HL u-turn on investment trusts

kidmugsy

aldershot wrote: »

What would be the disadvantage of moving to ITs and what are the boards recommendations for the cheapest pseudo trackers (UK, US, JP, EU and PR)?

http://www.aberdeenuktracker.co.uk

I view the discount as giving a small rebate on the charges. Frinstance, a 5% discount and a 3% yield is equivalent to knocking 0.15% of the TOC.

gadgetmind

jimjames wrote: »

I wonder how much more of the reaction is a shock to them.

Given the reaction to their £24pa tracker fee (which wasn't that drastic an increase TBH) they should have known what to expect.

Perhaps they decided to throw in something ridiculous to make the other changes look less drastic?

jimjames

westy22 wrote: »

"Therefore, we decided that where we received commission on investment trusts we would rebate that commission in full to clients" Ian Gorham

I'd be interested to know which ITs have been paying them any commission.

I find it almost unbelievable that HL set a charging policy for hundreds (?) of investment trusts based on the single ONE that gives commission to them. Why would anyone base their pricing on one example out of hundreds?

jimjames

westy22 wrote: »

Anyone like to start a 'book' on how long it will be before HL reconsider their 0.45% on funds now that they seem to stand out as the most expensive platform and that 0.35% looks to be nearer the norm?

I've just been reading the latest Investment Times that has popped through the post. Interesting statement on page 12. "After the initial communications we will make an objective assessment of all feedback on the changes as HL has always valued client opinions"

Pretty much leaves the door open for other changes and the IT charges change must have been very late decision as it isn't mentioned and the original plan is listed again.

naedanger

"Clients who hold investment trusts through Hargreaves Lansdown will therefore be better off than previously proposed." Ian Gorham

So now we will be "better off", which is funny because when the proposal was made I don't remember being told we would be "worse off".

PippiShortsock

aldershot wrote: »

Comparing the Vanguard ETF to the HSBC EUR index fund, the ETF underperforms consistently. Is there an obvious reason for this?

If you're comparing VEUR with HSBC European Index Income Units Fund, the former states it tracks the FTSE Developed Europe index and the latter tracks the FTSE Developed Europe excluding UK index. So they are different indexes.

jamesd

jimjames wrote: »

I find it almost unbelievable that HL set a charging policy for hundreds (?) of investment trusts based on the single ONE that gives commission to them. Why would anyone base their pricing on one example out of hundreds?

No chance that they did. It's just a good news item to mention to those who use ITs and who have been made unhappy.

It'd be interesting to know how the total pot sizes of those using ITs compare with the median, which is under £25k.

hyposmurf

H&L share price seems to have dropped 10%,since the news today.

http://www.livecharts.co.uk/share_prices/share_price/symbol-HL.

Porcupine

I was amused to receive this 'research update' today:

In order to keep the fund a manageable size, Aberdeen have sought to restrict inflows into the fund. We are
therefore unable to include the fund on the Wealth 150, our favourite funds across the major sectors. However, we
still hold the team in high regard and we feel existing investors who wish to maintain exposure to the region
should continue to hold the fund. Investors looking to invest new money in an emerging markets fund could refer
to the Wealth 150 for our favourite funds in this sector.

Evidently their 'favourite' funds aren't the ones they actually like best... :rotfl:

black_taxi_2

this was the first PR headline daily mail

Hargreaves Lansdown investors to pay new 0.45% annual fee but cut-price funds mean they will save £8million in charges

shameful

as my gran said ALWAYS CHECK THE SMALLPRINT