2026 Q2 - tulosraportti
Vain PDF
49 päivää sitten
4,00 DKK/osake
Viimeisin osinko
1,04%Tuotto/v
Tarjoustasot
Määrä
Osto
-
Myynti
Määrä
-
Viimeisimmät kaupat
| Aika | Hinta | Määrä | Ostaja | Myyjä |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 53 | - | - | ||
| 1 | - | - | ||
| 13 | - | - | ||
| 12 | - | - | ||
| 22 | - | - |
Huomioi, että vaikka osakkeisiin säästäminen on pitkällä aikavälillä tuottanut hyvin, tulevasta tuotosta ei ole takeita. On olemassa riski, että et saa sijoittamiasi varoja takaisin.
Rahastot ja ETF:t, joilla on osaketta
Mikään rahasto ei ilmoita osaketta kymmenen suurimman omistuksensa joukossa.
Asiakkaat katsoivat myös
Yhtiötapahtumat
Datan lähde: Quartr| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q3 - tulosraportti 18.11. |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
2026 Q2 - tulosraportti 27.8. | ||
2026 Q1 - tulosraportti 20.5. | ||
2025 Q4 - tulosraportti 25.2. | ||
2025 Q3 - tulosraportti 20.11.2025 | ||
2025 Q2 - tulosraportti 28.8.2025 |
Uutiset
Tämän sivun uutiset ja/tai sijoitussuositukset tai otteet niistä sekä niihin liittyvät linkit ovat mainitun tahon tuottamia ja toimittamia. Nordnet ei ole osallistunut materiaalin laatimiseen, eikä ole tarkistanut sen sisältöä tai tehnyt sisältöön muutoksia. Lue lisää sijoitussuosituksista.
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
·18.9. · MuokattuSJF Bank currently owns 300,099 shares in Møns Bank, corresponding to 5.0049% of the share capital. The voting right amounts to 1%. Other major banks have also bought into Møns Bank, and similarly only have voting rights of 1%.
It is therefore 15%, cf. the news overview "corresponding to 15.0049 % of the share capital. Voting rights associated with the shareholding are 1 %."
·7.9. · MuokattuWell, when one looks at the profit margin per employee, Møns Bank looks VERY BAD. Around 500.000Dkr. where other comparable financial institutions are around 1mill Dkr. per full-time equivalent. Proudly the management stands and announces they met expectations. That can hardly be avoided, as they are set so low, so all ambitions for an efficient business must be put on the back burner. SFJ BANK. gives more than double in dividendI therefore think it's better to get out of SFJ before they possibly announce a purchase of Møn, because then the price will probably go down, and I don't want to be part of that downturn :)
·4.9.So SJF Bank has bought an additional 5% of the share capital in Møns Bank and is thus up to 15% ownership. I wonder if they will soon try to make a takeover bid?
