Standard Chartered

[ADrunkenMarcus]

Standard Chartered announced yesterday that

a meeting of a Committee of the Board of Directors of the Company will be held on Tuesday, 27 February 2018 for the purpose of approving the release of the Company's announcement of results for the year ended 31 December 2017 and considering the payment of any final dividend for the year ended 31 December 2017. Furthermore, in compliance with Rule 13.66 of the HKSE it is proposed that, in the event of any final dividend being paid, the corresponding record date will be Friday, 9 March 2018.

So, if you want to buy in and qualify for a dividend whose existence and amount is undetermined, then you know when to buy!

Best wishes

Mark.

[kempiejon]

Standard Chartered yielded nothing last year, if you want to go with digital look there is a forecast amount but as ADrunkenMArcus says existence currently unknown. I do hold and like several other buys they cut within a comparatively short period of my purchase.

[Arborbridge]

Standard Chartered yielded nothing last year, if you want to go with digital look there is a forecast amount but as ADrunkenMArcus says existence currently unknown. I do hold and like several other buys they cut within a comparatively short period of my purchase.

I had the same experience. This was a bank I bought at the time (in my WyfHYP) because the numbers looked good, and it seemed much more conservative than others. Shortly afterwards, it all went belly up. I hold still.
Shows how much I can tell from the numbers.


Arb.

[kempiejon]

Arb,

I got caught by RBS indeed too good to be true and steady lloyds so I left banks well alone for along time. When I came to look at banks I hedged my bets with HSBC and STAN so at least half my income survived. A return to dividends from STAN is a welcome bit of news if it turns out to be that.

[Gengulphus]

Standard Chartered announced yesterday that

a meeting of a Committee of the Board of Directors of the Company will be held on Tuesday, 27 February 2018 for the purpose of approving the release of the Company's announcement of results for the year ended 31 December 2017 and considering the payment of any final dividend for the year ended 31 December 2017. Furthermore, in compliance with Rule 13.66 of the HKSE it is proposed that, in the event of any final dividend being paid, the corresponding record date will be Friday, 9 March 2018.

So, if you want to buy in and qualify for a dividend whose existence and amount is undetermined, then you know when to buy!

It does seem a bit of a pointless announcement, doesn't it?

But if one looks at the full announcement, one sees that it is titled "Overseas Regulatory Announcement", and the words you quote are preceded by "In compliance with Rule 13.43 of the Rules Governing the Listing of Securities on the Stock Exchange of Hong Kong Limited ('HKSE'), Standard Chartered PLC (the "Company") today submitted to the HKSE an announcement that ...". In other words, they're making the announcement in order to comply with Hong Kong regulations, not necessarily because what it says is of any real significance.

I don't know Hong Kong regulations at all, but I believe having a board meeting to approve results would be pretty standard for public companies anywhere, and considering paying a dividend would be pretty standard as well. Nothing says that the consideration needs to be anything more than "Does anyone think the company should pay a final dividend? No? OK, we're agreed on no dividend. The next item on the agenda is..."!

And about a year ago, the company made a very similarly-worded announcement... I.e. the signs are that this is an absolutely routine announcement that the company is required to make and says nothing at all about the prospects of a dividend resumption. (I should stress that "nothing at all" means that it neither indicates that dividends are likely to be resumed nor that they're not. I.e. I'm just saying "Don't get your hopes up on this announcement", not "Dividends are unlikely to be resumed" - I have put no research at all into Standard Chartered's dividend prospects, so am not going to pretend that I have any worthwhile opinion on them!)

Gengulphus

[Dod101]

I do not understand why people buy in to Standard Chartered. They have been accident prone for years and are very much the poor relation in the Stan Chart/HSBC East Asia area. HSBC, like all banks, goes through convulsions from time to time but they have the financial strength and management depth to cope. Standard Chartered clearly does not.

And I do not think anyone should read too much into the recent announcement by SC.

