|
Post by Fletchsmile on Jul 28, 2019 19:24:59 GMT 7
|
|
|
Post by Fletchsmile on Jul 29, 2019 17:52:29 GMT 7
Had to smile, knowing that he needed to sell while the trust is at a discount of over 30%. So one of the pitfalls of needing money from an IT when the time is wrong... but unlike the average investor it's of his own doing ================================================================ Woodford sells £1m Patient Capital shares as trust’s board talks to rival fund managersNeil Woodford has sold 60% of his holding in Woodford Patient Capital Trust to pay for a tax bill as board of investment trust revealed discussions with other investment groups about managing the listed fund. citywire.co.uk/wealth-manager/news/woodford-sells-1m-patient-capital-shares-as-trust-s-board-talks-to-rival-fund-managers/a1254084
|
|
|
Post by rgs2001uk on Jul 29, 2019 20:53:46 GMT 7
^^^^ of more concern, how was this able to come about in the first place, overpaid regulators asleep at the wheel yet gain?
|
|
AyG
Crazy Mango Extraordinaire
Posts: 5,871
Likes: 4,555
|
Post by AyG on Jul 30, 2019 7:32:58 GMT 7
^^^^ of more concern, how was this able to come about in the first place, overpaid regulators asleep at the wheel yet gain? Not sure what it's got to do with the regulators. Funds can invest in illiquid assets. Nothing wrong with that. Stuff like private equity, physical property. It's the investor's responsibility to understand what the fund is invested in and to understand that under certain circumstances the fund may have to be gated. The only area I think the regulators might like to look at is the promotion of these potentially illiquid investments to the poorly informed who are unlikely to do their own due diligence. Oh, and possibly the quality of the mandatory fund documentation that one must pretend to have read when placing a purchase order.
|
|
chiangmai
Crazy Mango Extraordinaire
Posts: 6,256
Likes: 5,266
|
Post by chiangmai on Jul 30, 2019 10:12:26 GMT 7
In all fairness to companies such as HL: they have a very difficult job of trying to stay on the right side of the line that separates fund research and fund promotion, which is why I think you have to look at what is intended rather than what the advice could mean. I receive research material from HL all the time and everything is always heavily caveated that it is meant to be research and is not advisory, but of course you can't stop people from interpreting things differently from what was intended.
As for the FCA requirement to read the notes before a trade is made: the FCA is not intended to be a broker or provide a brokers perspective or knowledge, they are trying to protect the consumer by providing a pregnant pause before the consumer spends money. I suppose they could always do more but at what point do they cease providing a cautionary pause and start to provide a brokers level of service. You can give people information and pointers but if they don't read it or can't understand it, that's hardly the fault of the FCA, ergo, making the information more detailed would serve no purpose.
|
|
AyG
Crazy Mango Extraordinaire
Posts: 5,871
Likes: 4,555
|
Post by AyG on Jul 30, 2019 10:28:58 GMT 7
As for the FCA requirement to read the notes before a trade is made: the FCA is not intended to be a broker or provide a brokers perspective or knowledge, they are trying to protect the consumer by providing a pregnant pause before the consumer spends money. I suppose they could always do more but at what point do they cease providing a cautionary pause and start to provide a brokers level of service. You can give people information and pointers but if they don't read it or can't understand it, that's hardly the fault of the FCA, ergo, making the information more detailed would serve no purpose. The documentation is not prepared by the FCA, but by the individual fund manager to the FCA specification. Unfortunately, it is poorly considered: warnings are clear enough of prominent enough, and it is extremely tedious (so not read). A single A4 sheet including graphics depicting key risks, and highlighting high charges really would do the job far better.
|
|
chiangmai
Crazy Mango Extraordinaire
Posts: 6,256
Likes: 5,266
|
Post by chiangmai on Jul 30, 2019 13:08:17 GMT 7
As for the FCA requirement to read the notes before a trade is made: the FCA is not intended to be a broker or provide a brokers perspective or knowledge, they are trying to protect the consumer by providing a pregnant pause before the consumer spends money. I suppose they could always do more but at what point do they cease providing a cautionary pause and start to provide a brokers level of service. You can give people information and pointers but if they don't read it or can't understand it, that's hardly the fault of the FCA, ergo, making the information more detailed would serve no purpose. The documentation is not prepared by the FCA, but by the individual fund manager to the FCA specification. Unfortunately, it is poorly considered: warnings are clear enough of prominent enough, and it is extremely tedious (so not read). A single A4 sheet including graphics depicting key risks, and highlighting high charges really would do the job far better. Of course the FCA doesn't produce the documentation, only the guidelines for it!!! Without trying to be sarcastic or anything other than factual, this exchange between us is a perfect example of the problem is it not, one person gives something to another who miss interprets what was written and that will always be the case. And there will always be somebody who things something can be improved upon. For my part, most times I have been asked to read the FCA blurb before I could proceed I have checked the box but not read it. Why? Because what has been written has not added anything to the case, one way or another, and/or, I've not understood it, and/or, I've not seen the FCA derived cautions as being a necessary part of the process.
