Member Info for 42trader

Market cap of 117million

Asset value of company is 143million
The company is fully funded
The company is profit making
The company is still targeting to double production by end of 2018
No placing needed

Sell on news if you like but sdx is already under valued. Any big drop and I’ll likely add or even add at these levels when funds become available.
All the best to everyone.

On target to doubling production.
No placing as has 25 million and 10million credit facility if needed.
3 new customers.
Yes if sdx had not spent cash over the year then would of had 70 million but would then not be on target to double production by end of 2018 and still have enough cash to be fully funded.
Pretty good RNS with company being managed well.

This sums up pretty well imo.

Throughout the period, we remained focused on strict capital discipline and continued to monitor opportunities that would enable us to increase our asset base in North Africa. As at June 30, 2018, we are well funded for our remaining work commitments with US$25.2 million of cash and an undrawn Credit Facility of US$10.0 million and we continue to target doubling our production by the end of 2018."

Yeah agree that their tips are often wrong and that is because the market can be fickle. Their info is often correct and helps investors understand certain aspects. What we know here is that retail is going through some tough changes mainly due to the internet, being able to bring products in from abroad. Retail will always be around though likely to be dominated by massive companies. Plenty more changes to come and all this makes retail a very risky sector to be in. This does not mean money can not be made here. Atb

Good to see this bounce off the 200 ema. Well under valued imo and I feel lucky I was able to add more here yesterday via a buy order I set a while ago.

Just posted a interesting article about retailers over on DEB.

"DEB has appointed Osborne as CFO replacing Smith who will leave the company this month. Ms Osborne was most recently DOM fourth CEO in as many years, after she took up the role in Oct 2016 and left in June.
One of the tough choices for Ms Osborne will be the future of DEB dividend.
The struggling retailer has issued 3 profit warnings since the start of the year and some brokers expect the payout to be pulled.
Pulling the dividend may disappoint the market, but we feel preserving the capital would be a sensible move, given the need to draw in new customers to mitigate the impact on margins and to cut costs. At 13.5p or six times forward earnings, we think the shares look cheap for a reason."

After a dismal Christmas trading period capped a poor 2017, House of Fraser’s net loss for the 12 months to January 2018 stood at £37m. With the shadow of its rent bill lengthening, the department store had little option but to try to strike a deal with its landlords. An insolvency arrangement, backed by creditors but bitterly opposed by some landlords, exposed another fracture in the British high street, and the tension between its property owners and tenants. But ultimately without the lifeline thrown to it by Mike Ashley and Sports Direct (SPD), House of Fraser would have been resigned to the growing list of failed shopping stalwarts.

House of Fraser has not been without its own operational faults. Like many high-street retailers, the company has been punished for its past debt-fuelled expansion, a strategy that has left it sinking under a huge store estate with long lease terms, and short of the sort of returns needed to offset expenses. These expenses not only include steeper rents, but also rising wage bills and higher business rates.

On the latter point, House of Fraser has company. In fact, higher business rates are causing distress for many businesses, not just retailers, and compounding the existential threats to the British high street in the process. The tax, while rarely the sole driver of business insolvencies, “certainly [is] a contributory factor”, according to Robert Hayton, an adviser on UK business rates at consultancy Altus Group. Unfortunately, this presents the sector with yet another quandary, from which there is no clear path to safety.

Online vs offline

Business rates went up in April, and with them the rising howls of high-street retailers. Tesco (TSCO) chief executive Dave Lewis has called for reform of the tax. Rising rates are near the top of JD Wetherspoon (JDW) chairman Tim Martin’s list of bêtes noires. In explaining the closure of a Covent Garden store, Marks and Spencer (MKS) chief executive Steve Rowe described the site’s near-£0.5m rise in business rates in the space of a year, as “untenable”.

For bigger retail businesses, one of the chief gripes with rate changes has been disparity across the sector. The problem is clear: online behemoths such as Amazon (US:AMZ) and Asos (ASC) aren’t subject to the same charges, despite their significant and growing share of the market. Without a high-street presence, critics argue, these online companies not only fail to contribute to the Treasury, but continue to undercut those determined (or left behind) to foster the survival of the British high street.
Even when it comes to the extensive distribution centres run by online retailers, Altus Group analysis showed that rates on these properties have fallen for companies including Asos and Littlewoods-owner Shop Direct, while Amazon only incurred a business rate tax bill equivalent to £38m this year. The rateable value of its fulfilment centres ranges from £27 per metre square in Swansea to £67.50 per metre square in Hemel Hempstead. That compares with House of Fraser’s Oxford St store, which saw its rateable value rise 57 per cent under the last revaluation to £3.28m, equivalent to £228 per square metre. Similarly, John Lewis’s High Wycombe department store costs the group £155 per square metre – more than double Amazon’s nearby Hemel Hempstead warehouse.

