ChalkiI am sure I have eaten you in an Indian restaurantvery tastybit of a chilli twizzler

Master.

Why do you concern yourself with defending yourself by attacking others whose only motive is to wind you up? Many on this thread are ignorant, they couldn't make money from the markets no matter how hard they tried and their only reason for being here is to annoy you. You should get back to basics, squelch them if necessary or just simply ignore their ramblings. Concentrate on what you do best which is technical analysis and disreard their spite. You're being drawn into their games when there really is no need.

At the end of the day this the LLoyds thread and all the posts should be about that. If the board jokers want to insult then let them do so. They only embarrass themselves.

Lloyds Banking Group's plans for a multi-billion-pound rights issue and asset sales are unlikely to get off the ground, warned investors and analysts.
The bank's scheme to avoid the government's toxic debt insurance plan by tapping investors for 15billion and selling off divisions is 'highly risky', insisted one leading shareholder.
He believes the attempt to negotiate a private sector solution to Lloyd's capital shortage is being driven in part by Labour's desire to claim the state-controlled lender is on the road to recovery.

Ambitious plans: The bank hopes to tap investors for 15bn to avoid Labour's toxic debt insurance scheme
'It is a toxic cocktail of politics and investment bankers chasing commissions,' the investor said. 'This would destroy shareholder value.'
Analysts agreed the plan looks far-fetched.
'It is difficult to make the maths stack up,' said one analyst. 'I am sceptical that there is a near-term solution on asset disposals that could generate a material gain.'
Lloyds is in talks with the Financial Services Authority over a proposal to raise around 25billion from a combination of issuing shares, buying back debt and selling assets.
It has to strengthen its capital base if it wants to circumvent the Treasury's costly and humiliating Asset Protection Scheme. But many investors are deeply reluctant to plough yet more money into the bank, because a rights issue would have to be at a painful discount to the firm's share price (down 1.35p to 94.31p yesterday).

Meanwhile a mooted sale of the bank's Scottish Widows division to raise cash is believed to be a non-starter, because it would not generate enough money to improve Lloyds' capital ratios.
Recent deals have priced life and pensions firms at less than their book value.
Analyst Jonathan Pierce of Credit Suisse said: 'It would be highly unfortunate, not to mention disruptive, if Lloyds launched its (presumably several-pronged) plan only to find it failed.'
Lloyds chief executive Eric Daniels currently has three options on his plate: Sticking with the existing plan of taking out Treasury insurance on 260billion of assets; substantially reducing his use of the APS; or dodging it entirely by raising around 25billion of capital.
Most experts say the second of these is the most likely outcome.
Talks are still under way between Lloyds, the FSA and the Treasury, which controls 43 per cent of the bank. A deal could take weeks to conclude.
A spokesman for Lloyds said: 'As we have said before, there are a number of options available and we continue to review them.'

dealerdear

re - Many on this thread are ignorant, they couldn't make money from the markets no matter how hard they tried

How right you are, but do not worry about the wind up they are trying, because at the end, I enjoy giving them a lesson of how to trade, how to do HTML and on top jokes, I made by accident and I thought good enough for some posters to comment about, very dry and in a put down way.

Be aware that most of my share selection are short term, but on most cases are cheap enough for them to be at bottom looking for UPTREND or already on this uptrend.

As you said it is easy to critisace, though I know they have no reason, specialy about my selection, but no change of them saying one share to go UP... cos theuy are affraid to embarrass themselves.

thanks for enjoying my " technical analysis " and saying so

tabasco
like yourself typed wrong hence chakli instead of chalk one .
ended up with this poster name ,is there a way to change the posting thread name .
no comments on your diet .eat who you may but shit you will !!!
have you eaten in balti triangle in birmingham alot of curry places

chakli

re - i guess people keep checking this thread to see what he picks next .

Maybe some do, but too affraid to admit it, nevermind, I have penty places that they ask for those selection, and I feel ambarras myself to post them because is not the right thread.

I know that I make money from them, so I would like other investors to be able to do well also.

like in many places there are detractors, most likely they have no money to invest and plenty of time to spare ( unemployed ) to talk nonesence, and being disruptive is their way to do so.

you will soon find out who is one or the other, specially cos they will talk negative all the time or not at all about LLOY.

I do not tolerate a talk down of my work that I spend time on reaching that conclusion and on most cases put money down as an investment, and on doing so I will use any dirty tactic to denegrate their integraty if they have any.

Glad you are on my side and reading my posting

deardealer , if you knew sod all about TA then at present LLOY certainly aint a buy that's why he is posting news stories (FA) as the TA says sell.

