 12:07
|
Dont know why, you cant sell them yet anyway......
Oh do keep up at the back Z - you obviously have not heard of the grey market .....what do you think everyone has being doing this morning in the hundreds of millions of trades that have swamped the brokers but buying and selling RM shares.....
I did get into HL site and could have dealt at £ 2.33 making a £233 profit ie over 30% but I have decided to hold for the moment.......
|
>>I believe that an awful lot of people will be selling shares they do not own yet ..
>>Is that still possible?
>>Oh do keep up at the back Z - you obviously have not heard of the grey market .....what do you think everyone has being doing this morning in the hundreds of millions of trades that have swamped the brokers but buying and selling RM shares.....
Presumable, they have been selling their allocated shares. Shares that they own.
|
>>
>>
>> I spent around £2000 on stamps at 46p each for work and we are still
>> using them.
Inheritance for the kids? Or keep a sub post office single handed? :-)
|
>>I believe that an awful lot of people will be selling shares they do not own yet ..
>>Is that still possible?
Having given the matter some thought, I think it most unlikely.
|
>> >>I believe that an awful lot of people will be selling shares they do not
>> own yet ..
>> >>Is that still possible?
>>
>> Having given the matter some thought, I think it most unlikely.
This implies you can - at least if you bought through HL
Service message: The Royal Mail Share Offer has created unprecedented interest, we are extremely busy, and some clients are experiencing a delay when they try to log into their account. We are working hard to solve this and appreciate your patience whilst this is resolved. Please accept our apologies and if your query is urgent call our helpdesk. If you would like to buy or sell Royal Mail shares please call our dealing line on 0117 980 9802 and we will place your deal at online rates.
Current(ish) price 433p.
|
|
So if I was now a share holder can I have my post especially marked to receive priority treatment?...on second thoughts maybe that might have the reverse effect! ;)
|
>> >>I believe that an awful lot of people will be selling shares they do not
>> own yet ..
>> >>Is that still possible?
>>
>> Having given the matter some thought, I think it most unlikely.
I expect that you are talking about trades that have not settled. Settlement is 3 days after the trade, but you can still sell in that time.
Of course, you can also short sell, but you often can't do that immediately, unless it is a naked short (i.e. where you haven't borrowed the stock).
It is amusing me today to see suggestions that they could have sold all the shares at 456p (or even close to that) simply because that is the high of the day.
If a million people would buy a loaf of bread at £1, half a million at £1.20 and a thousand at £2...is there anybody who really thinks that you could therefore convince the original million to buy it at £2 also?
Last edited by: SteelSpark on Fri 11 Oct 13 at 12:48
|
>>I expect that you are talking about trades that have not settled.
Yes, indeed. Thanks.
|
|
Sold at 438p as I have a nervous disposition.
|
|
Sold mine today, 441p, gone UP since then, still got hers as I have a bet hedging disposition.
|
|
I forgot to apply for any as I have a memory like a goldfish disposition.
|
|
Keeping ours as we have a hoarding disposition.
|
|
Didn't apply for any as I have a boracic disposition.
|
|
this whole Royal Mail sell off business makes the great train robbery look like a nice jolly on the titfield thunderbolt
|
Sold today for a total of £1029.21 @£4.58662 per share...that includes commission of £11.95
Total time to deal 20 minutes max, profit made £280.11.
|
Very nice. Thanks for the update.
[gentle seethe mode = on]
|
I decided not to be greedy Crankcase and I have decided that I will give that quick profit to my nephew when he gets married next month.....
Opinion varies as to whether the shares are a hold or a sell but a profit is a profit.
|
>>
>> Opinion varies as to whether the shares are a hold or a sell
>>
Here's one suggested strategy:
Sell half.
If the price rises, you make a further profit.
If the price falls, buy some more.
|
Just sold hers at 460. Mine went Friday at 441.
If there's a buying opportunity I might buy back in, but if they go up further then a profit of £523.77 is a nice problem to have, and it is going to my daughter and her husband elect as a wedding present on Saturday.
|
>> going to my daughter and her husband elect as a wedding present on Saturday.
Is that a G&S reference?
I ask because everything I've done this weekend has been mirrored in the various threads here today for some reason, and it's getting a bit unsettling now. I saw The Mikado on Saturday afternoon.
I'm hoping Manatee is going to say he has no idea what I'm talking about.
|
>> I'm hoping Manatee is going to say he has no idea what I'm talking about.
It does sound a bit Mikado-ish doesn't it, but it must have been sub-conscious.
I think my daughter is more Yum Yum than Katisha, and I'm not sure the affable Jock she's marrying would be quite as affable if I welcomed him into the family as Nanki-Poo in my speech.
|
>> Here's one suggested strategy:
>>
>> Sell half.
>> If the price rises, you make a further profit.
>> If the price falls, buy some more.
>>
Another would be to set a stop-loss, and follow the shares as they head north.
;-)
|
|
Shares are a funny business.I sold BP shares 11 years ago at over seven pounds they still haven't recoverd to that level.I've got K.C Shares which I should have sold at the top price and didn't.If you have some spare cash and can afford to lose some go ahead.If not leave well alone.
|
|
I sold and bought GSK. I then found my broker had done the same
|
|
Ditto the KC shares Dutchie :(
|
|
See RM are now trading at £4.84 so that is another £50 or so I could have had for hanging on an extra day.......
|
The 'trade' are making serious money now...there are more buys than sells, the reverse of the last couple of days.
