₦airaland Forum

mikeapollo:
Wale may be coming up with something.
Although they promised to release 2025 audited results on or before May31. May be some people have seen the results and it is good.?

aj8:
My apologies, Xidget.
Veritaskap eps isn’t just adding up. Will post after studying it closely.

zendi:
JOJI ease is among the great benefits of itrading.

Agbalowomeri:
They should pay N10 if the book is truly clean

megawealth01:
If you investing in OANDO, Access and ELLAH you need a lot of PATIENT FUNDS

Abbasmh:
I thought FIRSTHOLDCO released a bad result, but it’s currently going up at the market opening.

robobo:
Oga Babs

i have heard you but you are not paying attention to my concern "arbitrariness".

i agree that the 8% you stated above is quite low per the average within the Nigerian banking industry and should be worked on by Access (Notwithstanding the fact that the figure is within Basle requirement)

my point is why the focus on selling of subsidiaries as a means to achieve that aim. when the ratio has two other components?

In terms of liquidity (i.e. easy to achieve/sell/realised) the most liquid component of the ratio is the "liability" several of which will expure within twelve months (e.g. fixed deposits/ CP/ Bonds e.t.c) why not forbade the bank from taking fresh liabilities when those ones matured towars achieving the desired ratio?

another reasoning is that the equity part of the ratio has several other components apart from "sale of subsidiaries" which are easier to achieve than the desired "sale" e.g. retaining profit. so why not this route other than the sale of subsidiaries? are the subsidiaries making a loss (i.e. leaking capital)

megawealth01:
I'm building AUDIO WEALTH for many generations unborn because real wealth is in AUDIO format

megawealth01:
ACCESS should do quick and become less than 20 naira. No time pls

robobo:
I dont see how what you stated correlates to closing down subsidiaries.

For sake of argument, lets agree that it does. To the best of my knowledge the equation you portray has 3 components and any of the 3 could be worked on to bring the ratio desired by the sheriff. So why insistence on just a variable impacting only one of the components

ppogba:
You have made valid points.

However, let us give the regulators the benefit of the doubt considering the facts that there are egg heads employed to do the thinking especially knowing fully well the implications of any fooly.

As far as they are doing it to safeguard all stakeholders, the better for all and sundry.

robobo:
The sherrif is not new (50% of his first term gone already)

I am positive one or two of the acquisition will have passed through the sheriff for approvals (which was not decline)

The sheriff should avoid arbitrariness otherwise how does he want to portray an higher moral grounds than the players he is policing

robobo:
i beg to disagree

while i am also not in sync with Access aggressive expansion of late. However, the treatment being meted by the regulator look very arbitrary and might not pass a test of logic

1. Didnt the regulator approved each of the buying in the first place? (because such buying are subject to regulatory approvals)

2. if so what had changed between the approvals and now to warrant a rollback?

3. for the sake of argument let accept a rollback is justified, how was the 12 month deadline (for sale) arrived at?

4. Does precedent (of mergers & acquisition) support the 12 months (when most of the buying took more than 12 months)

5. how was the 10 of SHF arrived at? what are the metrics driving the limit set?

6. is the regulator leaving the realm of regulation to dictate how a private coy deploy its capital


n.b i have very minimal and inconsequential units in Access but only concern about regulatory overreach

jonnysessy:
ZENITH BANK
I don't know why Veritas Registrars is fond of doing this to me every year. Every time they keep paying me my Zenith bank dividend in piecemeal. They eventually will comply after i have engaged them through emails. I don't know why i always have to forward my CSCS statements to them before they will fully pay me. Meanwhile, i need this money together to solve a pressing need. Let me wait a day or two before we begin to exchange emails. Can they try this with my retired Chairman Mr jim Ovia ?
Part of the work of a registrar of a company is to keep the company book, i wonder why i should be the one supplying them information before my complete dividend is paid.

megawealth01:
What is holding UBA from coming really down na?

Dupeodus:
Is this speculation or facts? If it's facts, then it's a material misrepresentation that no auditor should sign. Bond, carrying a coupon rate is bond, regardless of which tier. It's interests should be charged against earnings. That it is tier 1 only partain to ranking in event of liquidation. It does not make it equity and it ranks higher than equity.

aj8:
Good Saturday morning BabsO2, Wema is probably the only Bank spelling it out in their weighted average. You can do the maths for UBA and ETI and kindly reflect it here if it differs. I did the maths, but willing to take corrections if they differ. At least we are stimulating discussions to improve our stock picks. Iron sharpenth iron.

aj8:
Yes

aj8:
Wema=39.50
GTCO=117.80
STANBIC=143
UBA=62.20
ACCESS =73.80
ETI=104.20
ZENITH=152.80

On Common Sense. Any doing below 5% dividend are likely to tick slightly lower in the short term but will eventual soar when the past is overtaken by future hope.

KarlTom:
Na wa o.

Make una buy my UBA o

nosa2:
I would like to humbly remind the UBA refugees that the ETI rocket is warm, cozy and welcoming.

Agbalowomeri:
UBA will not dip below 45. It will reverse on Tuesday after a dip

chimex38:
Speculation doesn't cut it.
How about Instantaneous value investor
Or just Instantaneous investor.
Buy at any instant of time it's undervalued
Sell at any instant of time valuation has peaked.

KarlTom:
If we ride with this narrative, who loses at the end of the day?

6.7bn units held

robobo:
You are right. The acquisition was not financed by UBA but be rest assured UBA would have been part of banks financing working capital (loan / overdraft with a max of yearly tenor). That said, the CBN rule is actually a double edged sword. In that in most frontier/ developing market, banks mogul/ owners are always also players in other sphere of the economy unlike in very developed markets. So there might be a need to find a delicate balance instead of policies that engendered total prohibition

Itzlinda:
Exactly why I feel there's foul play in their result.

UBA have more customer appeal (both high income and middle class) than zenith bank.

People trust uba more than zenith bank here in the north.

There's no reason why they should not be making more money than zenith bank.

I suspect foul play by their *perspire to aspire*chairman

megawealth01:
Na Tony handwork na all the companies him get is using UBA shu

Sunrisepebble:
I sell when I think they have peaked but I don’t buy because they’re rising

nosa2:
Its just a poorly run bank/business

Sunrisepebble:
I will add small speculation to mine