Saga share offer

[Deleted User]

Hi,

all youse folks who made money in the Royal Mail Share Offer, (I didn't because I tried to get too many), will you be going for the Saga offer?

Now that you know the process, should be straightforward this time.

2010

In a word NO.
The offer won`t be grossly underpriced as was RMG.

ChesterDog

When the government sells a holding, its priority is making sure that the offer is fully subscribed. In spite of future ramifications, it will then be judged (initially at least) a success. They want it to be seen to be popular and for it to 'get away', as they say. It would be a political disaster if shares went unsold. Even worse than being seen to have sold too cheaply.So the pricing of the initial offer will be on the low side.

But when a private/publicly-listed company makes shares available, its directors will generally be looking to raise as much money as possible. So there's far less chance of bagging a bargain and seeing the subsequent price rise quickly.

Having said that, the famed 'efficiency' of the markets sometimes gets temporarily set aside: if enough armchair punters don't realise they won't make a quick killing, then they might pile in and make a quick killing after all. But probably not.

reeac

[Deleted User] wrote:

Hi,

all youse folks who made money in the Royal Mail Share Offer, (I didn't because I tried to get too many), will you be going for the Saga offer?

Now that you know the process, should be straightforward this time.

I've seen the suggestion that Saga are hoping to cash in on the publicity surrounding the Royal Mail sale via punters expecting to make a quick profit in which case it won't be priced low. Another factor is that Saga is in debt to the tune of £1.5bn. which doesn't sound good. Initially I was interested but, having expressed an interest [I have Saga house insurance] I'm waiting for further details before deciding.

le_loup

As a customer gets some "free" shares, this may make it more attractive to some.

jimjames

I just hope this offer doesn't attract those that say they can't afford to lose any money because they expect the price to jump.

If you're an experienced investor then having it as part of portfolio is fine. If it's your only shareholding then you are taking a big risk.

Rhymsta

SAGA = Suckers And Grandparents Apply

I agree with above comments, not one for a quick killing.

2010

Trouble makers in Eastbourne

---

Saga Louts

alanq

I have some savings under the Saga brand (actually Birmingham Midshires / Lloyds Banking Group). I am not tempted to buy.

Saga IPO discussed in today's Money Box about 14mins in
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b042cq89

It was said that something like 70% of the profits come from insurance. Why should anyone even over-50's opt for insurance via Saga? Just because a product is restricted to an age group does not mean that it is the best value. There was an instance on Money Box a year ago of an elderly person who had been paying an ever increasing amount to Saga for home insurance each year. She could have been getting insurance at a fraction of the price from any number of non-targeted insurers and Saga itself would not have been charging anything like as much had she been a new customer. This is a business to maximise profits from the elderly not an organisation to further the interests of the elderly.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21717085

reeac

alanq wrote: »

I have some savings under the Saga brand (actually Birmingham Midshires / Lloyds Banking Group). I am not tempted to buy.

Saga IPO discussed in today's Money Box about 14mins in
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b042cq89

It was said that something like 70% of the profits come from insurance. Why should anyone even over-50's opt for insurance via Saga? Just because a product is restricted to an age group does not mean that it is the best value. There was an instance on Money Box a year ago of an elderly person who had been paying an ever increasing amount to Saga for home insurance each year. She could have been getting insurance at a fraction of the price from any number of non-targeted insurers and Saga itself would not have been charging anything like as much had she been a new customer. This is a business to maximise profits from the elderly not an organisation to further the interests of the elderly.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21717085

Saga, like lots of other insurers MAY be a good buy. I used the Meerkat to get some quotes and Saga came out almost cheapest so I had them for a year and then they offered me a very good renewal premium so I renewed. When seeking insurance you have to take it a year at a time - no loyalty bonuses for long term customers.

melbury

I have had my car insurance with Saga for the past two years because their price was really good.

Still undecided about the shares though - didn't know they were in debt to the tune of £1.5bn, that is certainly not very encouraging.