·10.7.2026 has so far been a quiet year compared to the consolidation that has been a natural part of the Danish banking market since the financial crisis 18 years ago. The number of banks – listed and unlisted – has steadily decreased. And there is a consensus that the trend will continue – even among the directors. It's just that no one sees themselves as the leader of the bank being acquired. Obviously, the likelihood of further consolidations is greatest in times of crisis, as a merger can become an urgent necessity. Despite geopolitical unrest, Danish banks are in calm waters, although I personally can be nervous about the smallest banks' inability to create better results in the current economic environment where no significant losses are realized. I would therefore be surprised (read: disappointed) if no considerations are being made in the executive and board rooms about what should happen if a larger bank comes calling. We know that some of the small banks have historically defended their independence through voting restrictions, i.e., a defensive tactic where the indirect intention is to make the bank as unattractive as possible to suitors. The disadvantage of this tactic was highlighted in connection with the saga of Nordfyns Bank, where it was established that the voting restrictions were not applicable in termination situations. We know the voting restrictions from, for example, Lollands Bank and Møns Bank. And it has worked – so far. However, it is my assessment that a more positive and offensive approach would be more obvious in keeping suitors at bay: Why not instead focus on increasing the price of an acquisition so much that no one would genuinely make advances? It is well-known – especially in non-crisis times – that a premium must be paid to convince current shareholders of a merger. If I were the CEO of one of the smaller banks, where my most distinguished task was to ensure the continued independence of the bank, I would think that the current share price should go so high that the premium (additional price) would become too high for acquiring banks to pay. I.e., a diametrically opposite direction than voting restrictions, which, all else being equal, lead to a lower share price. So, in addition to the very obvious task of ensuring the bank is run soundly financially, I would make sure to look in the toolbox for shareholder-friendly initiatives. There are actually a couple that are so obvious it almost screams to high heaven. So obvious, in fact, that even banks not "at risk" of acquisition should use them if they care about their shareholders' interests. First, the least effective: It is obvious to ensure the highest possible liquidity in the stock, so both small and large shareholders can get in and out. I myself am a shareholder in Berkshire Hathaway (primarily just to honor a great idol) and yes, there can certainly be a snob effect in a high share price. But I don't think that's a factor for a shareholder in Kreditbanken. So why not arrange a stock split when the price at the time of writing is 8.800 kr.? In my view, Kreditbanken is in every way a very, very soundly managed bank – but why not pick the low-hanging fruit on behalf of the shareholders? I hold shares in the bank worth approx. 2,5 mio. kr. But just as long as it took to get in, it will take just as long to get out if one doesn't want to shake the price. This leads me to the tool that more and more have chosen to use in recent years: Share buybacks. I admit the counter-intuitive nature that a reduction in the number of shares would make it harder for a competing bank with good or bad intentions to take over power, but the decisive factor for the acquiring bank is not the number of shares or the price – it is the product of these, i.e., the total value of the bank. So if buybacks lead to a higher total value of the bank via a higher share price, it will not only be shareholder-friendly but also leave the acquiring bank less room to offer a reasonable "premium". A large part of my investments are in banks that currently use share buybacks. I can see in my data how significant an impact it has on the share price. Therefore, the initiation of a large share buyback program is the very best buy signal. Therefore: @ Kreditbanken: You will be able to deliver a stock split and a buyback program when the annual report for 2026 is submitted (you are actually the only one on Bankdata not currently doing so) @ Jyske Bank: A stock split is also approaching for you. I think, however, that you, better than most, have understood the value of share buybacks – thank you for that. @ SJF Bank: Good to see you getting started with the share buyback. The question is, isn't there room for a larger program next year? @ Møns Bank and Lollands Bank: Voting restrictions alone will not be enough the day the economic cycle turns @ My fellow investors: Enjoy the summer
Don't you think, despite the good times, that SJF will try its hand in precisely Lolland and Møn. Partly they own strategic positions in both places, and partly it would be an easy matter to "grease" management and board chairmen with good deals. In my opinion, it would make sense in every way for SJF to buy the two.
·13.2.Crazy enough that it's taking such a beating when it hasn't risen nearly as much as many of the other small banks.
Yllä olevat kommentit ovat peräisin Nordnetin sosiaalisen verkoston Nordnet Socialin käyttäjiltä, eikä niitä ole muokattu eikä Nordnet ole tarkastanut niitä etukäteen. Ne eivät tarkoita, että Nordnet tarjoaisi sijoitusneuvoja tai sijoitussuosituksia. Nordnet ei ota vastuuta kommenteista.
