Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

MaxK,

If they go on strike, sack 'em. They're probably all Bozzers anyway.

it doesn't much matter whether or not RM had to be sold; the decision, right or wrong, was taken to do so
for myself, I can't say I was much enamoured with the present (late?) set up, though it's debatable whether or not it will improve under new management

as for the price, i wouldn't have any idea where to start on pricing anything like that - or much else for that matter - and i dare say you are in the same boat ...... therefore to say with infallible hindsight that the price should have been say £4.00 or a little more is pretty disingenuous

that said, i would agree that £3.30 looks strangely low (with hindsight) for something that was studied at length by so-called experts, and that £3.75 would probably have been the right sort of level to ensure success

Perhaps the problem with Royal Mail over the years is that it hasn't had any competition and I always think that good businesses thrive on competition. Added to that now there is so much business conducted over the internet by email etc.. A large part of the mail I get each day is junk mail - some of it addressed to " the householder". Demand for the service is going down and prices are going up.

Cyners,

You don't get it, do you? You price something according to what you think you'll be able to sell it for because somebody else will be happy to buy it at that price.

Barclays and BoA (or whoever it was) thought they'd be able to sell it at between £3.00 and £3.30 a share. They did sell at that price. They were right. It's got fuck all to do with being cheap or expensive. It's about matching perceived buyers with sellers in the market.

They seem to have balls it up.

I did some work on one of the privatisation IPOs in the early 80s. It is an extremely difficult problem. You have to value the assets, the turnover, estimated profit, goodwill, the business potential etc. When you have a figure that involved a huge team of people, you then have to come up with a range of possible prices. The one I worked on was done mainly by a very large firm of accountants using a lot of computing power for modelling various scenarios. The final price was a success as far as uptake, but all the left wing loonies moaned and moaned about it.

So the Nu owners took into account the pension provisions?

The new owners are just the shareholders. The pension is complicated. It would take a few pages to explain it. Essentially, the government has absorbed the current scheme, which is closed to new members. After privatisation a new scheme will be started. The government is then responsible for the pensions of the members of the old system.

Strong demand for the controversial privatisation of Royal Mail prompted the government to explore whether it could extract a higher price for the postal operator, but key institutional investors signalled they would drop out if they had to pay more than 330p a share

the cynical might suggest it was succumbing to blackmail, though Hilary would claim just as fairly that the price was what the market would bear

Where has the self-appointed bulletin board guru - gf - gone, just when we need his sage words of wisdom here. Font of all knowledge - have you been devoured by a shark in your fish pond or are you just trying to chat-up the local slapper? :-)

eating or being eaten by worms at the bottom of the river perhaps
better chance of that than hearing words of wisdom from that quarter

Hays,

You seem by your postings to be "Jack of all trades, master of none".

Lucky you parents were born before you.

------

Royal Mail.

With 4 daughters and a wife to apply for shares, we got more shares than I expected.

It was a complete balls up and if your estate agent sold your house for 37.9% less than the market valued it for you, you may wish to lynch that estate agent,


That is one good reason for taking the Hairy one's opinions with a pinch of salt.


================


Again it is a failure of competence by an inept government and will count against them at the next GE.

Especially when Cameron and the Hairy one try to present the sell off as a "success".

===========

Whether the price goes up or down the public will see it as a failure.

===========

DB4

Don't describe yourself as a slapper, and keep off the streets. You never know there must be somebody who may fancy you.

ah, so it's as I thought.

The "post" as it was, was not a viable business, it's debt was overwhelming it. (it was losing money, altho making it in a primary sense)

So now we have the "Nu post", which is privately run for whatever profit the nu owners can make, and the taxpayer picks up the tab for the bits that don't make a profit + plus any lingering debt.

Pensions: the gov hasn't absorbed anything, the taxpayers have been landed with the bill again, and let the juicy bits go to the shareholders.


It's not that complicated Haystack, you just have to follow the money.

Cynic, don't forget that he told us we were potentially heading for a market crash on 3rd October. I'm glad you immediately stamped on that prediction! Dow is currently up another 110 points tonight after the 300+ points yesterday.

The government has the assets of the pension scheme to cover part of the cost of the scheme. In fact the RM made a profit recently which is what made it possible to privatise it. There is no reason for the government to run businesses. It is better for the private sector to run them and take the risks. The government can then tax the profit from the companies. Those taxes are the ONLY source of wealth and income for the country.

gf is probably walking up and down his nearest high street wearing a doom board.

Fred The Red...... Oh dear what a shame, never mind! :O)

chris

The trouble with a 3 day game is that your opponent can cheat by having the time to use a Chess software program like Fritz to make his move

ald - never thought of that, really? If you get a chance look up my user name and pick one of the guys I have played and challenge them. I would never have won a single game against them if they had cheated.

"The government has the assets of the pension scheme to cover part of the cost of the scheme."


What does it take?