As for too scared to post my thoughts mr tosser try IDH , WCC , SWG , ISG , AVN , HLO , JDG ... I hold and have done for a while in most except WCC which I bought back into earlier this week.

As a general rule I use a 20% stop loss but may lower this to 10-15% when the investment hits my original target price of at least a 25% gain.


Now how about you coming clean mr tosser ?

yes, and i've posted on many threads this year showing that i've been picking huge winners.....long term winners!

do you think dealer and master are siamese twins?

Good morning all>

Chakliyour post 1021 is not very niceI simply noticed Dil had Mis-spelled your name to a tasty Indian dish and I had a GiraffeBTWI have eaten at the BelfryI would imagine that to be fairly close to the balti triangle in Birminghamother than that I cant help you
I will ask you to post your opinion on the merits of lloy being a strong buythe Master has declared this all the way up to 1-11...I will leave you to work out the hit taken on todays priceI value your opinion equal to his and others on these threadsbut take note of only a fewhis timings are questionable to say the leastand as said by another poster the percentage rises on many tips wouldn't even cover the spreadand with no game plan publishedhe can manipulate to suit
Unfortunately he believes himself to be Mr. B from Omahawhen in fact he is nearer Mr. Beanthose that are following blindly are helping him not themselves imo

        MORNING TEA


It applies on many of YOU, today's Friday morning humour

re- marni
re - do you think dealer and master are siamese twins?

Maybe the fathers know each other from the twilight zone

But I know a COW when I see one

The Goverment has said many times, they have no interest on taking over full control of the banks, and yet those financial journalist that have nothing to do but spread rumours and innuendos like there is no tomorrow, I suspect nothing to do like some on this thread...........

Lloyds and RBS still face nationalisation risk says Neil Woodford
By Daniel Grote | 07:32:30 | 09 October 2009

The threat of full nationalisation for RBS and Lloyds is not yet over, according to Neil Woodford, who has warned that the UK banking sector is still broken.

Woodford believes there is a 25 to 30 per cent chance the two banks could be brought under full state control in a bid to speed up their repair.

The difference between full nationalisation and where we are now is not that great. Its actually a decision about politics rather than economics, he said.

Nationalisation could provide a quicker recovery in certain circumstances. It may well be that ultimately politicians decide the political cost of not nationalising the banks is too high.

At what stage does the economy say, well hang on a minute, weve put all this money in and yet were still not getting any lending. Wheres the upside for the taxpayer?

Maybe a quicker resolution is full nationalisation, explicit good bank and bad bank, and then you at least have the possibility of being able to sell back to the market a cleaned up bank which is then able to lend to an economy that clearly is in need of credit. What is then retained on the nations balance sheet is the bad bank that is pretty much there anyway.

Woodford's, whose avoidance of banks helped insulate his investors from the worst of the credit crunch last year but has seen them miss much of the rally in 2009, argued that the UK was still in the midst of one hell of a banking crisis.

He pointed to the banking sector's need for gigantic amounts of further capital in order to resume lending.

Its only when you understand the scale of their balance sheets and the nature therefore of what losses might be embedded on those balance sheets that you can then quantify what I believe is their requirement for further capital, he said.

The reason that banks arent lending is of course because they are capital constrained. They know that they have large embedded losses actual losses and potential losses the majority of which they cannot afford to recognise.

This means that banks are failing to foreclose on businesses because they do not have the capital to sustain the losses they would be forced to recognize, and there is not a secondary market for the assets they would have to take on.

There is a widespread attempt to sustain businesses that in any other environment would be allowed to close, he said.

Its like what happened in Japan for so many years the culture of zombieism.

Speaking before reports that Lloyds was considering a 15 billion rights issue, which would be the largest ever seen in the UK, he said that banks would not be able to rely on the markets to raise the amounts needed to repair their balance sheets.

They may raise some money from the market but they wont be able to raise enough to make good their balance sheets, he said.

He said the UK was half way through the process of bank recapitalisation. After repairing balance sheets and building up capital to deal with the losses already embedded on balance sheets, banks would need further capital to deal with the tighter regulation that will emerge.

MasterI have been known to suckbut purely in a heterosexual kinda way

do not bite at it then?

You suppose to know the meaning not double meaning that you are trying to give

this is for you then...

I HATE POSERS !!!: They Suck !!!

Ah I see everybody has been very busy here whilst I took a break!

Christ, tobacco, lil and mates you're aren't half easy to wind up.

Just push your buttons and off you go.

Chill out lil all this stress ain't good for you mate.

The PPI highly positive for the economy to recover ...........


September PPI highest since April

LONDON (Reuters) - Factory gate inflation unexpectedly turned positive for the first time in five months, with almost all sectors contributing to the rise, official data showed on Friday.