Tuotteita joiden kohde-etuutena tämä arvopaperi
Välittäjätilasto
Ostaneet eniten
| Välittäjä | Ostettu | Myyty | Netto | Sisäinen |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anonyymi | 102 | 102 | 0 | 0 |
Myyneet eniten
| Välittäjä | Ostettu | Myyty | Netto | Sisäinen |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anonyymi | 102 | 102 | 0 | 0 |
2026 Q2 - tulosraportti
Vain PDF
49 päivää sitten
4,00 DKK/osake
Viimeisin osinko
1,04%Tuotto/v
Uutiset
Tämän sivun uutiset ja/tai sijoitussuositukset tai otteet niistä sekä niihin liittyvät linkit ovat mainitun tahon tuottamia ja toimittamia. Nordnet ei ole osallistunut materiaalin laatimiseen, eikä ole tarkistanut sen sisältöä tai tehnyt sisältöön muutoksia. Lue lisää sijoitussuosituksista.
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
- ·18.9. · MuokattuSJF Bank currently owns 300,099 shares in Møns Bank, corresponding to 5.0049% of the share capital. The voting right amounts to 1%. Other major banks have also bought into Møns Bank, and similarly only have voting rights of 1%.It is therefore 15%, cf. the news overview "corresponding to 15.0049 % of the share capital. Voting rights associated with the shareholding are 1 %."
- ·7.9. · MuokattuWell, when one looks at the profit margin per employee, Møns Bank looks VERY BAD. Around 500.000Dkr. where other comparable financial institutions are around 1mill Dkr. per full-time equivalent. Proudly the management stands and announces they met expectations. That can hardly be avoided, as they are set so low, so all ambitions for an efficient business must be put on the back burner. SFJ BANK. gives more than double in dividendI therefore think it's better to get out of SFJ before they possibly announce a purchase of Møn, because then the price will probably go down, and I don't want to be part of that downturn :)
- ·4.9.So SJF Bank has bought an additional 5% of the share capital in Møns Bank and is thus up to 15% ownership. I wonder if they will soon try to make a takeover bid?
- ·10.7.2026 has so far been a quiet year compared to the consolidation that has been a natural part of the Danish banking market since the financial crisis 18 years ago. The number of banks – listed and unlisted – has steadily decreased. And there is a consensus that the trend will continue – even among the directors. It's just that no one sees themselves as the leader of the bank being acquired. Obviously, the likelihood of further consolidations is greatest in times of crisis, as a merger can become an urgent necessity. Despite geopolitical unrest, Danish banks are in calm waters, although I personally can be nervous about the smallest banks' inability to create better results in the current economic environment where no significant losses are realized. I would therefore be surprised (read: disappointed) if no considerations are being made in the executive and board rooms about what should happen if a larger bank comes calling. We know that some of the small banks have historically defended their independence through voting restrictions, i.e., a defensive tactic where the indirect intention is to make the bank as unattractive as possible to suitors. The disadvantage of this tactic was highlighted in connection with the saga of Nordfyns Bank, where it was established that the voting restrictions were not applicable in termination situations. We know the voting restrictions from, for example, Lollands Bank and Møns Bank. And it has worked – so far. However, it is my assessment that a more positive and offensive approach would be more obvious in keeping suitors at bay: Why not instead focus on increasing the price of an acquisition so much that no one would genuinely make advances? It is well-known – especially in non-crisis times – that a premium must be paid to convince current shareholders of a merger. If I were the CEO of one of the smaller banks, where my most distinguished task was to ensure the continued independence of the bank, I would think that the current share price should go so high that the premium (additional price) would become too high for acquiring banks to pay. I.e., a diametrically opposite direction than voting restrictions, which, all else being equal, lead to a lower share price. So, in addition to the very obvious task of ensuring the bank is run soundly financially, I would make sure to look in the toolbox for shareholder-friendly initiatives. There are actually a couple that are so obvious it almost screams to high heaven. So obvious, in fact, that even banks not "at risk" of acquisition should use them if they care about their shareholders' interests. First, the least effective: It is obvious to ensure the highest possible liquidity in the stock, so both small and large shareholders can get in and out. I myself am a shareholder in Berkshire Hathaway (primarily just to honor a great idol) and yes, there can certainly be a snob effect in a high share price. But I don't think that's a factor for a shareholder in Kreditbanken. So why not arrange a stock split when the price at the time of writing is 8.800 kr.? In my view, Kreditbanken is in every way a very, very soundly managed bank – but why not pick the low-hanging fruit on behalf of the shareholders? I hold shares in the bank worth approx. 