Dod

[ADrunkenMarcus]

I do not understand why people buy in to Standard Chartered.

It takes two to make a market, as they say.

Looking at the FT charts going back to July 1992 then Standard Chartered has produced a higher return than HSBC to date. (I'd prefer TR data but don't have it.) Granted, it's narrowed markedly: at the start of 2013 it looks like HSBC's share price rose over 500% compared to Standard Chartered's almost 1,800%. Today, it looks closer to over 650% and over 800% respectively.

Best wishes


Mark.

[Dod101]

Since this is the HYP Board we should be looking at income not TR. I would be surprised if Stan Chart is better than HSBC on the income front. Apart from anything else, HSBC has continued paying a dividend since at least 1991 since I have held it and although it cut its dividend in 2008/9, most banks could barely stand then never mind pay a dividend.

I am certainly surprised that Stan Chartered's TR is as high as you quote over the period since 1992 and if it has gone from 1800% at the end of 2012 to a mere 800% that would reflect its problems of the last few years.

Dod

[Lootman]

I do not understand why people buy in to Standard Chartered. They have been accident prone for years and are very much the poor relation in the Stan Chart/HSBC East Asia area. HSBC, like all banks, goes through convulsions from time to time but they have the financial strength and management depth to cope. Standard Chartered clearly does not.

For my sins I worked for Standard Chartered in the mid 1980's. Far too long ago for my experiences to have any relevance now. But it was easily the most clueless financial institution I ever worked for relying, as it did, upon the residue of the Empire for its profits, ensuring that senior management were a bunch of ex-pats with a bloated sense of entitlement.

Now, they paid me a lot to swan about the globe doing what I did, so I had fun there. But as an investment? Never.

[ADrunkenMarcus]

Since this is the HYP Board we should be looking at income not TR.

The percentages quoted for returns are capital.

As I recall, Standard Chartered reduced its dividend around 1989-90 and didn't cut its dividend per share in 2009, although it certainly came a cropper later on! I don't have the data on dividend per share handy but it seems plausible that the total dividends over the period may have been higher with Standard Chartered given how much higher the share price went (until 2013 anyway).

Best wishes

Mark.

[Dod101]

Since this is the HYP Board we should be looking at income not TR.

The percentages quoted for returns are capital.

As I recall, Standard Chartered reduced its dividend around 1989-90 and didn't cut its dividend per share in 2009, although it certainly came a cropper later on! I don't have the data on dividend per share handy but it seems plausible that the total dividends over the period may have been higher with Standard Chartered given how much higher the share price went (until 2013 anyway).

Best wishes

Mark.

Much of this is down to speculation. Some time if I can be bothered I may trawl through the archived reports (assuming they are on its website) but my impression of Standard Chartered is nearer to Lootman's than it is yours. I know HSBC much better although I have no particular connection except as a customer in Hong Kong for a long time and then this country. It has always seemed to me to be accident prone, although most banks seem to be.

Dod

[ADrunkenMarcus]

I didn't come down on either side in particular.

There are arguments for both banks, qualitative and quantitative. I can certainly understand the appeal of HSBC in its conservative culture and geographical breadth, as well as the more diverse nature of its businesses.

However, if you're wanting to know 'why people buy in to Standard Chartered' then examining the data and looking at the quantitative side of things might help to further your understanding. We don't have a readily available comparison of dividends paid by both banks over the period, but Standard Chartered's superior capital performance - despite its recent problems - would seem to suggest it's entirely plausible that it paid out more in dividends in total.

It might be something for me to look at sometime but it's not an immediate priority.

Best wishes

Mark.

[kempiejon]

Morningstar do have calculations for TR and allow comparisons to the FTSE100. Over 10 years Standard Chartered show -0.6%, HSBC 5.06 and the FTSE100 TR 6.30.
http://tools.morningstar.co.uk/uk/stock ... 0P00007OFH