Member Info for Beo1

Yes, nearly 11k shares at just short of 96p. the inverted commas was because my shareholding (and others) are a rounding error in terms of ownership

So you closed you 210 position at a loss fees? Good going that!

Doesn't bode that well for "us" then as November LfL was down nearly 2%

TBF there's a fair bit of one offs to get to that £52.2m. effective tax rate of 59% wont stay at that level, impairment charges wont keep recurring, the underlying business is trading off a very low PE, and the SP theoretically based on future earnings not past earnings which included a bunch of items related to the acquisition that won't happen again. so as stated a 50p value for the FCF that this business spins off is kitchen sink time, and if thats the case I don't think anyone would touch any share at that point

Considering "most" on the BB will be long on JD, the way you mocked those that are long and prayed for there positions to get worse, is it any wonder those same people hold you in such disdain.

"Mid 80s and I will buy £700,000. Will be able to retire on the investment alone. Let's go.

See you guys at 70s on the 14th.

Painful to watch it go up especially 2%+, but I am confident we see low 80s on a disappointing trading update which is now 2 weeks away.

Lol JD goes up less than 1% after a -40% year and the bulls come out in full force.

Good little recovery before annihilation in January?

Why is this board silent as of late? Where are the bulls? Greg and co?

Hope you are all quietly adding to your position."

I'd say your observations are at least adding to the debate, but your reads (and your little photo's) were just wrong, "Oh they discounting heavier than normal", Proven wrong on Update

Oh they are very quiet, claiming it as fact, because you went in 2 stores, when the "fact" is your observations were nothing more than anecdotal and proven to be wrong as well, as store sales in December were up YoY.

Now calling the update, de-growth, when it wasn't. November was down LfL, but overall growth was good at over 3%. So if you don't post any more here, so be it, I wont be missing your "Insights"

"So just for you ladies to keep tabs - my first short position was at 277, added to this at 233 and 210. Profit at the moment stands as 59k after interest / charges"

Your 210 short looking Dicey now. 🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥

Your just full of manure!

You claimed results would be so bad they would send SP into 70s!

You claiming they are in de-growth (not even a word), when organic growth is up over 3%, LfL in December was up too

Yes Online Contracted but I'd argue if you make more physical stores accessible then people will choose that sales channel vs online.

Just keep getting it wrong, you might not entertain responses, but your are definitely entertaining

Where was the de-growth?

"Dead oh dear, in the 1s now just as predicted.

Added another 10000 shares at 200p to my short.

This is utterly fxcked - labour hate business."

this ones starting to feel a bit hot?

Which is a case in point, Ashtead moving their listing to the US soon

What are you on about over leveraged? Near all the debt is lease debt (eg the rents on the premises),

"we expect to end the year with a small net debt position on a pre-IFRS 16 basis"

if you don't know how to read stat accounts then don't offer an opinion that sounds like you know stat accounts

Over 3% organic growth, I've argued a few times LfL is misleading in the extent, you open a new store somewhere remote, those people used to shop online now they go in store, the LfL would be a drop in that scenario even if they spent the same in store vs online. Thats just a macro view of it, but opening new stores doesn't just generate "new" sales it also moves them. And organic growth of over 3% in this trading environment is good IMO. Yes, we have increased the cost base vs selling online, but we dont know that impact yet.

Do you understand the differences between growth, organic growth and LfL growth?

Organic growth includes new store openings but excludes acquisitions, so the 200 new stores are what drove 3.4% growth vs 1% drop in LfL. Acquisitions would then be accretive to that.

Also the person who said next year the acquisitions will show good organic growth due to full year impact, again that's not how it works, on the portion of the year in both years would be included in organic and LfL numbers

Yep dropped profit by £70m in mid range, and 7 or 8% drop in EPS, expect a similar drop in SP, although you could argue the market was pricing it in, so are we better or worse than what was priced in, who knows, but see better results punished

You cant argue out the route to market as thats inherent in the business model. "If M&S had 70% online and that was up 11% then the overall number would be closer to next". If my auntie had balls she'd be my uncle springs to mind

Honestly, reading your posts makes my head hurt. English your first language?

Agree, the NED position very normally hands off, But CVC have bought M Group with a turnaround and exit strategy with 5 years. That will call on a fair bit of Archie's time. He is already having all day meetings with each division

£100m EBITDA

Mmm, not so sure on Archie Motivation. He's just been appointed chairman of M Group, a £2b infrastructure company making less than £100 EBITDA. There's is a lot needed to be done at M Group and how much of his time will that take up vs Letting M&S CEO just get on with his job

If you look at the maths, on clothing and home, overall sales were up, nearly 2%, but online which is 35% of value was up 11%, which means the in store value was down. But that's not really an issue IMO. the cost to serve will be cheaper to be online vs store, so the goal has to be online (assuming as certain points you can get out of the fixed infrastructure overhead, no point doing in online and still having the same store footprint