US banks can't predict what will happen in September anymore than you can.
Trading the stockmarket (NO Referrals)
- Thread starter mcast123
- Start date
September is historically red. Saving any more of my buys til then.
yep - me too. Took some profits from UUUU which was up 79% for me. Watching closely for a month or so.
Soldato
- Joined
- 16 Jan 2003
- Posts
- 10,981
- Location
- Nottingham
Nvidia post good earnings, stocks drop by over 3% makes no sense to me, guess that’s why I don’t pick stocks.
Makes perfect sense. Stock is expensive, they called down future earnings growth so price falls. However in the scale of NVDA moves, this drop is barely anything of note.
Last edited:
Yeah forward guidance has to be stellar ever time to support nvdas valuation.
Its impossible to maintain.
I'm also surprised nvda dropped so little. I expect flat or decline in tech in the near term myself.
Too many companies with no net profit at multi billion valuation in tech banking on AI.
Its impossible to maintain.
I'm also surprised nvda dropped so little. I expect flat or decline in tech in the near term myself.
Too many companies with no net profit at multi billion valuation in tech banking on AI.
Exactly, the markets expected a good financial report and so this was priced into the stock price before the earnings.
Plus companies usually provide slightly cautious forecasts so it is easier to beat their guidance, therefore beating the so called forecast doesn't excite investors.
". Big UK banks are bracing for losses on billions of pounds in loans to troubled British broadband providers, as the weakest players in the nascent fibre sector battle mounting financial pressure. Find out which lenders are exposed to struggling “altnets”. "
They are worrying they could collapse, papers being draw up to ask the government, for billions of pounds.
They are worrying they could collapse, papers being draw up to ask the government, for billions of pounds.
Last edited:
Any idea on which providers?
NatWest and Lloyds are among the big banks braced for losses on billions of pounds in loans to troubled UK broadband providers, as the weakest players in the nascent fibre sector battle mounting financial pressure.
Dozens of “altnets” — alternative network providers — have tried to challenge the dominance of BT’s Openreach and Virgin Media O2 but many are struggling to attract enough customers to meet the costs of their network rollout and have been hit by higher interest rates.
Lloyds Banking Group said last month that its commercial banking unit had set aside £25mn to cover loans that were unlikely to be repaid in full. Its chief financial officer, William Chalmers, said these provisions were largely isolated to loans for the fibre sector.
Chalmers said the sector had suffered “bumps in the road” because of “higher construction costs” and “lower subscriber numbers than people had originally anticipated”.
NatWest was among the banks most exposed to altnets, said four people familiar with the matter, two of whom estimated that the bank had lent about £1bn to the struggling sector.
NatWest has taken provisions in relation to its loans to the fibre sector, said a person close to the bank. Its commercial and institutional division reported a £76mn impairment in its second-quarter results, which the person said included expected losses on loans to altnets.
The bank did not have any significant concerns about its credit portfolio, they added.
Creditors are holding talks with several altnets over how they will repay substantial debts they accumulated to fund the construction of fibre optic networks.
Gigaclear, an altnet serving more than 600,000 homes in mainly rural communities, is in negotiations with lenders — including Lloyds, NatWest and HSBC — over how to solve a funding shortfall, according to two people familiar with the matter.
In 2023, the year it secured a £1bn debt package, Gigaclear generated just £34mn of revenue. One person involved in the talks said the banks could end up swapping debt for equity or extending Gigaclear’s credit facility. Gigaclear’s shareholders might also inject more cash, the person said.
Gigaclear said its stakeholders remained supportive. “We continue to work constructively with them to explore a range of options that support the long-term success of Gigaclear and deliver the best outcome for all parties,” it said.
Another altnet, London-based G.Network, is searching for a buyer after accumulating £386mn of debt, against revenues of £10mn last year. G.Network declined to comment.
The issues in the sector are also set to affect the state-backed National Wealth Fund, which has committed £1.1bn for lending to altnets in recent years. The NWF has also offered indemnities to lenders on some riskier loans to the sector to encourage investment, according to two people familiar with the matter.