|
|
|
Post by rgs2001uk on Jul 31, 2019 19:35:41 GMT 7
The documentation is not prepared by the FCA, but by the individual fund manager to the FCA specification. Unfortunately, it is poorly considered: warnings are clear enough of prominent enough, and it is extremely tedious (so not read). A single A4 sheet including graphics depicting key risks, and highlighting high charges really would do the job far better. Of course the FCA doesn't produce the documentation, only the guidelines for it!!! Without trying to be sarcastic or anything other than factual, this exchange between us is a perfect example of the problem is it not, one person gives something to another who miss interprets what was written and that will always be the case. And there will always be somebody who things something can be improved upon. For my part, most times I have been asked to read the FCA blurb before I could proceed I have checked the box but not read it. Why? Because what has been written has not added anything to the case, one way or another, and/or, I've not understood it, and/or, I've not seen the FCA derived cautions as being a necessary part of the process. I asked my stockbroker if I could opt out of this KIID nonsense and reduce my fees, answer, no chance, required to do so. Do they really think I just pluck names out my ass and decide to invest in them, without first doing my due dilligence and knowing what i am investing in.
|
|
|
Post by rgs2001uk on Jul 31, 2019 20:07:01 GMT 7
^^^^ more cya, jobsworth shoite.
A recent e-mail I was sent from my stockbroker, who has now been taken over by Rathbones.
25 July 2019
Dear XXXXXX
Welcome to Rathbones
I would like to take this opportunity to formally welcome you to Rathbones now that the migration of assets and data has been completed successfully. In many ways it is sad to see the XXxxx name disappearing after all these years. Culturally though we very much believe our spirit and ethos will continue to thrive within Rathbones. We are looking forward to the future within a larger organisation with similar core values.
There are two specific matters to draw to your attention - the Rathbones Fund Number and the Rathbones Risk profile.
The Fund Number is a key detail which you will need for future reference, including if you wish to transfer funds via online banking to Rathbones. This is as follows:
XXXXXXX
XXXXXXX Esq
During the migration process we have mapped across your XXXXX risk profile and investment objective to the appropriate Rathbones equivalent. I thought it would be useful to explain what this will look like for your portfolio. At XXXXthe investment objective was Capital Bias and the risk profile was High. At Rathbones, this has been mapped across to an investment objective of Growth and a risk level of Risk Level 6. This is a process that has been carried out carefully to ensure a minimum of disruption. A summary of this risk level is provided below for ease of reference.
This risk level is applicable to a portfolio where the investor has a high risk tolerance. It aims to generate a return over time well in excess of inflation. We expect the value of the investments to fluctuate significantly which could more than reflect the volatility of equity markets. The portfolio will include a high exposure to shares. While there may be some modest exposure to asset classes that are considered to have lower risk characteristics, the focus will certainly be on equities and is therefore suitable for investors with a longer time horizon and the capacity to withstand capital loss.
If you do have any questions about this please do not hesitate to contact me. I should add that the brochure entitled
|
|
|
Post by rgs2001uk on Jul 31, 2019 20:09:42 GMT 7
I dare say those who post on here are sent similair shoite, but are they all speaking the same language, wtf is risk level 6?
|
|
chiangmai
Crazy Mango Extraordinaire
Posts: 6,256
Likes: 5,266
|
Post by chiangmai on Jul 31, 2019 20:58:08 GMT 7
I dare say those who post on here are sent similair shoite, but are they all speaking the same language, wtf is risk level 6? For someone like me, seeing that something is risk level 6 is actually useful, it helps me understand the relative risk levels of each of my funds - the range is 1-7 with 7 being highest risk.
|
|
|
Post by rgs2001uk on Jul 31, 2019 21:02:32 GMT 7
I dare say those who post on here are sent similair shoite, but are they all speaking the same language, wtf is risk level 6? For someone like me, seeing that something is risk level 6 is actually useful, it helps me understand the relative risk levels of each of my funds - the range is 1-7 with 7 being highest risk.No offence, but says who? Is your fund provider/advisor singing from the same hymn sheet as mine?
|
|
|
Post by rgs2001uk on Jul 31, 2019 21:05:26 GMT 7
^^^ ps, this is an assesment of the overall fund, not of each of the individual funds held within it.
|
|
|
Post by rgs2001uk on Jul 31, 2019 21:06:50 GMT 7
I dare say those who post on here are sent similair shoite, but are they all speaking the same language, wtf is risk level 6? For someone like me, seeing that something is risk level 6 is actually useful, it helps me understand the relative risk levels of each of my funds - the range is 1-7 with 7 being highest risk.Again, no offence, but do you have a link?
|
|
|
Post by rgs2001uk on Jul 31, 2019 21:30:04 GMT 7
^^^ in almost 30 years investing with Alliance Trust, I have never once be sent some sort of KYC,or CRS report, I wouldnt know what is my risk score for investing with Alliance Trust, they have never told me. Maybe those with more knowledge of the uk financial system can elaborate, that means you fletch, .
|
|