More companies could go bust if they fail to plug the gap in their pension funds.

Asheron

That is the warning from a firm of leading pensions experts, which comes just over a week after the UK arm of magazine Reader's Digest went into administration under a large pension burden.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8539465.stm

vivatifosi

Interesting article Ash. For sure there is quite a heavy burden on companies that operate Final Salary Pension schemes. Not only do they have to reduce the deficit, they have to pay a higher PPF levy.

However I would like to correct one point in the article which I feel the BBC should have balanced better. It has people talking about how their firms have gone bust and how they don't know how to fund their retirement. This is not something they should have to worry about given that the PPF funds up to 90% of their pension if the company goes down - that's what it is there for. If you compare that with the volatility in money purchase schemes that's still much safer. There is info on this at:
www.pensionprotectionfund.org.uk/.../Purple_Book_2009_chapter11.pdf

wymondham

.... also, more companies with fish tanks in their reception go bust than ones that don't. don't know why?

Mr.Brown_4

wymondham wrote: »

.... also, more companies with fish tanks in their reception go bust than ones that don't. don't know why?

Ah my area at last, it's been a long time coming.

It depends on the type of fish. A sea tank is more complex to set up and maintain, and the initial stock cost is higher too. A cold water tank also has drawbacks in term of maintenance, so that cheap looking goldfish can cost a lot more than you might think. The ideal tank would be a tropical setup but again with pitfalls for the amateur. "Guppies", you might think, but they breed and are fairly messy. "Neons perhaps" you query, but they are frankly rather downmarket and overrated. "How about a plecostamus" is a question I often hear, but they will vanish under any cover available and you will never see them again.

No, in my opinion, a fifty inch tank with a forty nine inch catfish in it is a way to make a statement about the company. Admittedly the statement is "we are heartless b4stards", but for an aggressive company in a dog eat dog world that may be the right statement to make.

What we try to replicate is an Amazon river environment, which we achieve within a standard tank of warm water, some gravel and a couple of plants. It has been scientifically proven that once a fish swims more than six inches it forgets where it was, so a twenty inch tank is sufficient for all but the largest species.

If you need to know any more my site www.plaiceforfish.com will be up soon. I have staked quite a lot of my own money on getting this venture afloat as it were. Sponsored by TetraFin "chemical products for condemmed creatures".

wageslave

Mr.Brown wrote: »

Ah my area at last, it's been a long time coming.

It depends on the type of fish. A sea tank is more complex to set up and maintain, and the initial stock cost is higher too. A cold water tank also has drawbacks in term of maintenance, so that cheap looking goldfish can cost a lot more than you might think. The ideal tank would be a tropical setup but again with pitfalls for the amateur. "Guppies", you might think, but they breed and are fairly messy. "Neons perhaps" you query, but they are frankly rather downmarket and overrated. "How about a plecostamus" is a question I often hear, but they will vanish under any cover available and you will never see them again.

No, in my opinion, a fifty inch tank with a forty nine inch catfish in it is a way to make a statement about the company. Admittedly the statement is "we are heartless b4stards", but for an aggressive company in a dog eat dog world that may be the right statement to make.

What we try to replicate is an Amazon river environment, which we achieve within a standard tank of warm water, some gravel and a couple of plants. It has been scientifically proven that once a fish swims more than six inches it forgets where it was, so a twenty inch tank is sufficient for all but the largest species.

If you need to know any more my site www.plaiceforfish.com will be up soon. I have staked quite a lot of my own money on getting this venture afloat as it were. Sponsored by TetraFin "chemical products for condemmed creatures".

I know all about guppies, they are cute and black and spend their whole life kissing the side of the tank.

I am led to believe they actually know the secret of life and have their very own spaceship secreted away in the peat bogs.

Personally, I think this is a lie.

1984ReturnsForReal_2

Company Pension Fund = Free Company Overdraft

wageslave

1984ReturnsForReal wrote: »

Company Pension Fund = Free Company Overdraft

I have a company pension. Why don't I feel that way?

1984ReturnsForReal_2

wageslave wrote: »

I have a company pension. Why don't I feel that way?

No idea..

It's the same as NI & PAYE..

The more deductions the more money the company has to play with at any particular time..

wageslave

1984ReturnsForReal wrote: »

No idea..

It's the same as NI & PAYE..

The more deductions the more money the company has to play with at any particular time..

And yet I still feel poor........

All I can see is a fair chunk of my salary coming off every month and, no longer, any guarantee of return.

StevieJ

vivatifosi wrote: »

Interesting article Ash. For sure there is quite a heavy burden on companies that operate Final Salary Pension schemes. Not only do they have to reduce the deficit, they have to pay a higher PPF levy.

However I would like to correct one point in the article which I feel the BBC should have balanced better. It has people talking about how their firms have gone bust and how they don't know how to fund their retirement. This is not something they should have to worry about given that the PPF funds up to 90% of their pension if the company goes down - that's what it is there for. If you compare that with the volatility in money purchase schemes that's still much safer. There is info on this at:
www.pensionprotectionfund.org.uk/.../Purple_Book_2009_chapter11.pdf

I was going to make the same point, trouble is after watching that video from that journalist posted the other week I don't believe any of these articles any more what did he say 90% unchecked vested interest :eek:

vivatifosi

StevieJ wrote: »

I was going to make the same point, trouble is after watching that video from that journalist posted the other week I don't believe any of these articles any more what did he say 90% unchecked vested interest :eek:

I'm a pension fund trustee and though the PPF can be a bit of a sledgehammer to crack a mildly under-performing nut I do think its a step in the right direction. My uncle was a Mirror pensioner and that scumbag Maxwell stole it from him. Rules nowadays are much tighter. However given that this is the internet and I may or may not be who I say I am and I definitely have VI in this area, whether or not you choose to believe me is a different matter! Given that you're thinking along the same lines I'm hoping you'll give me the benefit of the doubt.