Leaving HL

Ryan_Futuristics

Nope - done it a dozen different ways and even with no trades it's top 3 or 4 for HL

Rollinghome

Ryan_Futuristics wrote: »

No, and in keeping with forum elder protocol I'll now berate you for this mistake constantly throughout the entire of this thread

You're very young and to some extent a bit of silliness is to be expected but you seem to have some serious growing up to do. From what I've seen, Mason has been incredibly tolerant and courteous towards your nonsense, far more so than I would ever have the patience for.

You seem to live in a fantasy world and instead of wasting your time on the internet you almost certainly benefit by getting yourself a job, any job, where you could experience reality and interact with people. Otherwise you're liable to end up unemployable.

Ryan_Futuristics

Anyway, it's just simple maths

On most platforms, trading costs are going to count for more than the platform fee ... And if I were actually holding 10 funds, I'd be doing a lot more trades with rebalancing

At the point HL's non-capped fee starts to get you, you'd probably be better investing direct with the fund provider ... Or if you're a no-trade, buy-and-hold, get with Royal London or Vanguard right now and just forget the fund platform

Ryan_Futuristics

So group think has declared Mason is right?

This place is a mong creche

Rollinghome

Ryan_Futuristics wrote: »

EDIT: to put it another way

Look at the numbers you pompous t***

Sorry I long ago stopped bothering to look at numbers and "facts" provided by you.

masonic

Ryan_Futuristics wrote: »

Nope - done it a dozen different ways and even with no trades it's top 3 or 4 for HL

I will refrain from posting any more images because I think it's getting tiresome for all concerned.

Now your most recent image is more reasonable, and hopefully you now understand that when you assign a monthly sum, the calculator automatically splits the value between the number of funds and/or shares each month (for giggles, stick 99 shares in with a monthly sum and see the charges rocket). So out of your £500, £50 would be invested into each fund. Fund dealing is free at HL, which is why it claws its way back up the table. If you must make a monthly contribution to every fund you hold every month, then this is reasonable, but I think most people do not do this (I certainly don't).

I can forgive any misunderstanding about how the calculator works, because it isn't clear unless you go back and do the sums yourself. However, I think this has been established quite clearly now.

Personally, I make one or two trades per month at the £1.50 rate and the occasional £10 trade, so my platform cost going forward will be ~£100 per year or £1000 over 10 years. Compare that with the £3000+ in your image and you can see why I get a very different result than you.

Ryan_Futuristics

Rollinghome wrote: »

Sorry I long ago stopped bothering to look at numbers and "facts" provided by you.

Very mature

Ryan_Futuristics

masonic wrote: »

I will refrain from posting any more images because I think it's getting tiresome for all concerned.

Now your most recent image is more reasonable, and hopefully you now understand that when you assign a monthly sum, the calculator automatically splits the value between the number of funds and/or shares each month (for giggles, stick 99 shares in with a monthly sum and see the charges rocket). So out of your £500, £50 would be invested into each fund. Fund dealing is free at HL, which is why it claws its way back up the table. If you must make a monthly contribution to every fund you hold every month, then this is reasonable, but I think most people do not do this (I certainly don't).

A can forgive any misunderstanding about how the calculator works, because it isn't clear unless you go back and do the sums yourself. However, I think this has been established quite clearly now.

Personally, I make one or two trades per month at the £1.50 rate and the occasional £10 trade, so my platform cost going forward will be ~£100 per year or £1000 over 10 years. Compare that with the £3000+ in your image and you can see why I get a very different result than you.

I didn't find that re: the maths you're finding

If that were true, HL should be WAY out in front making 100s of share trades ... while making none at all only drops it one place

Ryan_Futuristics

Rollinghome wrote: »

Sorry I long ago stopped bothering to look at numbers and "facts" provided by you.

Well I apologise for calling you a pompous t***

But if you're going to come in here stirring up drama and sniping from the sidelines, at least have the courtesy to look at the numbers and understand what we're discussing

masonic

Ryan_Futuristics wrote: »

If that were true, HL should be WAY out in front making 100s of share trades ... while making none at all only drops it one place

It won't because many of the other platforms have reduced rates for frequent traders. If you put in no funds, 99 shares and some monthly savings (with no additional trades), running it over 1 year, HL's platform fee comes out at 26.45%, which can only happen if the calculator is stupidly trying to do monthly savings into all 99 shares every month at £1.50 a pop.