Standard Chartered Crashes 24%

Published in Company Comment on 7 August 2012

Accusations send Standard Chartered (LSE: STAN) plummeting.

Standard Chartered (LSE: STAN) has now joined the ranks of Lloyds Banking (LSE: LLOY), Barclays (LSE: BARC) and HSBC (LSE: HSBA) among international banks falling foul of US sanctions on Iran and terrorist groups. Their indiscretions have cost the other three banks £863 million (though HSBC's fines could go higher) and an even weightier fine could be headed Standard Chartered's way.

Importantly, the New York Department of Financial Services -- an organisation not even a year old -- and its Superintendent, Benjamin Lawsky, are flexing their regulatory muscle and threatening to strip Standard Chartered of its US banking license.

While not particularly damaging on the surface -- almost 90% of Standard Chartered's profits come from Asia and Africa -- the loss of a US banking licence would have implications for the bank's global operations. Without a US banking licence, the ability to process US dollar-denominated trade financing becomes significantly more difficult and could result in a material loss of business.

However, Standard Chartered isn't taking the allegations -- of hiding 60,000 transactions with Iranian clients -- lightly and has issued a statement saying it "strongly rejects the position and portrayal of facts made by the New York Department of Financial Services" and feels the charges as presented do not offer "a full and accurate picture of the facts." 

The bank claims to have been working with US authorities for more than two years as part of an internal review of its compliance with US sanctions on Iran and other countries.

Regardless of whose story is more accurate, these allegations taint yet another UK bank and surround Standard Chartered with uncertainty that quickly erased last week's solid results and sent shares plummeting 24% during today's trading.

With all this uncertainty, the financial industry remains one for only the bravest investors. However, you can find some of The Motley Fool's favourite opportunities in other sectors in this free "Top Sectors of 2012" report. You can download the free report (while it is still available) by clicking here.

Are you looking to profit from this uncertain economy? "10 Steps To Making A Million In The Market" is the very latest Motley Fool guide to help Britain invest. Better. We urge you to read the report today -- it's free.

Further Motley Fool investment opportunities:

> Nate does not own any shares discussed above. The Motley Fool owns shares of Standard Chartered.

Share & subscribe

Comments

The opinions expressed here are those of the individual writers and are not representative of The Motley Fool. If you spot any comments that are unsuitable hit the flag to alert our moderators.

QuantumDealer 07 Aug 2012 , 11:43am

Sounds like an attractive buy given STAN is down 25% on the day...US legislators always go overboard when they think they have found a criminal but I reckon the lawyers will work this one out.

apprenticeDRL 07 Aug 2012 , 11:49am

Hmmm - my thoughts exactly - I am watching this as a possible buy. The question is how low will they go

QuantumDealer 07 Aug 2012 , 12:46pm

Or how high?! I dipped a toe in around 1103p in the end...

apprenticeDRL 07 Aug 2012 , 1:32pm

I think you have a good price. I havent committed yet but I am sitting on the sidelines with my finger poised

apprenticeDRL 07 Aug 2012 , 2:31pm

Looking at the way the prices are going I think you made a good call. I was waiting to see what affect the US market comming on line would have but I think you may have made the right decission to buy early.

QuantumDealer 07 Aug 2012 , 2:53pm

I was waiting for an opportunity like this and was also a bit miffed to not have picked up some STAN at a cheap price when the banking crisis was in full flow. Delighted to have bought some at around the £11 mark but as apprenticeDRL says, the US market (& Govt.) will now decide where the share price ends up, all things being equal.

I took the view that if a company did >90% of its business in the rest of the world (i.e. ex-US) then a 25% fall on the day was overblown.

As always, only time will tell...

lotontech 07 Aug 2012 , 6:19pm

This morning I was "Dicing with Death on a Standard Chartered Day Trade"... http://goo.gl/v4Ol3

AndyThailand 07 Aug 2012 , 6:52pm

Yet another article short on content but long on adverts for the same old (Now very) tired pages -

The FTSE 100 Share Warren Buffett Loves
What Every New Investor Needs To Know
8 Dividend Shares Held By Britain's Super-Investor

Fool - can we have a break from this now?

AndyThailand 07 Aug 2012 , 7:02pm

In fact, looking through recent articles, there are a great many which are really just signposts for other older ones written by the same author (funny old thing).

Some of these are of substance, but others are merely adverts for other brief articles. And so the cycle continues....

Has anyone else noticed this? Is Fool in danger of getting lightweight because of poor moderation?

goodlifer 07 Aug 2012 , 7:56pm

Hi apprenticeDR, hi QuantumDealer,
I got out - and put the proceeds into RIO - for much the same price as you guys seem to be getting in.

Let's wish ourselves luck!

QuantumDealer 07 Aug 2012 , 8:47pm

goodlifer,

1. why did you sell STAN?
2. what price did you buy at (if you don't mind saying, that is)?
3. why did you switch into RIO?

PS - I already own a little RIO & a bit more of BLT.

QuantumDealer 07 Aug 2012 , 8:48pm

PPS - if Eminem bought one stock do you think it would be STAN?!

goodlifer 08 Aug 2012 , 12:52pm

QuantumDealer

1. Ask my psychiatrist!
2. 14.039
3. Long term hold - they looked quite cheap.

Less than 8 times earnings

goodlifer 08 Aug 2012 , 1:18pm

Sorry, let me start again

1. Ask my psychiatrist!

I did much the same when BP had their problems - may well have been wrong then, but not disastrously so,

Basically, I suppose I don't like holding shares which cause, or might cause, me to fret

And even if STAN turns out to be whiter than the whitewash on the wall, it won't help their business to have the Americans being awkward

And there's always the possibility of buying back in if they go down even further.

2. 14.039

3. Long term hold - they looked quite cheap.
Less than 8 times earnings.
Bit of a divi, quite generously covered.
Both beta and stockholders' equity nice and high

Bit of a hedge against inflation.
Demand for commodities unlikely, in the long run, to go down.
Share price could go unexpectedly up, with a chance of a profitable, opportunistic sale - it's happened before.


Anyway, those are my present sentlements, but I shan't be surprised if I've got everything all wrong.
Again!

goodlifer 08 Aug 2012 , 10:14pm

My answer to Question 2 was not quite right.
i've just remembered I bought them in two lots.

About a third cost 14.039.
I got the rest for13,879

Not that what they cost makes a blind bit of of difference to what they were worth when I sold them.

Join the conversation

Please take note - some tags have changed.

Line breaks are converted automatically.

You may use the following tags in your post: [b]bolded text[/b], [i]italicised text[/i]. All other tags will be removed from your post.

If you want to add a link, please ensure you type it as http://www.fool.co.uk as opposed to www.fool.co.uk.

Hello stranger

To add your own comment, please login.

Not yet registered? Register now.