2,5 mio. kr. But just as long as it took to get in, it will take just as long to get out if one doesn't want to shake the price. This leads me to the tool that more and more have chosen to use in recent years: Share buybacks. I admit the counter-intuitive nature that a reduction in the number of shares would make it harder for a competing bank with good or bad intentions to take over power, but the decisive factor for the acquiring bank is not the number of shares or the price – it is the product of these, i.e., the total value of the bank. So if buybacks lead to a higher total value of the bank via a higher share price, it will not only be shareholder-friendly but also leave the acquiring bank less room to offer a reasonable "premium". A large part of my investments are in banks that currently use share buybacks. I can see in my data how significant an impact it has on the share price. Therefore, the initiation of a large share buyback program is the very best buy signal. Therefore: @ Kreditbanken: You will be able to deliver a stock split and a buyback program when the annual report for 2026 is submitted (you are actually the only one on Bankdata not currently doing so) @ Jyske Bank: A stock split is also approaching for you. I think, however, that you, better than most, have understood the value of share buybacks – thank you for that. @ SJF Bank: Good to see you getting started with the share buyback. The question is, isn't there room for a larger program next year? @ Møns Bank and Lollands Bank: Voting restrictions alone will not be enough the day the economic cycle turns @ My fellow investors: Enjoy the summerDon't you think, despite the good times, that SJF will try its hand in precisely Lolland and Møn. Partly they own strategic positions in both places, and partly it would be an easy matter to "grease" management and board chairmen with good deals. In my opinion, it would make sense in every way for SJF to buy the two.
- ·13.2.Crazy enough that it's taking such a beating when it hasn't risen nearly as much as many of the other small banks.
Yllä olevat kommentit ovat peräisin Nordnetin sosiaalisen verkoston Nordnet Socialin käyttäjiltä, eikä niitä ole muokattu eikä Nordnet ole tarkastanut niitä etukäteen. Ne eivät tarkoita, että Nordnet tarjoaisi sijoitusneuvoja tai sijoitussuosituksia. Nordnet ei ota vastuuta kommenteista.
Tarjoustasot
Määrä
Osto
-
Myynti
Määrä
-
Viimeisimmät kaupat
| Aika | Hinta | Määrä | Ostaja | Myyjä |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 53 | - | - | ||
| 1 | - | - | ||
| 13 | - | - | ||
| 12 | - | - | ||
| 22 | - | - |
Huomioi, että vaikka osakkeisiin säästäminen on pitkällä aikavälillä tuottanut hyvin, tulevasta tuotosta ei ole takeita. On olemassa riski, että et saa sijoittamiasi varoja takaisin.
Rahastot ja ETF:t, joilla on osaketta
Mikään rahasto ei ilmoita osaketta kymmenen suurimman omistuksensa joukossa.
Asiakkaat katsoivat myös
Yhtiötapahtumat
Datan lähde: Quartr| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q3 - tulosraportti 18.11. |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
2026 Q2 - tulosraportti 27.8. | ||
2026 Q1 - tulosraportti 20.5. | ||
2025 Q4 - tulosraportti 25.2. | ||
2025 Q3 - tulosraportti 20.11.2025 | ||
2025 Q2 - tulosraportti 28.8.2025 |
Tuotteita joiden kohde-etuutena tämä arvopaperi
Välittäjätilasto
Ostaneet eniten
| Välittäjä | Ostettu | Myyty | Netto | Sisäinen |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anonyymi | 102 | 102 | 0 | 0 |
Myyneet eniten
| Välittäjä | Ostettu | Myyty | Netto | Sisäinen |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anonyymi | 102 | 102 | 0 | 0 |
2026 Q2 - tulosraportti
Vain PDF
49 päivää sitten
Uutiset
Tämän sivun uutiset ja/tai sijoitussuositukset tai otteet niistä sekä niihin liittyvät linkit ovat mainitun tahon tuottamia ja toimittamia. Nordnet ei ole osallistunut materiaalin laatimiseen, eikä ole tarkistanut sen sisältöä tai tehnyt sisältöön muutoksia. Lue lisää sijoitussuosituksista.
