The people vs PFI.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Hugh

You stated that Peter Davies had himself directly made millions from the Royal Mail sell-off - that isn't true.



The investment funds managed by Lansdowne made profits, yes, (and by the way, Lansdowne got £50 million in the RM share offer, out of their company annual turnover of £18,000 million), so I am not sure what the confusion is, or are you conflating the profits made by the pension funds that Lansdowne manage with Peter Davies personal earnings

I think you'll find it is true, unless he's on chicken feed like mayor Bozo

[ianch99]

Article on association of MPs to Companies Involved in Private Healthcare: http://socialinvestigations.blogspot...companies.html

If true, worrying ..

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

I think you'll find it is true, unless he's on chicken feed like mayor Bozo

Figures give you facts, not assumptions.

Lansdowne managed £13 billion of assets on behalf of its clients last year, of which Royal Mail was £50 million, or roughly 0.65% of managed funds - if Peter Davies earned "millions" from the Royal Mail sale (let's say £2 million), if we divide two million by 65 and multiply it by 100, to equal 1% of the Lansdowne managed assets (and the assumption he is paid equally for all of these things), and we then multiply that by 100 to compare it to the £13 billion of managed assets, that means he earned roughly £308 million last year.

Really?

I have no doubt that Peter Davies earned millions, if not tens of millions last year, as he is a Managing Partner in one of the biggest Hedge Funds in the world - but to state as fact that at least two million of that was from less than one percent of investments Lansdowne manage is a gross misinterpretation.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Figures give you facts, not assumptions.

Lansdowne managed £13 billion of assets on behalf of its clients last year, of which Royal Mail was £50 million, or roughly 0.65% of managed funds - if Peter Davies earned "millions" from the Royal Mail sale (let's say £2 million), if we divide two million by 65 and multiply it by 100, to equal 1% of the Lansdowne managed assets (and the assumption he is paid equally for all of these things), and we then multiply that by 100 to compare it to the £13 billion of managed assets, that means he earned roughly £308 million last year.

Really?

I have no doubt that Peter Davies earned millions, if not tens of millions last year, as he is a Managing Partner in one of the biggest Hedge Funds in the world - but to state as fact that at least two million of that was from less than one percent of investments Lansdowne manage is a gross misinterpretation.

Facts and figures can be grossly misinterpreted to, fact is his company made millions from the sale of a public asset that they were given preferential treatment with and he was paid millions to do it is undeniable, we can throw figures around all night but that is the simple straight forward fact, you can dress it up however you please or try and make it less sinister