On average, Amazon pays a business rate bill equivalent to £46 per square metre across 13 fulfilment centres, while Altus Group estimates that rises in this year’s rates equated to just 0.7 per cent for 11 of Amazon’s 14 “vast sheds”. In its defence, the Seattle-headquartered company says it pays all taxes demanded under UK law, and that it pays “tens of millions of pounds more in business rates in England and Wales” than the Altus research suggests. Amazon also says it pays more than just the rates on its fulfilment centres – and that its business rates bill “increased significantly” in 2018.

The end of the high street?

Some will also counter that Amazon simply has a better business model, and that the competition needs to catch up or out-innovate the US giant’s redefinition of shopping. But the main argument among UK high-street retailers is that if government policy doesn’t act quickly to make life easier, then the high street will die. A string of high-profile collapses this year – including Maplin, Toys ‘R’ Us, and Poundworld – all point to the difficulties of running a successful retail business. Others, including Mothercare (MTC), Carpetright (CPR) and House of Fraser, have all attempted to use company voluntary arrangements (CVAs) to exit underperforming stores and secure their futures.

The latter solution faces its own form of opposition. A CVA is effectively the first stage of an insolvency procedure, which allows a company with serious debt problems to reach agreement with its creditors regarding repayment of all, or part of its corporate debts over an agreed period of time. As part of this process, the CVA can allow groups to exit punitive property leases ahead of schedule. For listed retailers, equity fundraisings are often part of the deal, so existing shareholders can find their investment diluted, too. But the alternative is often complete collapse, which helps win over legacy stakeholders, and lure fresh investors convinced a turnaround is afoot.
Landlords, however, have dug their heels in. In response to House of Fraser’s use of this scheme, some of its major store owners attempted a legal challenge, claiming the deal to exit 31 of 59 sites and slash the rent bill on the remainder was unfair. But the appeal itself was rendered moot when C.banner, the Chinese owner of Hamley’s, pulled out of a rescue plan to inject £70m in exchange for a 51 per cent stake in the chain. House of Fraser’s subsequent collapse was also short-lived thanks to Mike Ashley’s pledge to buy the company out of administration for £90m.

While the company’s debt and pension liabilities aren’t part of the package, cash generation will remain a major issue. Mr Ashley has said he wants to keep 80 per cent of House of Fraser stores open, but rates and other fixed costs are still part of the problem. Business rate bills for the department store chain rose 15 per cent to £4m in 2017-18, and could rise again this financial year.

But even companies eligible for discounts, such as pubs, have suffered under the first year of revaluation. According to research by Altus, pubs saw rates bills rise 5.6 per cent despite the £1,000 relief, while restaurants saw rises of roughly 23.3 per cent.

Future relief

Earlier in August, many industries – not just retail – welcomed comments by chancellor Philip Hammond, who hinted that the government would consider the introduction of a tax on online businesses to make up for the disparity in business rate charges. “We want to assure that the high street remains resilient,” said Mr Hammond in an interview with Sky News. “We want to make sure that taxation is fair, between businesses doing business the traditional way, and those doing business online.” But Mr Hammond also pointed out a crucial difference with these online groups, many of which are international, and so would require the renegotiation of international tax treaties to allow for new legislation at home. If international agreements cannot be found, Mr Hammond has floated the idea of temporary tax measures in Britain, which could be enforced until new international rules are agreed. Revenues from these new taxes could then be diverted to ease the burden of property-led retailers on the British high street.
Spreading the risk

The introduction of a new online tax doesn’t seem out of the question. Similar measures were taken in the gambling sector three years ago, with the point of consumption tax, which was designed to stop online gambling groups registering offshore and paying minimal duties on their sold services in the UK market. Now online gambling companies pay a 15 per cent levy on revenues generated where the relevant player is based. Additional levies have since been introduced on cash bonuses too.

This prospect leaves groups such as Asos and boohoo (BOO) highly exposed, but it’s worth remembering that high-street chains like Debenhams (DEB) – in which Mike Ashley also owns a 29 per cent stake – and Marks and Spencer now have extensive online operations as well. Even if property-related business rates are frozen, an additional online levy isn’t going to ease the pain. This must be a consideration in any new legislation as high-street retailers of a certain size risk facing twice the expense, leaving only small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) without an online presence as the true winners. HR

Business rates: an explanation

Business rates have garnered a lot of attention of late, mainly because rates were revised on 1 April 2018 in England and Wales. These were based on valuations made in 2017, having been postponed from the original valuation date of 2015. Before 2017 rateable values hadn’t changed since 2008.

