Luthien

There he is !
Thank you
this one's kind of handy too

PaulandNic

PaulandNic

.4 from the CBA, handy!! ...

carolinephillips

But the greedy sods are still trousering an extra 0.1, and no doubt will cut the savings rates by the full 0.5%

commonwealth

if u have an offset mortgage/deposit account package, and positively geared, put everything in the offset account as a tax strategy.

PaulandNic

Savings? ... ahhh, never gonna be a problem for me ...

chris955

I cant see the point in what the RBA do every month anyway as the banks just ignore it and do their own thing.

swans

That is wonderful crowd nonsense,well done.

The few self funded retirees that I know, and myself ,do not live off interest.I'll make the maths very easy so you can refuse to see it.30,000 shares in CBA produce a net income of $96,000 ,working on the $3.20 per share dividend I received last year.This is a gross income of $137,000 when the franking credits are added.

Luckily I have never been as clever as the crowd,so I have always thought and did the opposite to what they do.While they are clever enough to think that rich means money in the bank,I'm silly enough to think that rich means income producing assets.

Again, luckily, there are only around 0.04% of the population that think like me,the crowd are clever enough to pat each other on the bank and agree with each other how wise and clever they are,because they agree with each other that they are wise and clever.

Now if you want to see some really silly people the annual report will tell you that around 400 "people" own 100,000 or more shares in CBA (wish I was one of them).I would think they would all be super funds ,but we shall say they are all people shall we .They have a net income of $320,000 from dividends on 100,000 shares.You can see how they must feel right silly cnuts cant you,23 million people disagree with them,how could all those people be wrong?

Now to really show how out of step with the crowd I am ,I didn't dollar cost average either,can you imagine that,what a silly cnut I must look.I bought most of those shares at under $10 each .

To make the maths easy so you can again refuse to see it,I bought 15000 shares @say $10 each,so they cost 150K,money borrowed from the bank.The other 15000 came from using the DRP,so there is a very slight dollar cost averaging effect.

Now those really dumb experts and the crowd (sorry insert clever instead of dumb) are far cleverer than I,they have no problem working out that paying $52 a share today is better than paying $10 a share in circa 1995,because of course the wonders of dollar cost averaging.

When I borrowed that 150k it was probably around 4 yrs wages,tomorrow when the crowd get exactly the same chance as I did,borrow 4 yrs wages.

ALTOGETHER NOW

Read this article,listen to this expert,have an opinion poll, funny old life innit

Now pass the stage of being an idiot and get to the stage of being a complete moron,once again

ALTOGETHER NOW

The banks make far too much profit

WHY DON'T THE "GUVMINT 'DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT

geordie down under

swans

Wonderful nonsense,as they have said funding pressures at home are the main cause.Costs have risen o/seas,costs at home have risen more.

To quote you 6.1% on a term deposit,put a blanket average on variable rates @ 7%,not a lot there is there.Obviuosly they are not borrowing all of their money @6.1% and lending it out@ 7%,they would go bust.

Now to see reality, as the bank tells you ,net interest margin is around 2%,in the case of westpac yesterday 2.11%.People cannot do the most basic maths so I will try to keep it as simple as possible.

Now,they have $600 bilion lent out @ 7%,so obviously they collect $42 billlion in interest (6 x 7 =42).They pay 5% on that money so again obviously they pay out $30 billion to depositors.Profit is thus $12 billion.

Now add on fees and charges etc of say $3 billion,gives a profit of $15 billion'

I'm silly enough to believe they pay rent,electric bills,IT charges,wages and everything from that .Then they pay tax,this leaves them around $6 billion in net profit,or 1%.

Who could be silly enough to think in a rational manner.

Who could be silly enough to think reality could be that obvious.

Geordie downunder

iamthecreaturefromuranus

Where's those words I'm looking for???? Ahhhh there they are.... Smug CNUT

Bermudashorts

The word "what?" sprung to my mind. Couldn't make any sense of it, apart from I think he wants everyone to think he is very clever.

Grayling

30000 CBA shares would cost around $1500000..So why doesn't every pensioner rush out and buy that amount so then they would be financially secure as well

Presumably this arrogant 'clever' prick worked in Finance and bought them at a discount or simply got lucky. He wouldn't sound so smug and 'clever' if they tanked, which shares often do.

Some people like myself do not want money tied up in shares as we have other plans and uses for it so the drop in Bank interest rates is not good for us but is not a disaster either.

IvanM

Funny how the cnuts move savings at the same rate as the RBA.

Net interest margin is quite different to an monopolistic 18% return on equity.

The answer is true competition rather than hoo doo crap that banks saved us from the GFC. APRA did that.

From what I see the big four are far from going bust.

swans

Amazing the shite people come up with to fool themselves they've made reality disappear.Where did you get that nonsense from.

Savings rates are variable,like a mortgage they have nothing to do with cash rate.At present I get 5.1%on an e account with westpac,it has to be renewed every 3 months,the guy at the bank does it for me.The top rate from memory was 5.8%,cash rates are down 1%,for that account rates are down 0.7%,seems reasonable to me,what would your version of reality be?

WBC are very happy to pay me that 5.1%,they are happy to lend it out say at an average rate of 7.1%. Round it shall we,the bank buys the money at 5% and sells it at 7%,gross profit margin of 2%,what would your version of reality be?That is net interest margin,nothing at all to do with ROE,do you know what ROE is?

APRA is a watchdog (1 of)that overseas financial institutions,without an APRA licence it is illegal to operate as a DTI in oz,do explain how you manage to come to the conclusion that APRA saved us from the GFC which was more of a north atlantic/med crisis.Neither the banks nor APRA saved us from the supposed GFC.

I hope those banks continue to make profits,would you rather be in the deep shit that the aforesaid N/A/med is in.

Ah the stupidity of the sheep as they all bleat the same,I'll ask the same question again,we will all be dead before you or any body else will be able to explain it.

WHY WOULD COMPETITION REDUCE MORTGAGE RATES OR PRICES.

PLEASE,PLEASE explain,I would love to know.

Geordie down under

Amazulu

baaaaa, baaaaaa