Yhtiötapahtumat
Datan lähde: Quartr| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q3 - tulosraportti 18.11. |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
2026 Q2 - tulosraportti 27.8. | ||
2026 Q1 - tulosraportti 20.5. | ||
2025 Q4 - tulosraportti 25.2. | ||
2025 Q3 - tulosraportti 20.11.2025 | ||
2025 Q2 - tulosraportti 28.8.2025 |
Tuotteita joiden kohde-etuutena tämä arvopaperi
4,00 DKK/osake
Viimeisin osinko
1,04%Tuotto/v
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
- ·18.9. · MuokattuSJF Bank currently owns 300,099 shares in Møns Bank, corresponding to 5.0049% of the share capital. The voting right amounts to 1%. Other major banks have also bought into Møns Bank, and similarly only have voting rights of 1%.It is therefore 15%, cf. the news overview "corresponding to 15.0049 % of the share capital. Voting rights associated with the shareholding are 1 %."
- ·7.9. · MuokattuWell, when one looks at the profit margin per employee, Møns Bank looks VERY BAD. Around 500.000Dkr. where other comparable financial institutions are around 1mill Dkr. per full-time equivalent. Proudly the management stands and announces they met expectations. That can hardly be avoided, as they are set so low, so all ambitions for an efficient business must be put on the back burner. SFJ BANK. gives more than double in dividendI therefore think it's better to get out of SFJ before they possibly announce a purchase of Møn, because then the price will probably go down, and I don't want to be part of that downturn :)
- ·4.9.So SJF Bank has bought an additional 5% of the share capital in Møns Bank and is thus up to 15% ownership. I wonder if they will soon try to make a takeover bid?
- ·10.7.2026 has so far been a quiet year compared to the consolidation that has been a natural part of the Danish banking market since the financial crisis 18 years ago. The number of banks – listed and unlisted – has steadily decreased. And there is a consensus that the trend will continue – even among the directors. It's just that no one sees themselves as the leader of the bank being acquired. Obviously, the likelihood of further consolidations is greatest in times of crisis, as a merger can become an urgent necessity. Despite geopolitical unrest, Danish banks are in calm waters, although I personally can be nervous about the smallest banks' inability to create better results in the current economic environment where no significant losses are realized. I would therefore be surprised (read: disappointed) if no considerations are being made in the executive and board rooms about what should happen if a larger bank comes calling. We know that some of the small banks have historically defended their independence through voting restrictions, i.e., a defensive tactic where the indirect intention is to make the bank as unattractive as possible to suitors. The disadvantage of this tactic was highlighted in connection with the saga of Nordfyns Bank, where it was established that the voting restrictions were not applicable in termination situations. We know the voting restrictions from, for example, Lollands Bank and Møns Bank. And it has worked – so far. However, it is my assessment that a more positive and offensive approach would be more obvious in keeping suitors at bay: Why not instead focus on increasing the price of an acquisition so much that no one would genuinely make advances? It is well-known – especially in non-crisis times – that a premium must be paid to convince current shareholders of a merger. If I were the CEO of one of the smaller banks, where my most distinguished task was to ensure the continued independence of the bank, I would think that the current share price should go so high that the premium (additional price) would become too high for acquiring banks to pay. I.e., a diametrically opposite direction than voting restrictions, which, all else being equal, lead to a lower share price. So, in addition to the very obvious task of ensuring the bank is run soundly financially, I would make sure to look in the toolbox for shareholder-friendly initiatives. There