The rate is calculated by taking the open market rental value, or rateable value, of a property and multiplying it by a figure set by the government and known as a multiplier. In some cases, a property owner will be eligible for transitional relief, which means that any increase is introduced over a period of time. And any property with a rateable value of less than £15,000 will earn some sort of relief. If the figure is less than £12,000, the owner will not pay any business rates, while there is a sliding scale for rateable values between the two figures. On a rateable value below £51,000, the bill will be calculated using the small business multiplier, which is 48p, whereas the standard multiplier is 49.3p

Then there is rural rate relief and charitable rate relief, where relief applies to rural areas with a population of under 3,000 or if the property is being used for charitable purposes. And if you are starting up or relocating to an enterprise zone you could get up to £55,000 a year over five years. Pubs also get £1,000 relief in England where the rateable value is less than £100,000.

The government pledged that the revaluation had to be broadly revenue neutral, and estimated that while 510,000 businesses saw an increase in their business rates, 420,000 stayed the same and 920,000 saw a decrease. The winners are predominantly the smallest businesses, where small business rate relief was doubled to £12,000. For the losers, one of the problems has been that support from the emergency business rates hardship fund has taken a long time to get through. There are also significant regional variations too. In London, for example, rateable values in Aldgate, Clerkenwell and Canary Wharf are a third of what they are in the West End. And there are also wide sector differences.

Again, in London, the average increases were 5 per cent on industrial premises, 21 per cent on offices and 26 per cent on retail outlets. It doesn’t sound very sympathetic, but high-street retail outlets have been the most vociferous because their business rates may just have been increased at a time when their very viability is being put under pressure from online retailers; a kind of straw that broke the camel’s back scenario. The changes in rates have led to some good news and bad news stories, and the overall picture has seen more rate increases in the more prosperous south of England and more reductions in the north. Perhaps the problem should be looked at another way.

According to management consultancy Altus Group, business rates rose by £847m from April to £24.8bn, with 1.25m business premises receiving a rate demand. On average, that’s just an extra £677 a year. However, the business world has a point when it stresses that properties are charged on rateable value and not profitability. So a struggling fashion retailer will pay the same as a prosperous fast food outlet next door. To help soften the extent of the increase, a cap was introduced limiting the increase in the first year, but this was funded by also capping the rate on introducing lower rates. The tax was introduced in 1601 under the Poor Relief Act which charged property owners a tax to help support the poor. That’s not really relevant anymore, but as the Treasury’s sixth-biggest revenue generator it’s hard to see the tax going away. JC

Not at all. What I am trying to say is, the market generally moves on hard facts such as cash today and not tomorrow.
But I’m am certainly no expert in this company and I’m just guessing. The sp is already low here so certainly value for money.

Atb

It will be interesting to see if this flies or if it falls. Where the positives are ukog get a controlling stake now, the negatives are there is a small dilution and the increased cash flow will come some time in 2019. Increased cash flow is always a positive, but only when it’s bagged.
So ukog could well stay low in sp values until next year I’m guessing. Speculation of course and I wish all the best of luck.

Rwc increase of 5-10% holdings shows some confidence here. Obviously why the so has been kept down. Is guess more large orders in the pipe line as lack of movement with latest buy.

This share is very much under the radar when it comes to PI's.
Big bank balance and profit making the company has recently reported the results due are within target.
This is excellent news as the company is growing.
The sp drop was due to write off of the Angola business, but with the disposal of this part the company is in a strong postion to return to previous levels of profit.
Small amount of shares available means the share price can move very swiftly in both directions.
Canccord have dropped their broker rating from 200p to 155p which still is near enough a 50% rise from current levels.
All in all, the company is still very much undervalued. Expect a steady rise from here on as the company proves that the drop in profits last results was a one off write off.

Absolutely nothing wrong with being positive with a share when you are invested. BOO has many good points and look like they will do very well. Certainly will not go bust and the new distribution investment will work wonders. Unfortunately shares rarely go up in a straight line and the sp is often run on sentiment especially in between results. The latest news of online taxes will ofc create uncertainty and looks likely to create additional buying opportunities. Put in the bottom draw, set buy orders and come back several years later and you will likely be amused at how low the sp once was.

Not at all, I found you comments quite amusing. TSCO is having a nice little run. I would like to see what you mean though by your comments of "however it is not something i am at liberty to comment upon
due to the ethical nature and market sensitivity " - what are you implying?
one post to you certainly does not make a stalker and why on earth would I want to stalk a random poster on a chat board?
LastCall has made some good points though I do not necessarily agree with all he says. He/she certainly fills up the boards with too many posts imo, which in turn hides a lot of good posts. Maybe you are stalking me as you are aware of my post to LastCall? Absurd imo.
If you have a point to make out (page 24), then why not just say it?

Enjoy the rest of your day, being retired, I am far too busy to sit at a pc desk all day long but rest assured I will pop back to this delightful board another day.

The report certainly makes SWL look interesting and I would hazard a guess the sp has moved today on this share tip.
Bear in mind though, the chart shows this to be in a downward trend still and a lower price is still possible.

http://www.chartupload.com/viewer.php?file=87014458091645371443.png