The premise for that must be the expected yield...but at that price the projection must be below 5%. That's around the yield on BP, Imperial Tobacco, BAT, GSK etc. that seem to me to have more reliable earnings.
I'm not relying on that. The financials seem to support it but RM will need a lot of continuing investment, it isn't operating in a stable environment, it still has the Universal Service Obligation, and if it loses its grip on service or industrial relations then the ball will be over the wall. On the plus side it still has a good market position, and there's talk of hidden value in property.
Not that anybody should take my opinion as advice. I bought BP at £6 just before the Macondo blowup.
|
>> Shares are a funny business.I sold BP shares 11 years ago at over seven pounds
>> they still haven't recoverd to that level.I've got K.C Shares which I should have sold
>> at the top price and didn't.If you have some spare cash and can afford to
>> lose some go ahead.If not leave well alone.
Remember the govts sale of part of BP around time of the market fall in 1987? The offer price was more than the price shares were trading on the LSE. Ditto with one tranche of BT.
Aviva has been a big faller as well. Holding worth north of £10k a few years ago now around £4k.
|
Share price finished even higher at close of business today.
I applied online just a short time before going into hospital for surgery, and could have sworn I applied through the RM Nominee Share Service. My mind must have been on other things because I received the share certificate in the post today! Drat. There goes selling cheaply via the automated telephone service.
|
I got the £750 worth of shares.No share certificate yet,rang the broker it's on his way.
Success with your surgery legacylad.
|
Anyone still holding?
I sold my mothers @£5.12 and hoping the sell price will reach £5.57. After online dealing costs in my Isa that should net me £500....almost sufficient to fuel an A8 from Edinburgh to Southampton.
|
Are you still holding Legacylad ?
Price still rising........
Current sell price is £5.755.....
|
I'm certainly holding until they've entered the Footsie in December; tracker funds must be desperate for them.
To be honest, it's such a small holding and it's in my SIPP so I won't see the cash for years yet that I might just keep hold of them. It doesn't cost anything to keep holding them, it does cost money to sell them and to buy something different.
|
>> I'm certainly holding until they've entered the Footsie in December;
Same here.
|
I agree with you Mapmaker regarding the long term and the Footsie entry which will more or less oblige tracker funds to buy into them......
....so much so that I have just bought another 400 as a longer term punt .... I will see what happens in December
|
I agree with you Mapmaker regarding the long term and the Footsie entry which will more or less oblige tracker funds to buy into them......
....so much so that I have just bought another 400 as a longer term punt .... I will see what happens in December
|
Still holding here. £11.95 to deal online but no big deal as only 227 like the majority of us. Mind you, the net profit would pay my car insurance for over three years.
Wish I had bought more when trading started...hindsight yet again.
|
>>Wish I had bought more when trading started...hindsight yet again.
Yeah, right.
I sold BT when they were at £13 and bought them back at £9.
I've got a load of Lloyds shares.
I don't do the share market any more.
|
Nothing personal bathtub, but operate a 'stop loss' and unless bad news leads to a catastrophic overnight drop you can't go too far wrong.
Unfortunately I have had a few 'sudden drops' and then my 'stop loss' system was to no avail. Just glad it hasn't happened more often.
|
That has about the same logic as playing red on roulette and always doubling your bet when you lose so when you win you always make back your previous losses.
Until you get black 10 times in a row and lose the lot.
Don't gamble that which you can't afford to lose, and you won't go far wrong ;-)
|
>>but operate a 'stop loss' and unless bad news leads to a catastrophic overnight drop you can't go too far wrong.
I remember buying my first shares when I was about twenty. It was the only time I have ever bought on the advice of a stockbroker and I was pleased that his selection (a mix of about half a dozen or so, from a rock-solid blue chip company to a considerably more risky mining company) had increased in value by around 50% in a relatively short period of time.
However, in my inexperience, I didn’t give a thought to incorporating any sort of stop-loss system, instead watching the shares drift lower, hoping they would recover, and eventually selling them for less than they had cost me.
Never again. Since then I keep an eye firmly on my stop-loss. It certainly doesn’t come with a 100% guarantee of success, but it offers a reasonable safety net in many instances and has served me well.
How else could I afford to run my modest 1.8 hatch?
|
Anybody still holding their original allocation of these shares?
I see that they have just hit the £6 mark.......
I sold my original allocation at a profit as above .
I then bought another 400 shares @ £5.72 so they are still rising.... is it worthwhile buying more - what does the team think?
|
I'm still holding my small allocation.
Pre launch I had a chat whilst out walking with a friend, and told him I was thinking of buying more at the opening price, whatever it was...£4.40? Unbeknown to me he sold £22k of equity from his S & S Isa and bought RM. So far as I know he is still holding. Wish I had his nerve, and funds!
|
|
also kept mine, and was quite encouraged to retain when I noted, earlier in Jan, Sky's Business editor forecasting that German post giant Deutche Post would make a bid for UK Royal Mail by end of 2014.
|
|
There is certainly something going on .... they are now up 11 p on the day to £6.08 ......maybe a bid is coming in.....
|
|
Cazenove put a 700p target on it yesterday. We'll see...
|
|
Its a pity the present Govt didn't think it was very valuable to the country.........
|
>>Still got mine
Same here.
|
Royal Mail sell off - helicopter
