Topping up on Fernades (the process)

  • can somebody please help a new trader out.

    I orginally had 1 fernades at £9.80 who then went down to £9.40, I’ve decided to buy 4 more of him but on my portfolio it’s still saying I got him at £9.80 and my profit/loss has reduced further because of it. Am I right in saying if you have a share of them at a certain price, you can only buy at that price, therefore if you get someone cheap and they go up then just keep pumping money into them as you got a low rate? Please help

  • @NewUser586262 no you pay the price they currently are; your shown buy price is then an average of what you purchased. When you well your older shares sell first.

  • @Sav2000 thank you, makes sense and thought that was the case. Just had a slight panic as now all of a sudden I seem to be in the minus on profit when before I was in a healthy position.

  • @Sav2000 @NewUser586262
    It should have reduced your buy price tho... Should show 5 shares at £9.48...if it doesn't something has gone wrong... Its not a big deal but if concerned contact customer services.

    It could just sort itself out when you sell a share... But psychologically it could impact your strategy and current position etc.

    Show screenshots here if you like of the transactions and fernandes in your port in case there is anything you've mistaken

  • @NewUser586262

    Hi, this happened to me yesterday (also with Bruno). I contacted CS via live chat and they fixed it, if it hasn’t already sorted itself then might be worth asking just so it’s right.

  • This is happening to me on some of my players and the one I noticed recently is Rodrygo. It seems like the portfolio values are correct in some places but wrong in others (in the buy column). I think that's why in your main totals on the front screen your 'current' always has a higher value/percentage than your 'all time' value/percentage as the 'current' takes in your portfolio cost (which is showing as wrong) but the 'all time' only takes your portfolio value which is correct as it's based on the live buy price.

    For example I broke my Rodrygo purchases down to this:-
    Portfolio currently shows: 30 shares bought at 3.06 (91.80) and currently worth 3.19 (95.70)
    To get those 30 shares I bought 15 at 3.06 (45.90) and 15 at 3.19 (47.85), so a total spend of 93.75 that works out at an average share price of 3.125

    So my buy column should be showing 30 shares at 3.12 or 3.13 (93.75) and therefore a lower profit margin than being shown.

    So really your portfolio is pretty useless to view in terms of breaking your actual profit and loss down per player and you can only see an overall profit and loss via the 'all time' total.

    Surely this is something that should be fixed as I know I don't have time to go through every player on my portfolio and break them down as above to see if the figures are correct or not?!?

    I'm guessing overall you won't lose money as the current value (buy price) is what you'll get and what your shares are worth but it is shown in a misleading and incorrect way when in the portfolio.

  • If they fixed this I'm guessing this would also mean the 'current' and 'all time' values would be the same and you wouldn't need one or the other.

  • Actually edit to that comment about the 'current' and 'all time' value/percentage' being the same as there should be a difference between the two if you have money sitting in your cash balance (the 'current' value doesn't include that). So really your 'all time' value/percentage should be higher than your current if you have any money in your cash balance.

    Well for me my 'current' value/percentage is about £9 higher than my 'all time' but I only have 48p in my cash balance. So I'm lost at the minute as to what is what and clearly the incorrect cost price in my portfolio for some players is effecting this.

  • @NewUser586262 had the same today, emailed them about it, less than 3 hours later had a response and the issue has been rectified

  • Yes I had the same issue yesterday, only noticed as it was only a few shares. Just hope this hasn't been happening on bigger trades and I havent realised.

  • Just spoke to online chat and they corrected my Rodrygo and Auochichi shares that hadn’t updated the cost price to an average cost price or the total correctly. All now sorted.

    They also explained that the reason there’s a slight difference between ‘current’ and ‘all time’ values is that the all time value, which should be higher than the current value isn’t because it doesn’t include double dividends. I asked for it to be fed back for any further double dividends so that they are shown and therefore gives and accurate value for your all time value.

    Probably something worth keeping an eye on if you top up any shares to make sure the cost adjusted.

  • @Erased-Citizen the double dividends completely screwed up my spreadsheets as i could always check it against my portfolio but now my dividend total is higher on the spreadsheet. I could of listed them under a bonus section but i like to know exactly how much my profits are on individual players so they were entered into my SS as i do with normal dividends

  • Is this now a wide spread problem? Been topping up Kostic to get my average buy price breakeven. Added 29 futures today and made no difference to my average buy price but by my calculations I should be breakeven. I'd suggest this is a big problem if you can't trust your average buy price and I'm fucked if I'm checking every top up and emailing FI to correct it!

  • @LittleFish i went through my whole portfolio last night alongside my entire transaction history and found that only Rodrygo and Auochichi we’re wrong for me and they were players I’d recently topped up on. So I think it’s a recent glitch but people certainly don’t have the time to do that as there must be many with much bigger ports than mine.

    Seems an issue but I’m making note now to check a players price before I top up and if it doesn’t change I will contact them as it’s a quick fix.

    Ideally though they need to find the glitch in the system and permanently fix it though. As it can skew.your figures.

  • @Erased-Citizen thanks for that. I've been topping Kostic with divs for a couple of weeks. I did notice that there wasn't a change in av price but thought it due to just the few shares I was buying. Today I deposited money and worked out how many shares I needed to buy to breakeven. It was only then that I realised the problem. I might be well up on Kostic now if it has been calculating profit on the wrong basis. This is more piss poor FI.

  • @LittleFish Contact someone on the live chat as it’s a very quick fix. I did that last night and was sorted within minutes. Plus if you raise it as a concern and others do the same; they may look into it further.

  • @Erased-Citizen I've emailed them. Just bought 100 Rashford which should increase my average buy price and it has stayed the same. I think their system is broken. I'd suggest anyone topping up checks. It really is piss poor. And people wonder why I'm getting out while they introduce order books.

  • @Erased-Citizen

    Thanks for sharing this. All of my figures have been a complete mess since I made a 15k deposit on the 2nd of April. Before I contact CS a quick question. Rodrygo and Auochichi were your only errors, had you bought anyone else recently that didn't screw up?

  • @Martyn-B said in Topping up on Fernades (the process):


    Thanks for sharing this. All of my figures have been a complete mess since I made a 15k deposit on the 2nd of April. Before I contact CS a quick question. Rodrygo and Auochichi were your only errors, had you bought anyone else recently that didn't screw up?

    I had bought some shares in others a few days before that and they were okay so I think it’s only something that’s started happening in the last few days maybe. Unless it’s just certain players.

    Clearly it’s something they need to look into.

  • I had this problem yesterday with Jurgen Ekkelenkamp average buy price is wrong, originality was £1.55 wrought in again at £1.22 but average buy price still shows at the higher cost, customer services said they are aware of the problem and apparently working hard to fix it, so just watch your average buy prices

Log in to reply