LLOYDS is going to FLY



Hi Again @J_Westlock, Well I am certainly warped by time myself !. And JC seems intent on taking us into his Tardis and transporting us back to the 1960s or is it the 1950s ?.

I don’t pay much (any ?) attention to the media myself. I guess I read the business pages of the telegraph in the pub sometimes. TBH though I don’t believe ANYTHING that I see on TV or in the paper without doing some checks of my own.

I downloaded the Labour manifesto over the weekend (I like horror stories !) and to me it read like nothing but a series of targeted raids on groups that they clearly regard as rich or privileged together with commitments to various groups designed to win votes (eg the WASPI women – 3 Million votes in the bag there at a cost of £??Bn).

And on nationalisation given my previous experience dealing with nationalised entities I don’t see that saving money or providing a better service or the ability to provide the funding to do the job, as I said in a previous post.

On the NHS, surely their biggest hobby horse, that’s a black hole that could swallow ALL of EVERYONEs money forever if we wanted a truly modern excellent service. Personally as I have said before here I think the only viable way to address this is for anyone who is not on benefits to pay something every time they use any NHS service. Totally free is not a realistic option IMV. Yes I know people pay for prescriptions (though many don’t) but that’s only scratching the surface of the problem.

But I am sure we aren’t going to agree on this. No problem, you are entitled to your own view.





That isn’t viable either. You are quite right that any health service in any country could swallow the whole of the country’s GDP. They don’t, because difficult decisions are made. I’d rather they were made on medical grounds rather than people’s ability to pay.

Plus, with your suggestion, the people with the most expensive and serious conditions would immediately end up on benefits and get it all free anyway. There is also the issue of prevention and higher costs down the road if you put people off visits.

I think we can and should have a modern and excellent service. It will have limits though and we all have to accept that. How do I know? I know everytime we see news of an American billionaire shuffling off their mortal coil despite the best treatment for their condition that money can buy.




Hi @Eadwig, Well I’m afraid that I do not believe that the state can afford to operate a totally free system (apart from what people pay for prescriptions).

I would agree that all decisions regarding treatment should be guided by a clinician. I think that seeing a clinician should have a cost if you can afford it, as should any treatment. I believe that this cost should be a contribution to the total and not the whole thing, and only be for adults and anyone not on benefits.

If such costs put people off preventative medicine then more fool them.

Yes billionaires die of something just like anybody else. Do you think that UK billionaires should get totally free treatment on the NHS ?. I doubt they would opt for that and sufferer the waiting lists etc. but given that they can easily afford to pay then surely they should do.




Billionaires are perfectly entitled to use the NHS and it would be better if they did so that they could use their wealth and influence to press for better services.

Of course, it is total nonsense that the NHS is “free”. Maybe free at the point of use, but not free of charge since all but the very poorest pay for it through their taxes. What those who say that we should pay at the point of use mean is that they want to ration health services so that we can get better services for ourselves and, basically, they don’t care if the poor die for want of access.

Of course, the NHS must be efficiently managed but there is scant evidence that a privatised service would be any better managed than it is at present judging from our experience of privatisations including the railways and overcharging utilities. Why turn our health service into a machine for making profits when we need every penny to be invested in service provision.

The reality is that the collective funding of health services through taxation is by far the most efficient and equitable way of providing the service to most of our people.


Frog in a tree


Hi @Frog_In_A_Tree, Well I didn’t recognise anything in what you said as being applicable to my proposal, specifically:-

a) I did not suggest that the NHS should be privatised, merely that any adults not on benefits should pay a contribution to any use of the service.
b) Children and those on benefits would continue to receive completely free treatment funded by taxation as at present. So the poor would continue to be covered as at present.
c) I also did NOT suggest that the NHS should be run for profit, merely that the huge (and currently uncovered costs of the system) would be better accommodated if those who can afford to pay a contribution to their treatment did so in addition to their taxes.

Other countries do these things why don’t we ?. The free at the point of delivery for everyone is just an NHS holy cow that needs to be eliminated from peoples thinking IMV. Unless a “magic money tree” can be found of course.

Anyway ATB



Fair points Pref, but it remains that payment (either in full or part) at the point of delivery introduces whole new level of bureaucracy and no new efficiency. The British public loves its NHS because it is free and there for them when they need it. They would certainly regard payments as opening the door to full privatisation. I am aware that other countries require citizens to pay into form of health service insurance. That is not necessarily better and certainly introduces more bureaucracy. The NHS model works fine except when politicians strangle funding in order tomreduce taxes for the better off.




Hi @J_Westlock, Just seen something come up on Bloomberg which says that BMO are going to close all of their European ETFs in January. Found this article that confirms this:-

Said somewhere that settlement could get held up if funds get very low - I just sold all mine. Have to find new homes for them !.




Thanks… that IS annoying!


OK. Limit orders in… probably a mistake but trying for improved price.
It would seem that the AUM figure on my Total Returns tables should probably play a larger part in the consideration of which to invest in… will have to complete the ones I hadn’t now.
Thing is… if you don’t update the AUM regularly then how would you be alerted that one is falling below some threshold you set? Shame that online Brokers don’t offer this type of alerting.
But then with Charles Stanley Direct you can’t even place dated or GTC Limit Orders so some of the offerings in terms of functionality out there aren’t the best.

Being forced to settle is annoying and with an associated cost… but for some might have tax implications as well as a lengthy wait.


It blows a bit of a hole in my US market exposure too. Was nothing I ever found as good as ZWUS… in terms of total return/yield/cost. Looks to be only VUSA that’s a potential candidate now unless I can find some IT better.

