Woodford Concerns

Thrugelmir

atush wrote: »

Mores the point- is anyone concerned that those who forced woodford to close down are profitting from buying the unlisted assets at a huge discount?

Only time will tell if there's profit to be made. Valuation of unlisted company shares is a very different world to that of listed companies.

talexuser

Trustnet reports that Woodford Income Focus made the biggest one day return of 6.57% of the entire ~4000 Investment Association universe on the results of the election!

What an irony that arch Brexiteer Woodford has been waiting for the bounce all this time, but was dumped just before it happened.

Voyager2002

Patient Capital is no more: I logged on to my platform and saw a name I did not recognise (Schroder Public Private). RIP.

dividendhero

Current Private Eye magazine is interesting.

A number of fund managers have been bribing, sorry contributing to the Tories - they're pay off will be less regulation after the Woodford debacle...what could possibly go wrong :wall:

Malthusian

Voyager2002 wrote: »

Patient Capital is no more: I logged on to my platform and saw a name I did not recognise (Schroder Public Private). RIP.

Is the fund manager Private Public?

dividendhero wrote: »

Current Private Eye magazine is interesting.

A number of fund managers have been bribing, sorry contributing to the Tories - they're pay off will be less regulation after the Woodford debacle...what could possibly go wrong :wall:

As there were regulations against what Woodford was doing which the FCA simply didn't bother to enforce (namely the 10% unlisted equities restriction for open-ended funds), the answer to your question is "everything that was already going wrong before".

IanManc

dividendhero wrote: »

Current Private Eye magazine is interesting.

A number of fund managers have been bribing, sorry contributing to the Tories - they're pay off will be less regulation after the Woodford debacle...what could possibly go wrong :wall:

Why are donations to the Tories bribes, when the huge Trade Union donations the Labour Party are not? :think:

talexuser

IanManc wrote: »

Why are donations to the Tories bribes, when the huge Trade Union donations the Labour Party are not? :think:

Who said they aren't the equivalent bribes? They lied. The parties are there to implement the policies their paymasters want.

dividendhero

IanManc wrote: »

Why are donations to the Tories bribes, when the huge Trade Union donations the Labour Party are not? :think:

Trade Unions would say that they're representing the interests of their membership, but yes you're entirely correct - they're both bribes...

Rollinghome

dividendhero wrote: »

they're both bribes...

Are they?

A "bribe" tends to be defined as an illegal payment and I doubt that is so in either case. I'd expect both to say that they give money in order to enable and support the party they favour.

Giving isn't isn't the same a bribing. Whether it's illegal or improper depends on the motivation and circumstances, ie what is expected in return. So you may safely give money to your golf club or school fund - provided your motives are pure. Or to your preferred political party.

dividendhero

Rollinghome wrote: »

Are they?

A "bribe" tends to be defined as an illegal payment and I doubt that is so in either case. I'd expect both to say that they give money in order to enable and support the party they favour.

Me thinks you're being a tad naive there

There's an old saying that "he who pays the piper chooses the tune". It's interesting to note that political donations from normal FTSE 100 type companies have dried up....these days many donations are being made by hedge funds, often located in dodgy tax havens. I don't believe for one moment they're doing it purely out of altruism.

There's also the small factoid that some entities, such as Lakshmi Mittal have been bribing, sorry donating to both main parties :money: