Royal Mail privatisation

[El Cid 221]

Royal Mail privatisation, has it made the mail deliver better or worse?

 

Does that tell us anything about publicly owned businesses?

 

I bought shares in Royal Mail, so I benefited from its privatisation.

[Robin-H 11]

Royal Mail privatisation, has it made the mail deliver better or worse?

 

Does that tell us anything about publicly owned businesses?

 

I bought shares in Royal Mail, so I benefited from its privatisation.

 

I can't say I've noticed any change in the level of service since privatisation, although I'm not a prolific letter/parcel poster. I know the number of staff have been cut and some mail centres closed. It did raise a few billion for the exchequer, and removed a loss making business from their books.

 

I believe the Royal Mail is now profitable, and also pays out millions in dividends every year. Perhaps that tells us about publicly owned businesses?

[Jacktari 10]

Why does a public service need to be profitable?

This is skewing of the idea of public service.

 

Does everyone have do everything purely for what is in it for them?

It seems we have become a nation of spivs.

[El Cid 221]

Why does a public service need to be profitable?

This is skewing of the idea of public service.

 

Its no longer a 'public service', I did get a letter for the next street the other day, but that has happened before.

I took it to the correct address.

[JNewton69 10]

I can't say I've noticed any change in the level of service since privatisation, although I'm not a prolific letter/parcel poster. I know the number of staff have been cut and some mail centres closed. It did raise a few billion for the exchequer, and removed a loss making business from their books.

 

I believe the Royal Mail is now profitable, and also pays out millions in dividends every year. Perhaps that tells us about publicly owned businesses?

 

To who? Royal Mail was sold off at hundreds of millions of pounds below what it was actually worth much of it to big city institutions. Landsdowne Partners, one of the world's biggest hedge funds made a fortune on the first day Royal Mail was floated on the London stock exchange. Peter Davies was a senior employee at Landsdowne, he was also the best man of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne.

[Robin-H 11]

To who? Royal Mail was sold off at hundreds of millions of pounds below what it was actually worth much of it to big city institutions. Landsdowne Partners, one of the world's biggest hedge funds made a fortune on the first day Royal Mail was floated on the London stock exchange. Peter Davies was a senior employee at Landsdowne, he was also the best man of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne.

 

It pays out dividends to whoever owns shares in the Royal Mail, like Landsdowne Partners, or El Cid.

[JNewton69 10]

Royal Mail privatisation, has it made the mail deliver better or worse?

 

Does that tell us anything about publicly owned businesses?

 

I bought shares in Royal Mail, so I benefited from its privatisation.

 

How much did the shares cost?

 

---------- Post added 26-03-2017 at 18:45 ----------

 

It pays out dividends to whoever owns shares in the Royal Mail, like Landsdowne Partners, or El Cid.

 

Do you not find it odd that Landsdowne Partners made a killing what with the link between Osbourne and Davies?

[Robin-H 11]

How much did the shares cost?

 

---------- Post added 26-03-2017 at 18:45 ----------

 

 

Do you not find it odd that Landsdowne Partners made a killing what with the link between Osbourne and Davies?

 

I believe the float price was 330p.

 

I don't find it particularly odd no. It would be odd if a major hedge fund, managing $18billion, didn't invest in a significant IPO. Are you suggesting that the shares were priced deliberately low by Osborne so that his best man could make a quick profit?

[JNewton69 10]

I believe the float price was 330p.

 

I don't find it particularly odd no. It would be odd if a major hedge fund, managing $18billion, didn't invest in a significant IPO. Are you suggesting that the shares were priced deliberately low by Osborne so that his best man could make a quick profit?

 

Investers had to spend a minimum of £750 though and that's s a lot of money for many people. I'm not suggesting the shares were priced low for Mr Davies but I do think it smells a bit fishy.

[the_bloke 17]

Why does a public service need to be profitable?

This is skewing of the idea of public service.

 

Does everyone have do everything purely for what is in it for them?

It seems we have become a nation of spivs.

 

A public service doesn't need to be profitable, especially if the end service is free at the point of use. However it should be accountable and run to maximise the best use of taxpayers money in the same way as a not for profit private enterprise. Not just a financial black hole and not to be used as a political tool in an effort to resist change for the better in the face of union threats.

[alchresearch 215]

Only difference I've seen is an increase in Post Offices being closed down and relocated as a small counter in shops.

 

---------- Post added 27-03-2017 at 10:09 ----------

 

Investers had to spend a minimum of £750 though and that's s a lot of money for many people.

 

Not necessarily. I recall lots wanted to invest more but because of demand, people were limited to £750. I wanted to buy £2000 worth of shares.

[Andy1976 10]

Only difference I've seen is an increase in Post Offices being closed down and relocated as a small counter in shops.

 

That's probably a good thing though? Must be a lot cheaper to rent a section of, for example, Wilkinsons than it is to rent a whole building?