HBOS shares

setmefree

He is also a Non Executive Director of the Home Retail Group

HOME RETAIL GROUP (LSE:HOME.L) Last Trade:223.75 pTrade Time:4:35PM Change:5.50 (2.40%)

Just not his day is it

setmefree

Share price today 249.75

muymalestado

setmefree wrote: »

Share price today 249.75

And bobbling about with no incipient rise detectable; but, why does no one mention the other reason to hold shares - dividend. HBOS has paid out well over a long period. I suspect their shares pay better than their accounts do. In general, long term holding pays rewards, what with splits, takeover bonuses, restructures, cash returns, what have you ...

earlgrey_3

kate705 wrote: »

Set me free,
Hi, I don't want to be rude or argue with you at all but I am wondering how much you are adding here to the discussion. Some of your posts seem to imply that you are really enjoying this situation. I don't know your own position and perhaps you have every reason to feel angry at the capitalist system that we have. It may not be helping on this thread however......

Kate, there are some full-time losers around who need to blame anyone they can for their not being able to keep up with the rest, be it the banks or whoever. For them, the whole world is unfair and I'm sure some have very sad stories to tell.

For them it's a viscious circle, they're bitter because they're losers, they're losers because they're eaten up with bitterness. If someone could persuade them to get a job instead of wasting their days on the net it might be a first step.

Dick_here

And many people (inc me) never actually bought their shares, they were given foc upon demutualisation...

tradetime

cargo wrote: »

Well I am going to buy my allocation.
I defiantly will not sell my shares at this price,why would one?
I have no need for the money tied up with them at the present time just like when it was high.
I guess I will sell them when I am older or out of nessacity.
Ps:
Just a layman's opinion.

Don't know much about "Rights Issues" tbh, but if I've got this right HBOS has announced one, and will sell x number of shares per y number held, to existing shareholders. For various reasons, you think you should take up the offer, fair enough, but ifthe market price is below the offering would it not make more sense to buy in the market, either the same number for less, or more for the same money amount? Or do the underwriters make up the shortfall? Sorry as I said, "rights offers" not one of my things, just curious.

setmefree

earlgrey wrote: »

Kate, there are some full-time losers around who need to blame anyone they can for their not being able to keep up with the rest, be it the banks or whoever. For them, the whole world is unfair and I'm sure some have very sad stories to tell.

For them it's a viscious circle, they're bitter because they're losers, they're losers because they're eaten up with bitterness. If someone could persuade them to get a job instead of wasting their days on the net it might be a first step.

Very nice wording earlgrey:rolleyes:

Now lets see
Poverty among pensioners rose for the first time since 1998 to 2.5 million, these people earlgrey,are the same people who fought wars,without these people millions would not be where they are today.

The number of children living in poverty rose by 100,000 in 2006-2007 to 2.9 million, this can also be linked to the amount of familes who have lost their properties for a number of different reasons. in turn forcing their children into a poverty status.

Then we have area's where business's fold,either coz they have been taxed to death or coz they move their operations abroad. perhaps earlgrey should take a look at how many BIG business's have closed and left the area a ghost town, These people are then given a minimum amount to live on and told to find a job elsewhere, nice in theory i suppose but the money only just covers their food, no chance of travelling.

Now the losers situation as stated by earlgrey
£80 billion had to be ploughed into the Banking Industry,and why coz they are losers.they haven't shown an improvement for it have they, Shareholders of N.R. saw their shares fall in stages, did they pull out no did they hell.

Northern Rock shareholders today threw down the gauntlet to the Government - declaring: "Pay us fair compensation or we will sue

Yeah why not take even more out of the public funds:rolleyes:

So earlgrey who really are the losers, certainly not the Banking Industry is it, they just live of the backs of the tax payer, so it must be the pensioners and the children in poverty, after all £80 billion certainly couldn't have helped them;).

So lets make it a fairer system is it. the Banking Industry have had a bend over the table boost at the tax payers expense, so hows about them admitting to the fact that their charges are unfair, and dropping their appeal..Mmm no they cant really coz then everyone would know they are LOSERS...
:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Old_Slaphead

Well setmefree you really seem to have this thing about the banking industry.

I might be a bit thick about this but surely no-one's forced to borrow money from banks so what has pensioner/child poverty got to do with it?

Also, what's this £80bn 'ploughed into the banking industry' ???

setmefree

An unprecedented £50 billion injection to bail out Britain’s ailing banking system could be doubled if it fails to stave off a collapse in the housing market.
Alistair Darling, the Chancellor, will tell MPs today that the Bank of England is to allow lenders to swap assets for government-backed bonds in an attempt to restore confidence and ease the effects of the credit crunch.
The initial offer is for £50 billion of bonds, but senior Treasury sources told The Times yesterday that further cash injections up to a total of £100 billion were possible.
However, they admit that there is no guarantee that the bailout will lead to banks offering cheaper mortgage deals.
Mr Darling is also braced for a dispute over whether the bonds should be counted as government debt.
British banks, uncertain which institution has lost what, have hoarded cash reserves to protect their own positions.
Mr Darling said that the latest move was intended to “ease” the market.
“We believe that this will be an essential step in trying to get the financial market stabilised. That in turn will help the mortgage market too,” the Chancellor said.
However, he gave warning that in return he expected that the banks would “begin now to disclose the extent of their losses and explain how they are going to rebuild their capital”.
Under the terms of today’s announcement, banks will be allowed to swap hard-to-trade mortgage-backed securities linked to their previous lending for specially issued Treasury bills.
Mr Darling is expected to press for mortgage lenders to ease lending conditions, especially for first-time buyers, when he meets them tomorrow.




Once again £50 billion of taxpayers money is being used to bail out the blood sucking banks.. why?

They got themselves into this mess with their dodgy dealings and back handed practices. If everyone in the city wasn't so obsessed with getting multi million pound bonuses year on year, their greed would not have lead to this crisis.

This so called crunch is the result of unregulated greed and dodgy dealings, which had a blind eye turned to it by an incompetent Chancellor (now Prime Minister, god help us). The bank have made countless billions in profit over the past 10 years, I'm sure they could weather one poor financial year, but the greedy pigs are squealing already.

Any other organisation would just have to lump the fact that they are just going to have a bad year.

Gordon Brown should have been regulating banking procedures as Chancellor so the buck no stops firmly at Number 10.

And I dont have any Debt

setmefree

Old_Slaphead wrote: »

I might be a bit thick about this but surely no-one's forced to borrow money from banks so what has pensioner/child poverty got to do with it?

Well that's simple, if they can afford to plough billions into the Banking Industry, why is the pensioners and xhildren in so much poverty;)