The fund said that ensuring good internet connectivity across the UK was “key to [economic] growth — an essential part of the NWF’s mission”.
“We only commit capital where we are needed and, in the case of altnets, where market appetite is restricted, we have worked to crowd in commercial investors to help meet the government’s Gigabit ambitions,” the NWF added.
Dozens of lenders — including Société Générale and ABN AMRO — loaned billions to altnets after industry regulator Ofcom launched a plan to encourage competition in the UK broadband market.
As a result the UK now has about 75 broadband providers, according to comparison site ThinkBroadband. The intense competition has driven down prices and returns in an industry with high upfront costs.
Karen Egan, head of telecoms at Enders Analysis, said writedowns in this sector had been “inevitable for some time”. Enders calculates altnets are collectively carrying more than £7bn of net debt.
“The interest bill [for these companies] . . . is even higher than their revenue bases in many instances,” Egan added.
Lloyds, NatWest, ING, ABN Amro and HSBC declined to comment.
Dozens of “altnets” — alternative network providers — have tried to challenge the dominance of BT’s Openreach and Virgin Media O2 but many are struggling to attract enough customers to meet the costs of their network rollout and have been hit by higher interest rates.
Lloyds Banking Group said last month that its commercial banking unit had set aside £25mn to cover loans that were unlikely to be repaid in full. Its chief financial officer, William Chalmers, said these provisions were largely isolated to loans for the fibre sector.
Chalmers said the sector had suffered “bumps in the road” because of “higher construction costs” and “lower subscriber numbers than people had originally anticipated”.
NatWest was among the banks most exposed to altnets, said four people familiar with the matter, two of whom estimated that the bank had lent about £1bn to the struggling sector.
NatWest has taken provisions in relation to its loans to the fibre sector, said a person close to the bank. Its commercial and institutional division reported a £76mn impairment in its second-quarter results, which the person said included expected losses on loans to altnets.
The bank did not have any significant concerns about its credit portfolio, they added.
Creditors are holding talks with several altnets over how they will repay substantial debts they accumulated to fund the construction of fibre optic networks.
Gigaclear, an altnet serving more than 600,000 homes in mainly rural communities, is in negotiations with lenders — including Lloyds, NatWest and HSBC — over how to solve a funding shortfall, according to two people familiar with the matter.
In 2023, the year it secured a £1bn debt package, Gigaclear generated just £34mn of revenue. One person involved in the talks said the banks could end up swapping debt for equity or extending Gigaclear’s credit facility. Gigaclear’s shareholders might also inject more cash, the person said.
Gigaclear said its stakeholders remained supportive. “We continue to work constructively with them to explore a range of options that support the long-term success of Gigaclear and deliver the best outcome for all parties,” it said.
Another altnet, London-based G.Network, is searching for a buyer after accumulating £386mn of debt, against revenues of £10mn last year. G.Network declined to comment.
The issues in the sector are also set to affect the state-backed National Wealth Fund, which has committed £1.1bn for lending to altnets in recent years. The NWF has also offered indemnities to lenders on some riskier loans to the sector to encourage investment, according to two people familiar with the matter.
The fund said that ensuring good internet connectivity across the UK was “key to [economic] growth — an essential part of the NWF’s mission”.
“We only commit capital where we are needed and, in the case of altnets, where market appetite is restricted, we have worked to crowd in commercial investors to help meet the government’s Gigabit ambitions,” the NWF added.
Dozens of lenders — including Société Générale and ABN AMRO — loaned billions to altnets after industry regulator Ofcom launched a plan to encourage competition in the UK broadband market.
As a result the UK now has about 75 broadband providers, according to comparison site ThinkBroadband. The intense competition has driven down prices and returns in an industry with high upfront costs.
Karen Egan, head of telecoms at Enders Analysis, said writedowns in this sector had been “inevitable for some time”. Enders calculates altnets are collectively carrying more than £7bn of net debt.
“The interest bill [for these companies] . . . is even higher than their revenue bases in many instances,” Egan added.
