Further Sale Of Shares

[WOTRED]

Have just seen an announcement saying that Steve Lansdown has sold more shares in Hargreaves Lansdown. The report says:

"Landsdown sold 13,560,843 shares in the firm at a price of 429p per share, equating to 2.86% stake worth £58.2 million. The transaction reduces his interest in the group to 20.1%."

Don't know what it means but is certainly of interest.

[112 Days]

What it does mean is that he'll have a capital gains bill of £16.3 million pounds. Although same fans will still say he's moved to 'be a tax dodger'.

He's probably just taking stock out ofthe company, solidifying his capital and dilutig his risk.

It'll probably fund the legal bill for the stadium!

[CliftonCliff]

Mmmmh. Very interesting...

[Martyn Hocking]

He's probably on the phone right now to Donny Rovers using a couple of those millions to sign up Sean O'Driscoll.

[FanaticRed]

He's probably on the phone right now to Donny Rovers using a couple of those millions to sign up Sean O'Driscoll.

[NickJ]

Could mean he thinks the HG share price will drop over the long term.

Given the publicity over charges in the industry, for example Panorama programme this week, there could be further political and economic pressure on such firms.

HG is a reputable firm in the market in terms of transparency of charges and performance, and seems to be well respected in the media, indeed the guy who acted as an independent expert on Panorama is a senior HG employee, however that might not stop the industry in general being adversely affected.

Still means he has 50 million quid burning a hole in his pocket, not a bad position to be in..

[redsontour]

Could mean he thinks the HG share price will drop over the long term.

Given the publicity over charges in the industry, for example Panorama programme this week, there could be further political and economic pressure on such firms.

HG is a reputable firm in the market in terms of transparency of charges and performance, and seems to be well respected in the media, indeed the guy who acted as an independent expert on Panorama is a senior HG employee, however that might not stop the industry in general being adversely affected.

Still means he has 50 million quid burning a hole in his pocket, not a bad position to be in..

I certainly dont think a poorly produced piece of tabloid television is likely to effect an organisation like HL, whether Tom McPhail appears on it or not...

But this isn't the place to debate either the why's and wherefor's of Panorama or indeed the merits of the Hargreaves "Mother Theresa" Lansdown..however much it would be fun..(especially as i know there are a couple of very good, and respected, financial journo's registered on this forum..)

[simon uk]

my colleague just suggested that he might be buying a new village green, you've got to laugh I suppose.

[Bishops Finger]

Sod buying the village green, why not just by the WHOLE of ashton vale and be done with it, move all those dog walkers out and build the sodding stadium.

[St. Aldhelms Red]

Could mean he thinks the HG share price will drop over the long term.

Given the publicity over charges in the industry, for example Panorama programme this week, there could be further political and economic pressure on such firms.

HG is a reputable firm in the market in terms of transparency of charges and performance, and seems to be well respected in the media, indeed the guy who acted as an independent expert on Panorama is a senior HG employee, however that might not stop the industry in general being adversely affected.

Still means he has 50 million quid burning a hole in his pocket, not a bad position to be in..

Almost worth as much as you now Nick!

[NickJ]

I certainly dont think a poorly produced piece of tabloid television is likely to effect an organisation like HL, whether Tom McPhail appears on it or not...

But this isn't the place to debate either the why's and wherefor's of Panorama or indeed the merits of the Hargreaves "Mother Theresa" Lansdown..however much it would be fun..(especially as i know there are a couple of very good, and respected, financial journo's registered on this forum..)

Sorry didnt realise this wasnt the place to debate the issue, I thought it was relevant to the point raised from the OP never mind perhaps you could let us all know what is allowed.

In the meantime I would disagree with the description of BBC Panorama as tabloid - not so tabloid indeed that a senior HG employee was happy to lend his expertise to the programme just as he does for other media such as for example Sunday Times - is this also tabloid?

Whether tabloid media are capable of affecting an industry, well on the contrary any business which relies on consumers who are influenced by what the media say, tabloid or not, is likely to be worried when its industry receives bad publicity.

