Royal Mail Shares

buglawton

blinko wrote: »

Although in saying that this assume's that management are not dysfunctional and are working in the long term best interests of the shareholders

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

sabretoothtigger

The shareholders own the boardroom, they can all be gone on their say so. What seems quite bullish is a few interests are trying to build up a controlling percentage of the firm which might get a seat on the board. Which suggests long term holders like this share or think it'll be bought by others

bigfellathanks

mcscoty1973 wrote: »

Mine and others were there the day after they received them so with any luck you have them now.

Unfortunately not! Hopefully tomorrow :think:

halwise

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/investing/shares/10413655/Royal-Mail-unwanted-share-certificates-caused-by-software-error.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

IronWolf

blinko wrote: »

You don't sell an asset because it exists on the balance sheet ! and certainly not an appreciating asset that will be worth more in 5 years time than it is today!

Although in saying that this assume's that management are not dysfunctional and are working in the long term best interests of the shareholders

If it isn't an operating asset, then it should be sold and the proceeds returned to shareholders. Management of companies shouldn't think they can invest shareholders money better outside the operating business than they can themselves.

blinko

IronWolf wrote: »

If it isn't an operating asset, then it should be sold and the proceeds returned to shareholders. Management of companies shouldn't think they can invest shareholders money better outside the operating business than they can themselves.

Is that what you would do as a manager? or is this what you would like to happen?

I'd love to hear your thought process behind that statement

IronWolf

blinko wrote: »

Is that what you would do as a manager? or is this what you would like to happen?

I'd love to hear your thought process behind that statement

As a shareholder, that is what I think should happen. Far too many CEOs engage in empire building rather than returning earnings to shareholders. They will waste money on expensive acquisitions, or sit on unnecessary assets to justify a higher pay-packet. Only rarely am I happy for a company to invest my money for me outside of the business itself.

blinko

IronWolf wrote: »

As a shareholder, that is what I think should happen. Far too many CEOs engage in empire building rather than returning earnings to shareholders. They will waste money on expensive acquisitions, or sit on unnecessary assets to justify a higher pay-packet. Only rarely am I happy for a company to invest my money for me outside of the business itself.

Buddy it really isn't as simple as that....

IronWolf

blinko wrote: »

Buddy it really isn't as simple as that....

And why isn't it?

I see it frequently, both here and in the US. In the US there is more activism by hedge funds to wage proxy battles and force returns of capital to shareholders.

Be_Happy

BBC news is saying strike planned for Monday has been called off as progress has been made in talks.