stockmarkets -are we nearing the bottom or is there further to go ??

Glen_Clark

Scarpacci wrote: »

This is certainly a time you would rather have Unilever stock than own a bank or mining company.

That time was a few years ago, not so sure about now because its in the share price.
I like Levers - its a great company to work for and their Port Sunlight Museum is well worth a visit - William Hesketh Lever collected paintings of beautiful women and children, which gave him copyright to them so he could use them as adverts to suggest their good looks were down to using his soap :rotfl:It worked and he became very rich.
Thats the business model - milking the brand name to sell stuff at a higher price. The risk with that is people might find cheaper supermarket own brands do the job just as well.

Thrugelmir

Glen_Clark wrote: »

I was hoping you were going to tell me that because you said 'Deutsche bank. could cripple Germany'

Could being the operative word. Simply due to the sheer scale of the operation. Balance sheet is three times the size of the entire German economy to put matters into perspective if the worst did happen. Nor forget that Germany is bound by the rules of the Eurozone etc so cannot act unilaterally as the UK did.

Glen_Clark

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Could being the operative word. Simply due to the sheer scale of the operation. Balance sheet is three times the size of the entire German economy to put matters into perspective if the worst did happen.

Do you German taxpayers would bail them out?
Judging by the rocketing yields on their bonds, the market doesn't think so.

A_Flock_Of_Sheep

Glen_Clark wrote: »

Just a very simple question
Why didn't you tell him when you bought them?
Anybody could say they bought them before they had risen?

If I can locate the other thread where dearest Bowly was slagging me and trawl through it I will find where I mention Glencore.

A_Flock_Of_Sheep

And here it is at number 59
9th Jan 2016 - about a month ago see.

Read it and weep boys, read it and weep x

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/69879669#Comment_69879669

grey_gym_sock

Scarpacci wrote: »

A stock like Unilever with a 5% free cash flow yield + around 3-4% organic growth, which can typically translate into around 5-6% profit growth, would set you up for long term annual returns of around 10-11%.

not quite. you don't get the free cash flow plus the profit growth, because part of that profit growth is achieved by reinvesting some of the free cash flow.

you could argue that you get the free cash plus the organic growth, i.e. 8-9% (on your figures).

or you could say that you get the profit growth (assuming that this is the same as earnings growth, i.e. there is no dilution) plus the dividend yield (viz. 3%), which also makes 8-9%.

8-9% is still pretty good, in a low inflation environment, if that's how it turns out. no idea if it will (i just looked up the dividend yield, and otherwise used your figures).

A_Flock_Of_Sheep

And here we have it in full graphical beauty

http://www.hl.co.uk/shares/shares-search-results/g/glencore-plc-ord-usd0.01

Just select the 1M view and check out the foresight - not hindsight

Thrugelmir

Glen_Clark wrote: »

Do you German taxpayers would bail them out?
Judging by the rocketing yields on their bonds, the market doesn't think so.

Think you've confused matters. A bail out doesn't mean investors in the bank aren't impacted in some way. Think back to Northern Rock it was very simply nationalised. Treasury provided enough liquidity to keep the operation solvent. Now it's being traded out and the treasury repaid.

As for DB's bonds. Interest is paid from the same reserves as equity dividends. Therefore interest coupons could simply be missed. To accord with Basle III at a predetermined level bonds now have to converted in equity by default. In order to boost the capital reserves of a bank. Holding the bonds is akin to musical chairs where is the music going to stop?

grey_gym_sock

Glen_Clark wrote: »

Do you German taxpayers would bail them out?
Judging by the rocketing yields on their bonds, the market doesn't think so.

i think bank bondholders are supposed to be burnt first this time (and that would apply to UK banks, too). but that wouldn't be enough to make up for really big losses; it's what happens after that.

there are also powers to split banks into "good" and "bad" banks, effectively forcing the losses onto whoever ends up as creditors of the "bad" bank. which is potentially very useful; but how can you do the split? ideally, perhaps the "good" bank would be a socially useful "utility" bank, and the "bad" bank would be a "casino" bank; but is it even possible to make that kind of split retrospectively, in a crisis?

peter1000

have been watching bp shares for ages but not had the bottle to buy any!!they seem to go down over afew days then go back up by the end of the week,i guess people with big money are just playing a game,buying at between 330, 345 and selling again when it climbs by 20p if your buying large volumes must be making a good few quid.

I see some money guys are saying the oil price could stay low for ten years....