Woodford Concerns

Filo25

Johnnyboy11 wrote: »

Does anyone think HL's shares are worth a punt, they are down 9% since yesterday's open?

I never trusted them in the first place, and I do have some active funds.

Drp8713

Brian65 wrote: »

After glancing at WPCT ongoing charge of 0.17% thought Woodfords charges were very cheap https://www.hl.co.uk/shares/shares-search-results/w/woodford-patient-capital-trust-ord-gbp0.01
What am I missing?

I think charges were based on performance of the trust, and since its lost a third of its value since inception there hasnt been any.

AnotherJoe

Malthusian wrote: »

But it wouldn't protect the OP against the scenario he is worrying about - namely the markets seizing up as they did in the credit crisis, even for supposedly liquid assets such as bonds - because his Vanguard and L&G fund would be invested in largely the same things and would both be affected.

But it matters little as in reality, a) the odds of the funds shuttering completely for an extended length of time are extremely low, b) if the funds did shutter, you almost certainly wouldn't want to cash out anyway, as you would be cashing in a massive loss. Unless you were extremely dim, or you had a gambling debt to the mob that had to be paid that day to avoid being fitted with a concrete overcoat.

Recall the post-Brexit-referendum commercial property crisis when investors acted like cats miaowing at the door during a rainstorm. When Aberdeen, for one, opened the door (with a hefty penalty), investors decided they didn't actually want to go out anyway and cancelled their withdrawal requests.

I thought the scenario he was worried about was something dodgy at Vanguard? As I said, having two funds near identical funds wont protect against a market crash. But if you want that you shouldn't be 80% equities.
In fact, a better protection, even if he didnt "diversify" , would be to open a second SIPP. More likely than vanguard going "pop" would be something remiss at a SIPP provider* meaning unable to access the investments until it was sorted.



*for example, major hack or IT failure, or fraud on a massive scale - massive because of the number of people it would involve..

Brian65

Johnnyboy11 wrote: »

Does anyone think HL's shares are worth a punt, they are down 9% since yesterday's open?

Certainly, because some people are buying them.
But equally some think not, because they are selling

thelawnet

masonic wrote: »

up between HL and the FCA - as was being discussed in the preceding discussion.

It was necessary to explain this point to others, however.
o.

No, what I meant was that your method of calculating was unnecessary, given that the % holding in Woodford is known, and it is not necessary to posit numbers of units or anything like that, as they don't affect the calculations.

Btw as I perceive it the problem for sellers now is that the settlement will NOT be done at the price published , but rather at the next pricing point, by which time they could have potentially marked things down and there would be nothing you could do about it.

Not a big issue in that the MM funds are expensive anyway, so it's no bad thing to sell. But the hoped for saving might not arrive.

gadgetmind

arnoldy wrote: »

In which case I would sell out now of HL fund of funds

Shame there isn't a fund of funds of funds to avoid you having to make these decisions. After all, if active management is good, and another layer on top even better, why not just keep adding layers?

https://images6.moneysavingexpert.com/images/forum_smilies/biggrin.gif

gadgetmind

Lokolo wrote: »

Haven't seen you around in a long time! Hope you are well.

Why thanks!

Life got complicated with redundancy and then starting a new venture. I also put all pensions into drawdown with a 50:50 bond equity split in Vanguard passives, so haven't really been doing much other then 1-2 reviews and rebalances a year.

fun4everyone

Mark Dampier (head of HL research) apparently sold £6m worth of shares last week. I have not checked the validity of this claim I just read about it but what a scam. I mean insider trading allegations never come to anything, ever but if it's true thats a ****ing scam.

EDIT : He did indeed. ****ing joke.

https://www.hl.co.uk/shares/shares-search-results/h/hargreaves-lansdown-plc-ordinary-0.4p/director-deals

talexuser

That story is more important than Woodford's. He just failed in his mission of adding value. HL profited and continued to promote the wealth 50 while all the time selling their own shares because saw the writing on the wall.

EdGasketTheSecond

Johnnyboy11 wrote: »

Does anyone think HL's shares are worth a punt, they are down 9% since yesterday's open?

PE is still 43! eek. I usually buy shares with PE's around 10 or less. JUP looks a lot better value imho