The Office for National Statistics said non seasonally adjusted output prices rose 0.5 percent on the month in September, taking the annual rate of inflation to 0.4 percent.

That was both the highest reading since April and followed a -0.3 percent rate in August.

Analysts had predicted factory gate inflation would stay negative at a rate of 0.1 percent and said price pressures could start rising again soon.

"You could see inflation start to pick up again in the early part of next year," said George Buckley, chief UK economist at Deutsche Bank.

While most sectors had a positive impact on output prices over the month, the ONS said the biggest effect came from petroleum product prices, which were driven up by a rise in duty at the start of September.

Annual input price inflation was also the least negative since April, falling by 0.5 percent on the month and by 6.5 percent on the year.

Separately, the ONS said Britain's trade gap with the rest of the world narrowed slightly to 6.240 billion pounds in August from 6.431 billion pounds in July. That was the smallest trade gap since June 2006, but was not significantly lower than the deficits in recent months.

If I was anymore laid back deardealer I would fall off my chair.

Regulators say banks face duller future - Fri 09 Oct, 2009 11:05

BASEL, Switzerland (Reuters) - Banks will be duller in future as they creak under heavier capital requirements but risks should be clearer to investors and supervisors, global regulators and central bankers said.

The International Organisation of Securities Commissions is meeting to review steps to make the financial system safer by applying lessons from the worst crisis in 70 years.

Monitoring system-wide risks and heavy bank capital and liquidity requirements are core lessons but there are still tough talks ahead to forge a consensus on details of new rules.

"As a consequence of stronger liquidity and capital requirements banks of the future may seem more boring, with lower return on equity but less risky and frankly, probably socially much more useful," Philipp Hildebrand, designated chairman of the Swiss National Bank, told the IOSCO meeting.

The Swiss have led in toughening up capital requirements on its two biggest banks, Credit Suisse and UBS, requiring them to have Tier 1 capital ratios of 16 percent, double the level of globally-agreed rules set by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision.

The Basel II rules are being toughened up with draft revisions due in December. The actual capital and liquidity figures will be set by the end of 2010 and take effect by the end of 2012 or when economic recovery is assured.

Banks say if capital and liquidity requirements become too heavy too soon, lending to aid recovery will be harder.

"The layering effect of all this could be quite significant which is why there will be the mother of all impact assessments next year," a regulatory source said.

The Basel revisions will include a new leverage ratio to cap how much a bank can extend itself, a new definition of capital to improve its quality, and a new liquidity ratio.

There is debate over which assets to include in a global leverage ratio -- set at 5 percent in the United States -- with some countries wanting to exclude on balance sheet assets like cash and government securities.

There is a concern that excluding cash and government bonds would send a "perverse" message, encouraging banks to cut their holdings to a minimum.

"But there is consensus emerging to include off balance sheet items but there is also a need for simplicity in a ratio," the source said. Such a leverage would be similar to Canada's.

"I think it is a big step forward that the Basel Committee is improving the quality of its ratios. Most importantly, it will be introducing a new unweighted leverage ratio, a backstop ratio of 4 percent, which is much more closely aligned with the regular accountancy rules," Hans Hoogervorst, chairman of the Dutch markets regulator AFM told the IOSCO conference.

"At least this ratio will make the overall leveraging of a bank continuously visible to the market and the regulators," Hoogervorst said.

Under Basel II, half of the 8 percent minimum overall capital requirements must be Tier 1 or higher quality capital.

Part of Tier 1 must be retained earnings or common equity and the new rules will say this should be the predominant form but no exact figure is expected.

A view is also emerging that government capital injections such as coupons should not be subject to the new tighter capital quality rules as in some cases it would not qualify.

Regulators hope that by the time the new rules take effect, most banks will have paid back government capital and substituted it with better quality capital.

The Basel Committee will also propose a simple liquidity ratio of highly liquid assets to liabilities so bans can withstand sudden shocks for a few weeks at least.

The new liquidity framework is set to be substantial and separate from Basel II, in effect a new global Liquidity I regime, as one official dubbed it.

It is expected to be similar to a liquidity regime adopted this week by Britain which requires banks to build minimum liquidity buffers of only cash or government bonds.

So far, there is no timing on when the new liquidity regime will be introduced.

The Basel Committee has already adopted rules to increase capital requirements on trading books and although figures have yet to be fixed, it will force banks with trading desks to set aside two to three times the amount of capital.

Some regulators privately hope this magnitude of increase will force banks to reconsider whether to continue trading risky products that turned toxic in the credit crunch.

And I have just fallen off my chair