If I were the sort of person likely to invest in pensions or other pooled investments run by financial intermediaries I would think twice having seen Panorama however I long ago concluded that I am just as capable of losing my money as spotty oiks sitting in large offices, but at least I wont be paying them for the privilige. As others come to the same conclusion and invest or save directly, IFA's, reputable or otherwise, might find their earnings squeezed.

Hence the possible thinking partially responsible for SL's sale.

I sincerely hope he enjoys the money and spends none of it on Bristol City.

[NickJ]

Almost worth as much as you now Nick!

I'm not living in Guernsey yet!

Hope youve recovered from Switzerland!

[The Red Planet]

Could mean he thinks the HG share price will drop over the long term.

Given the publicity over charges in the industry, for example Panorama programme this week, there could be further political and economic pressure on such firms.

HG is a reputable firm in the market in terms of transparency of charges and performance, and seems to be well respected in the media, indeed the guy who acted as an independent expert on Panorama is a senior HG employee, however that might not stop the industry in general being adversely affected.

Still means he has 50 million quid burning a hole in his pocket, not a bad position to be in..

Although Hargreaves Lansdown do offer pension plans, they are primarily a company who provide investment schemes with a massively lower rate of commission than those pension providers who featured on that Panorama programme this week.

In fact, that idea of lower commissions and therefore higher turnover was (I believe) the basic business plan when Steve Lansdown and Peter Hargreaves started their business in a Clifton bedroom 30+ years ago.

I don't think there is any connection between this programme and recent share sales by SL. Much more likely is that he has seen an opportunity to off load shares at a good time and if that tops up his piggy bank right now, I reckon that is good news for us because, as I have said on here many times, SL is no quitter from BCFC and further investment in our club is likely, if not certain.

[NickJ]

Although Hargreaves Lansdown do offer pension plans, they are primarily a company who provide investment schemes with a massively lower rate of commission than those pension providers who featured on that Panorama programme this week.

I understand that, you understand that, however the vast majority wouldnt be aware of the fact hence HG could easily be tarred with the same brush.

Of course the sale wasnt directly as a result of the Panorama programme, I merely used that as a recent example of the increased awareness of the charges taken from pensions and other forms of saving.

SL's decision to sell £58million of assets would not I imagine have been taken and acted upon since Monday evening, even if it were possible to dump that many shares onto the market that quickly!!

[InCider]

I understand that, you understand that, however the vast majority wouldnt be aware of the fact hence HG could easily be tarred with the same brush.

Of course the sale wasnt directly as a result of the Panorama programme, I merely used that as a recent example of the increased awareness of the charges taken from pensions and other forms of saving.

SL's decision to sell £58million of assets would not I imagine have been taken and acted upon since Monday evening, even if it were possible to dump that many shares onto the market that quickly!!

What is HG?

[redsontour]

Good god, why is everyone so bloody angry on these boards nowadays.

NickJ, I did not aim to criticise your post, I was pointing out that Panorama, and yes I will call it tabloid, was failing to look at the subject properly, turned into a cartoon and that it's effects on on a company whose revenue is derived primarily from a fund platform were very unlikely to result in a founding partner selling c>£50Million of stock. Rather it was much more likely to be that as he is no longer an executive director he was choosing to liquidate some of his holding so that perhaps such a large amount of his fortune was not invested in one company (but also in the hope he buys us Messi)

Efficient Portfolio planning is, after all, something that Mr Lansdown's extremely vocal business partner would I am sure encourage.

But if you do want a decent review of the program I would encourage you to take a look at the following blog commentating on the issues raised

http://nickxspencer.posterous.com/mis-taking-takings

Though, not sure he is a City fan per se..so may not be that relevant..

[NickJ]

Good god, why is everyone so bloody angry on these boards nowadays.

