- Joined
- 3 July 2009
- Posts
- 27,650
- Reactions
- 24,555
Not a good look when a company wants to change its name after 175 years, kind of indicates how much good will they apportion to their brand IMO.SPIN
IOOF suffered net investor redemptions from its financial advice and funds management units in the September quarter, although increases in fund holdings helped to push up overall assets under management and administration.
There was $1.4 billion in net outflows during the quarter while market gains of $2 billion pushed overall funds under management to $98.3 billion.
Funds under administration edged $1.8 billion higher to $222.8 billion despite net outflows of $900 million as market gains added $3.4 billion to the overall total.
Another one of my dogs, sold out when they said they were going to buy MLC off NAB.Change of Company Name Following approval at the IOOF Holdings Ltd Annual General Meeting on 25 November 2021, we are pleased to announce that the change of name process with the Australian Securities and Investments Commission has now been completed and the Company’s name has been changed to Insignia Financial Ltd.
Attached is a consolidated constitution which incorporates the amendments approved by shareholders on 25 November 2021. The ASX listing code for the Company will remain the same, IFL. -ENDS
DYOR
i hold IFL ( deeply in the red )
i see name ( and/or ticker-code ) changes as a red flag in most circumstances
( it strongly hints your brand is trashed )
I wasn't saying they won't come good, but IMO the reason the banks got out of super was because it is difficult to compete with funds that don't pay a dividend, having to beat them on performance when you have a 4% dividend handicap will be difficult IMO.i may yet regret not doing the same
i probably should have suggested it for gg's Dogs of December , but i think gg was looking something that MIGHT have a reason to go positive
this is still very low priority on my top-up list ( or average-down which is probably more accurate , since i am down more than 50% , so far )
mine set me back $8.67 , but i see several coming headwinds , one being the persistent government meddling ( by word and regulation ) in the investment/Super industry , now several local players have been brutally savaged and IFL MIGHT leverage that for a future turn-around , but comparing it to the JHG i have bought during the same period ( i held some as Henderson before that)I wasn't saying they won't come good, but IMO the reason the banks got out of super was because it is difficult to compete with funds that don't pay a dividend, having to beat them on performance when you have a 4% dividend handicap will be difficult IMO.
Just my reasoning, hope you get back in the black, I lost about 30% on them from memory, bought in around $5, when they where a nimble clever operation.
currently have IFL and PTM on my 'ignore list ( i hold both deep underwater )mmmmm
I'd be interested in Divsie's @divs4ever take on this little yapper.
By my reckoning it has been paying near 10% in divies, and on the face of it would be a "brave" buy in any circumstances, but shortly may be too cheap to ignore.
View attachment 166685
gg
Listed Fund/Wealth managers is another sector that Greg Canavan is taking a contrarian stance on - he has previously made supportive arguments on the fossil fuels and reits sectors. His latest recc for this sector is ... IFL. That should put paid to Garpal's interest.wealth management , i think, will face further testing times in the near future
|
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?