Lloyds, NatWest, ING, ABN Amro and HSBC declined to comment.
These are the one that came up on the screen.
Gigaclear G.Network, and a few others lot of smaller city ones are in crisis. List of large banks has been issued about the exposure to their debt.. Ofcom have been involved.
This is ridiculous.
Lending out cash and when it goes wrong asking for a bailout? In that case any loans that are particularly profitable should be taxed if we are, yet again, going to insure banks losses.
They didn't provide a source for that claim did they?
It was Ofcom's initiative so it's not too far fetched to think there would have been an agreement if there were potential losses. Just a pity the UK government don't take any equity if there is any upside. Like Trump and Intel, gov's should be far more demanding on socialised losses/privatised profits. And if there was any type of environment to do a bit more state sponsored capitalism like China, then a war time footing/matters of national security global scenario like the next 10 years will be, that time is now.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 12,760
The only thing they learned from 2008 is that they can do this and get away with it
Hoping this isn't too off-topic, but this seems a fairly good thread to ask!
I've started selling off some old shares, some bought for me by my parents back in the 80s and some gifted to me or inherited since, not a huge amount in total, I think around £7-8K max, but I'm a little wary of Capital Gains Tax and was just hoping to get some clarification.
As I understand it, you get a CGT allowance of £3k per tax year and after that you start paying CGT on any profit made and the profit is counted from when you became the owner, so in my case either when my parents bought the shares in the 80s or when they were gifted to me. Considering the low value of what I'm selling compared to the CGT tax allowance I'm thinking I'm probably fine, but I am just wondering about some of the shares from the 80s, as I understand CGT does not take any account of inflation, so shares that were bought in the 80s for a few hundred pounds and could now be worth a few thousand, so potentially just starting to trouble that limit.
Is my understanding correct, and is there any easy way of trying to find out what the value of the shares might have been so long ago? Even if I could find out the price back then (maybe not too hard as they would have been bought when the shares were issues as part of nationalisation) there is still the issue of the number of shares, as many of them have been various different companies over the years, the number of shares has been increased or reduced, companies have been bought and sold and different shares issued etc.
Is there anything I may have overlooked or misunderstood? Generally CGT is not something I ever encounter or need to worry about and it's not so much the money that's a concern, it's just all the paperwork and simply trying to get any idea of what I might owe (or making a mistake) that is the main concern.
I could just wait now and not sell any more until the next tax year I guess, but kind of hoping to get it done and consilidate the money.
I've started selling off some old shares, some bought for me by my parents back in the 80s and some gifted to me or inherited since, not a huge amount in total, I think around £7-8K max, but I'm a little wary of Capital Gains Tax and was just hoping to get some clarification.
As I understand it, you get a CGT allowance of £3k per tax year and after that you start paying CGT on any profit made and the profit is counted from when you became the owner, so in my case either when my parents bought the shares in the 80s or when they were gifted to me. Considering the low value of what I'm selling compared to the CGT tax allowance I'm thinking I'm probably fine, but I am just wondering about some of the shares from the 80s, as I understand CGT does not take any account of inflation, so shares that were bought in the 80s for a few hundred pounds and could now be worth a few thousand, so potentially just starting to trouble that limit.
Is my understanding correct, and is there any easy way of trying to find out what the value of the shares might have been so long ago? Even if I could find out the price back then (maybe not too hard as they would have been bought when the shares were issues as part of nationalisation) there is still the issue of the number of shares, as many of them have been various different companies over the years, the number of shares has been increased or reduced, companies have been bought and sold and different shares issued etc.
Is there anything I may have overlooked or misunderstood? Generally CGT is not something I ever encounter or need to worry about and it's not so much the money that's a concern, it's just all the paperwork and simply trying to get any idea of what I might owe (or making a mistake) that is the main concern.
I could just wait now and not sell any more until the next tax year I guess, but kind of hoping to get it done and consilidate the money.
Well you said papers were being drawn up to bail them out. But it seems its just your conjecture and not fact.