are actually a couple that are so obvious it almost screams to high heaven. So obvious, in fact, that even banks not "at risk" of acquisition should use them if they care about their shareholders' interests. First, the least effective: It is obvious to ensure the highest possible liquidity in the stock, so both small and large shareholders can get in and out. I myself am a shareholder in Berkshire Hathaway (primarily just to honor a great idol) and yes, there can certainly be a snob effect in a high share price. But I don't think that's a factor for a shareholder in Kreditbanken. So why not arrange a stock split when the price at the time of writing is 8.800 kr.? In my view, Kreditbanken is in every way a very, very soundly managed bank – but why not pick the low-hanging fruit on behalf of the shareholders? I hold shares in the bank worth approx. 2,5 mio. kr. But just as long as it took to get in, it will take just as long to get out if one doesn't want to shake the price. This leads me to the tool that more and more have chosen to use in recent years: Share buybacks. I admit the counter-intuitive nature that a reduction in the number of shares would make it harder for a competing bank with good or bad intentions to take over power, but the decisive factor for the acquiring bank is not the number of shares or the price – it is the product of these, i.e., the total value of the bank. So if buybacks lead to a higher total value of the bank via a higher share price, it will not only be shareholder-friendly but also leave the acquiring bank less room to offer a reasonable "premium". A large part of my investments are in banks that currently use share buybacks. I can see in my data how significant an impact it has on the share price. Therefore, the initiation of a large share buyback program is the very best buy signal. Therefore: @ Kreditbanken: You will be able to deliver a stock split and a buyback program when the annual report for 2026 is submitted (you are actually the only one on Bankdata not currently doing so) @ Jyske Bank: A stock split is also approaching for you. I think, however, that you, better than most, have understood the value of share buybacks – thank you for that. @ SJF Bank: Good to see you getting started with the share buyback. The question is, isn't there room for a larger program next year? @ Møns Bank and Lollands Bank: Voting restrictions alone will not be enough the day the economic cycle turns @ My fellow investors: Enjoy the summerDon't you think, despite the good times, that SJF will try its hand in precisely Lolland and Møn. Partly they own strategic positions in both places, and partly it would be an easy matter to "grease" management and board chairmen with good deals. In my opinion, it would make sense in every way for SJF to buy the two.
- ·13.2.Crazy enough that it's taking such a beating when it hasn't risen nearly as much as many of the other small banks.
Yllä olevat kommentit ovat peräisin Nordnetin sosiaalisen verkoston Nordnet Socialin käyttäjiltä, eikä niitä ole muokattu eikä Nordnet ole tarkastanut niitä etukäteen. Ne eivät tarkoita, että Nordnet tarjoaisi sijoitusneuvoja tai sijoitussuosituksia. Nordnet ei ota vastuuta kommenteista.
Tarjoustasot
Määrä
Osto
-
Myynti
Määrä
-
Viimeisimmät kaupat
| Aika | Hinta | Määrä | Ostaja | Myyjä |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 53 | - | - | ||
| 1 | - | - | ||
| 13 | - | - | ||
| 12 | - | - | ||
| 22 | - | - |
Huomioi, että vaikka osakkeisiin säästäminen on pitkällä aikavälillä tuottanut hyvin, tulevasta tuotosta ei ole takeita. On olemassa riski, että et saa sijoittamiasi varoja takaisin.
Rahastot ja ETF:t, joilla on osaketta
Mikään rahasto ei ilmoita osaketta kymmenen suurimman omistuksensa joukossa.
Asiakkaat katsoivat myös
Välittäjätilasto
Ostaneet eniten
| Välittäjä | Ostettu | Myyty | Netto | Sisäinen |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anonyymi | 102 | 102 | 0 | 0 |
Myyneet eniten
| Välittäjä | Ostettu | Myyty | Netto | Sisäinen |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anonyymi | 102 | 102 | 0 | 0 |