Fletch

I imagine replacement of such packaging is not something that a packaging company can take on in isolation. Changing from plastic to some paper-based solution may have implications in increasing exposure to moisture, which may have knock-on effects for drug stability. I could be completely wrong, but I would say such a project is more likely to be initiated by a Pharma company in conjunction with their existing packaging suppliers

Might be worth having a look at DS Smith, Mondi and Smurfitt Kappa - I have no position in any of them so can't really comment on their financials or how innovative they are, but they are all in the packaging game.

Not that I'm disputing the mathematics behind your hypothetical study, but at a fundamental level, if the event rate is low, then what is that inferring about the malignancy of the virus in the control group? Extending that, if you want to talk about consequences, I would suggest that seeking to subject the entire population to a 'medicine' that has had little more than cursory exposure to the normal regulatory checks and procedures raises the potential for a consequence that goes far beyond individual calamity to global catastrophe. In some circumstances I could understand the need for such reckless abandon, but for covid (ADE induced variants or not), I would say it is sheer madness. But maybe you are right. Maybe all the reports of sportsmen collapsing, cardiac problems, vaccine ADE, and all the rest of it is indeed nothing. But at the very least (especially given the scarcity of proper long term trials done on these vaccines) these reports should be thoroughly investigated as a potential red flag rather than just charge on regardless injecting everything in sight at an ever increasing frequency in the (vain) hope that these coronaviruses will magically disappear (not done so well this far has it, in fact the situation seems strangely akin to what was predicted by those vaccine ADE conspiracy nutters). And when I say investigated, I mean properly investigated, and if it is by the Pharma companies themselves, then insist that they display their faith in the safety of their own products, rather than allow them to hide behind governmental waivers of liability.

It comes as no surprise - it was fairly clear from the growing level of hysteria last March where this was ultimately heading. Give it a few months and we'll be:

The suits are already rubbing their hands in anticipation, it will doubtless all be the fault of those selfish, ignorant people who haven't had the jab. Yet more coal for their pyre.

Commission fees apply to both sells and buys. I was under the impression that the commission on Australian shares was 0.1% with a minimum of $10 rather than a flat fee - at least that's what is claimed on their charges page

The custody fee is only payable if you have made no trades in the quarter. Any trade you make will offset the custody fee - making three trades during a quarter will cause the fee to be waived entirely.

To be fair, it's nothing to do with IG - for whatever reason those instruments do not not meet HMRC rules to be included in an ISA, and so it doesn't matter who the ISA provider is. There are a lot of stocks/ETFs that are simply ineligible for inclusion in ISAs

Not sure what you were looking at, but I've just looked at the price of Alliance Pharma on IG and it's 94.5p - you're not getting it mixed up with the commission charge by any chance?

You will be able to add more funds to the existing ISA. However you will only be able to do this once the new ISA year begins (6th April I think) as you have already used all of your allocation for this (tax) year.

As detailed in the link below, the custody charge is per client rather than per account, so there shouldn't be multiple charges. The fee is also offset by any trades you make during a quarter. If you make three deals (from any of your accounts) in a quarter, then the custody fee is waived entirely. https://community.ig.com/forums/topic/3398-uk-share-dealing-and-isa-custody-fee/

IG doesn't have that functionality. All your trades will be in the history which can be downloaded as a CSV and, with a bit of work, sorted to give the separate trades for each share. The other option is to maintain a record of your trades on the fly in a separate portfolio management tool.

Would be nice, but I can't see it happening. To be honest, I would be happy to just have a say over whether a broker can pimp my shares around. Ultimately, I guess the argument is that the fee the broker gets from lending clients' shares out offsets the commission the clients' are charged, so they are indeed indirectly paid from the process. The whole thing stinks though.

https://www.ig.com/uk/help-and-support/accounts-and-statements/my-accounts/how-does-a-demo-account-differ-from-a-live-account#:~:text=Trades made through the demo,grounds of size or price 'Trades made through the demo account will not be subject to slippage, interest and dividend adjustments, or out-of-hours price movements'

Buying and selling are counted as separate transactions - so you would be looking at three transactions of any type (so £30) to qualify for the zero commission on US stocks. However, bear in mind that there is also a 0.5% fee for currency conversion which will always apply ('free' is rarely ever truly free). I can't comment on CFDs as I personally don't touch them.