Leverage, BTL and Shares

Thrugelmir

Generali wrote: »

Do you mean always in the 250, never in the FTSE 100 either?

Always. Since the index was formed.

Here's a starter clue. You've named one of the Companies in your earlier posts on this topic already.

What I found interesting is that it shows how much does change over the course of a business \ technological cycle. When you look back at the famous names that once formed the index.

Mr_Mumble

This FTSE-250 quiz question has me stumped - if we're including investment companies I'd say Witan and Mercantile are probables. The F&C investment trust has been a FTSE-100 firm so that can't be one of the three. The manager of F&C IT was particularly precedent about the timing of his trust's move between the FTSE-100 & 250.

F&C Trust re-entry to FTSE 100 could signal market upturn
12 Mar 2009

Foreign & Colonial Investment Trust fund manager Jeremy Tigue says the portfolio's re-entry to the FTSE 100 could be an indicator of a coming rebound in the market.
...
Tigue says the appearance of F&C in the FTSE 100 has in the past signalled markets are about to rise.

He says: "We were promoted to the FTSE 100 in 2003 for similar reasons after a long bear market, which bottomed in March of that year. The market subsequently moved upwards sharply, so history would suggest our inclusion is a bullish signal for markets."

blueboy43

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Only 3 companies remain that were listed from when the FTSE250 was first formed .

Sunday question. Who are they?

Fiendishly difficult but unless it has squeezed into the FTSE 100 in the last 25 years, Foreign & Colonial Inv Trust could be one of them.

Booker
Babcock
Greene King
Yule Catto
DS Smith

any of those ?


scratch F & C having read Mr Mumble post above.

blueboy43

Generali wrote: »

Railtrack was still in the FTSE100 when it failed.

.

Pretty sure it had dropped out of the 100 a few months before it was placed in administration.

Shareholders did get £2.60 ish per share back.

Rainmaker_uk

Can I phone a friend? :money:

I think we need a clue...

vivatifosi

I thought F&C too, so there goes that one.

However a question for Thrug, are these companies that have been in the index since 1992 when it started or in 1984, when it was nominally backdated to? Or am I missing something?

sabretoothtigger

Companies have a cheaper cost of debt then indivuials so taking it on this way could be considered more efficient so long as that company matches your aims

Just noticed Randgold as mentioned, massive amounts of cash. This is the biggest ft100 faller since year start. Its based in a country falling into civil war, all risk is relative I guess so instead of risk of loss to debt they risk loss of majority of assets to war

, Bradford and Bingley,

Never were that big, ft250 company. Not sure of a ft100 company to go bankrupt overnight. Mostly failures are well signalled in some way.

Rand I guess could or should have been sold before the election if one were that cautious.
For widows and orphans funds, BB should have been sold when NR was on the news that summer, it had 75% of its highest share value till dec so people had a chance