For LLOY investors… it’s up a bit again… probably a response to next hung Parliament and 2nd Referendum next year.


Hi Again @J_Westlock, Well I didn’t want to take any risk of somehow getting stuck in these ETFs - not sure if it’s a real risk but I figured I’d sell and try and buy at better prices. Off to do some planning and set some buy limit orders now…




Hi Again @J_Westlock, Ok so have set up buy limit orders to replace my ZWUK & ZWEU holdings, aim is to buy GBDV, IDVY & VHYL in about equal amounts at prices about 1% lower than where they are now. I figure that we are pretty high after the last 10 days and might be due a bit of a pullback. Just have to watch and see it how it goes. Last time I did something like this the market surged which was bad news.





It happened to me with the FTSE 100 short/longs I had running causing me to close them out mid October, earlier than I had intended as I had wanted to run past the Brexit date of 31 Oct. That cost me as they did come good later.

The danger was, so far as I could understand it, not so much getting a settlement, but having to take whatever price the fund was at on the day they closed it out … and the date wasn’t set in stone either.
In volatile 3 x leveraged funds that was a big risk.

Left a bad taste, I can tell you. I haven’t used a similar instrument since which has left a gap in my armoury.

I often had a problem with limit orders on that type of instrument, also. I could never be certain they’d work, although they sometimes did. Problems may have been due to the spread.

They were funds offered by Wisdom Tree who were just tidying up their portfolio of offerings, it seems, but certainly left me high and dry and I haven’t been back to see what they are offering in place. Probably nothing, as 3x leveraged ETFs are not at all common.


Yep… understood. Well I managed to settle zip today… trying to be too greedy. Tomorrow’s another day.


Hi All,

There have certainly been some interesting off-topic posts on this thread just recently!

Perhaps the NHS and Lloyds have much more in common than we think - they are both large organisations and difficult to manage.

Service levels are better in some areas/regions than others.

I expect many NHS staff have their salaries paid into Lloyds Banking Group accounts, and some may even be Lloyds investors.

Many Lloyds staff are likely to be very glad of the NHS for both themselves and wider families.

Some people may even work part-time for both the NHS and Lloyds.

Similar things could be said of other large companies, institutions, service providers etc., including the railways.

I am certainly very thankful that the NHS is free at the point of use, and wish that dentists and even opticians were the same.

I am sure lots of people would think twice about certain investigations or procedures if they had to make a contribution towards the cost, and any thought of having to pay to visit a GP really would be going back to the “bad old days” before the NHS was set up.

I wonder if any Lloyds branches, or other offices use Economy 7 type tariffs, or indeed any part of the NHS?

Economy 7 (or similar) tends to only favour those families or businesses which have high night-time electricity usage, and then it is definitely worth ensuring that other things such as the baking, washing, tumble drying etc. takes place before the daytime tariff kicks in.

We recently had a pleasant surprise - based on the meter reading earlier this month, electricity payments we have already made, and our projected usage for the next few months, our monthly payment will be reduced by over 11% from next month - it will probably go up again at the annual review in the spring, but we are happy to have the extra cash now.

I wonder how many of the election candidates hold Lloyds shares or even currently are (or have been) employed by Lloyds?

It will be very interesting to see what happens at the election, and although many voters may well have really entrenched views and always vote for the same party, I would not be surprised to see some significant changes.




Charges have dropped across the board, so perhaps they wont raise on review. My direct debit has also been reduced by 14%


Hi @J_Westlock, Well I guess there were two possible approaches to our problem

  1. Hold on and try and maximise the price obtained from the BMO ETFs
  2. Sell immediately (we were at a midday peak at the time and on an upward run of several days - US especially) and hope prices drop and buyback cheaper.

Both have their own risks and rewards.

Personally I shall be pleased to see the settlement data come and go for my sales so that I can feel assured that the money I had invested there is safe. I took a look at the trades last night and there had been very little selling, I’m guessing most people wont even know as there isnt even an RNS on the ETFs on the LSE - If you go to the BMO ETFs UK web site there is a notice there, but how many people are going to do that ?.

My limit orders have bought VHYL & IDVY this morning at about 0.5% lower price than yesterday. Just like to buy GBDV for about 2650 as well now. I dont want to be out of the market for too long just in case there is a China trade deal or some other big news.

Anyway hope it works out for you.




Yes, I noticed that VHYL has quite a large US exposure so yes, if you take view that US-China trade deal is close then it’s a good thing.
Probably a good idea for me to get back some of my US exposure too.


New fly in the ointment from Trump administration regarding freedoms in Hong Kong. China is absolutely furious. Could all cave in again.


Right, back on topic…I know, I know someone had to spoil the fun.

I know there are two camps on here; 1) this stock should be 80p+ and 2) saying around 50p (not exact figures). LLOY is up about 5% since the end of last week without too much company news - any even. Some put a sell limit of 66p several months ago (so did I but didn’t listen to head) before it fell back to sub 50p. The graphs look like 62p was the ceiling and it was a figure I had in mind to sell at in the hope it would fall again as it has done recently. However, it has breached the 62p level and still seems positive in its momentum. Is this going to fly? Or has it has its moment of glory? What the hell is going to happen at the GE. Tory win SP goes north. Labour win it goes south. Libs win (and for once I think they may have a chance) and I think it goes north. I suspect we’ll get a hung parliament and confusion will reign.

What the boards thoughts (on the SP rather than the GE result although that clearly has an impact)?