Talk:FTSE 100 Index

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Business and economics Portal
This article is within the scope of the Business and Economics WikiProject.
Stub rated as stub-Class on the assessment scale
??? This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale.

Should it be quoted not quotated? 1 March 2004

I have updated as of the 27th of this month and am creating pages for every company, changing their listing to +(plc) to differentiate from other entities with same name. Calexico (Talk) 10:55, 27 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Listing by value

Is it possible to list the FTSE companies by value? Has it been done elsewhere?

[edit] Dual listings

Dicussion transferred here from user talk.

Hi. The dual listings for Schroders and Royal Dutch Shell are correct. 100 companies, but 102 listings. Mark83 22:17, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

People want to know the names of the companies. Putting the complications in brackets is quite enough. Carina22 16:45, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
These aren't "complications", the two changes you keep reverting are factually correct. You can't just change the composition of the FTSE 100 to conform to your own standard. The FTSE 100 does actually have 102 listings, i.e. 100 companies, two with dual listings makes 102. Every listing of the FTSE 100 (e.g. [1] [2] [3]) currently shows 102 listings, this is an encylopedia and must be factually correct. Mark83 18:07, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
Further to this, the official FTSE website list "FTSE 100 Index Constituents" shows Royal Dutch Shell and Schroders with two listings. Mark83 22:11, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
The list is headed "companies" and it is the companies that matter. I am not removing information, just arranging it better than other sources. I will clarify the note. Carina22 17:31, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Formal company names

see: Types of companies

[edit] FTSE All-Share

The article states ' the FT All Share Index (which incorporates all listed companies)'

I don't think this is correct.

Firstly some companies can be listed but are ineligble for inclusion in the indices.

Secondly there is the FTSE Fledgling index - The FTSE Fledgling consists of all UK companies which qualify for inclusion in UK Index Series but are too small to be included in the FTSE All-Share Index.

[edit] Indy 100

I added a short page on the Indy 100. Would it make sense to have a short "criticism" section here linking to it, and explaining the reasoning behind the new index? Steved424 22:15, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

I don't think it should be called "criticism". The FTSE is a market weighted index of UK based stocks, and it is not a meaningful "criticism" that they don't reflect the balance of the UK economy, just a fact of life. If you want a different kind of index you can have one, but it is tendentious to call it a criticism of the FTSE. Greg Grahame 22:20, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Market capitalisation table

This, for some reason, displays at the bottom of the page instead of in its section. I've looked at the source, and can't see any immediate problem, but my Wiki markup isn't up to scratch yet. RaceProUK 10:21, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:FTSE.PNG

Image:FTSE.PNG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 08:22, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Former listed companies

If were going to have former FTSE 100 companies listed on this page, would it be beneficial to also have the reason why these companies were delisted (e.g. defunct, merger, takeover etc)? KJNPBR 14:00, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

I think it is interesting, in many cases, to say why these companies were de-listed. Many companies can have very varied and colourful histories. The full history of what happened to companies is best explained in the article body of the company, where the company merits a full article. I think, just a small note here would suffice. I would invite more opinions on this too. Sloman 14:44, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
I agree with the small note of the reasons. The notes could also have wiki-links of the succeeding companies (if applicable). Eventually the section might even require a separate "list of..." article if this one gets too long. KJNPBR 07:17, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
As suggested I have put a short note against every company (unless it is still listed somewhere on the LSE) Dormskirk 21:53, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

I can't find any external information about T&N being a previous member of the FTSE 100 index. Any more information about this would be very much appreciated. Sloman (talk) 09:49, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

I have checked a list dated 1984 in "Financial Director" magazine and it was not in the FTSE 100 then Dormskirk (talk) 21:38, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
The official FTSE 100 constituent history which is cited as a source in the article has no mention of T&N (or Turner & Newall), so I think we can assume it was never a member. Gr1st (talk) 21:51, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Computation

How is the index computed? Would somebody like to write a section about it? (Sloman (talk) 18:05, 24 November 2007 (UTC))