NickJ, I did not aim to criticise your post, I was pointing out that Panorama, and yes I will call it tabloid, was failing to look at the subject properly, turned into a cartoon and that it's effects on on a company whose revenue is derived primarily from a fund platform were very unlikely to result in a founding partner selling c>£50Million of stock. Rather it was much more likely to be that as he is no longer an executive director he was choosing to liquidate some of his holding so that perhaps such a large amount of his fortune was not invested in one company (but also in the hope he buys us Messi)

Efficient Portfolio planning is, after all, something that Mr Lansdown's extremely vocal business partner would I am sure encourage.

But if you do want a decent review of the program I would encourage you to take a look at the following blog commentating on the issues raised

http://nickxspencer....-taking-takings

Though, not sure he is a City fan per se..so may not be that relevant..

Not sure how you can gauge anger from my somewhat even answer I am in fact quite chilled, just disagree with your diktat that the issue should not be discussed here.

Anyway, how could a half hour programme look at it "properly" but what it did do in that time is raise awareness generally that the industry makes a lot of money for itself but in general not, overall, for its customers. And how could it, investment is a zero sum game, for every above average return there will be an equal below average one.

Yes, your review makes the reasonable point that it is the after cost return which is the most important consideration ie, high costs do not matter if returns are high enough to compensate. However, overall returns across the whole economy are what they are, therefore any charges taken out by the pensions and savings industry deplete the overall returns to investors. So it comes down to the fact that a service is being paid for, the question is, which I think Panorama quite rightly albeit alluded to, as opposed to asked directly: is the service provided worth the cost?

In my view, you dont have to be Einstein to work out that if you consider the enormous administration costs that have to be paid for, and the high salaries, and indeed the impressive profits of firms like Hargreaves Lansdown, all these things are being paid for out of the overall returns being made from the pensions and savings invested. Hence the gradual (tabloidesque you may say) reduction of the limo down to the smart car.

I'm not criticising that, its a legal business making money legitimately, just pointing out the increased awareness of costs that may mean the days of HL making the sort of profits it has are behind it, hence maybe the entirely sensible decision of SL to cash in, though no doubt there would have been other considerations. If he's sensible, one of those would have been a desire to spend as much of it while he still can!!

[eskay]

In the meantime I would disagree with the description of BBC Panorama as tabloid

Would have to disagree, Panorama verges on tabloidism at times. The one that springs to mind is the undercover nurse episode, the under cover nurse in that episode said a patient was left with a wet bed for an amount of time but she was filmed having a tea break whilst the woman was wet in bed!!

[phantom]

[CodeRed]

Not sure how you can gauge anger from my somewhat even answer I am in fact quite chilled, just disagree with your diktat that the issue should not be discussed here.

Anyway, how could a half hour programme look at it "properly" but what it did do in that time is raise awareness generally that the industry makes a lot of money for itself but in general not, overall, for its customers. And how could it, investment is a zero sum game, for every above average return there will be an equal below average one.

Yes, your review makes the reasonable point that it is the after cost return which is the most important consideration ie, high costs do not matter if returns are high enough to compensate. However, overall returns across the whole economy are what they are, therefore any charges taken out by the pensions and savings industry deplete the overall returns to investors. So it comes down to the fact that a service is being paid for, the question is, which I think Panorama quite rightly albeit alluded to, as opposed to asked directly: is the service provided worth the cost?

In my view, you dont have to be Einstein to work out that if you consider the enormous administration costs that have to be paid for, and the high salaries, and indeed the impressive profits of firms like Hargreaves Lansdown, all these things are being paid for out of the overall returns being made from the pensions and savings invested. Hence the gradual (tabloidesque you may say) reduction of the limo down to the smart car.

I'm not criticising that, its a legal business making money legitimately, just pointing out the increased awareness of costs that may mean the days of HL making the sort of profits it has are behind it, hence maybe the entirely sensible decision of SL to cash in, though no doubt there would have been other considerations. If he's sensible, one of those would have been a desire to spend as much of it while he still can!!

It certainly makes you think when SL & PH can basically make £500 Million each from advising and administering on behalf of investors -as IFA's - it's more profitable to tell someone else what to buy (invest) than actually invest yourself.

CR