WestOfEngland
Partly because of the lack of coverage and the controlling family stake Goodwin's always been a nightmare to value ( I've been in to a greater or lesser extent for ~ 20 years ), though the family's stake allows them to take a very long term view !
I don't think we're currently overvalued ... I'm assuming eps for this FY will be ~250p which, at the current share price of £63 will put us on a pe of ~25. With growth at 20% that's a PEG of ~1.25. If growth continues at ~20% that's not cheap, but it's not obviously expensive either.
It is putting a lot of faith in continuing high growth though. If that growth drops to ( say ) 15% then it starts to look a bit different.
Are we on the brink of sustained medium term ( 3 to 5 years ) growth 9f ~20% per annum ? Maybe. If we are then I can see a share price of £80 to £90 in the next 18 months. We'll know better when this years results come out along with, more importantly, details of the outlook for 24/25.
Until then, for me, it's about risk management of my meagre wad !
It'll be nice if it does carry on rising, but at £60 the yield is dropping to roughly 2% and the sp is putting a lot of faith in earnings continuing to rise which is making me a bit nervous so I've reduced a bit.
The spread is tighter than it appears btw, the price I got for selling a few was in the £59's so the guess that sites make on whether trades are buys or sells isn't very accurate on GDWN.
Unless the sp rises to really silly heights, I'll keep most of the rest of my holding, but will likely reduce a bit more if it keeps creeping up.
BB
Gixer
We only had 145k's worth of inventory ( both FF+ and FF ) left at the end of Sept 2023. It seems unlikely to me that that stock would have taken us through to the end of the FY so I think we'll probably have bought more stock of FF from DSM between Oct 2023 and Feb 2024 ... which would have reduced our cash position.
It's possible our cash position is still healthy, but I doubt very much we're saving it for a big order.
BB
Https://www.ii.co.uk/analysis-commentary/stockwatch-what-would-us-takeover-mean-income-share-ii531236 works for anyone not having an ii account.
A quick skim through the Finals suggests to me that getting the accounts signed off as a Going Concern was a bit tight, so that's a relief. Renegogiating the debt was crucial going forward so, overall, unlike like what I thought a few months ago, it doesn't look like a Rights Issue will be needed to repair the Balance Sheet.
Overall, it's obviously been a bit s h one t here recently, but it does look a lot more hopeful going forward.
Gixer
Fair point on the 6% threshold. It sounds like DSM Venturing have, at some time in the last years or months crossed the 6% threshold without realising and have failed to notify the market.
I guess, in theory, they could have crossed 6% very recently and you have a certain amount of time to notify, but that seems very unlikely.
It doesn't make any difference where in the world you are, you have to notify every time you cross a threshold, and the threshold is each 1% above 5%.
No big deal really, in theory the FCA might people over the knuckles for not disclosing properly, but it's hardly up there with what Ken Morrison didn't do ! ( google it if interested )
As an aside, I never really understood how the disclosure rules worked when holders were diluted under a % threshold. I always thought they should declare that, bur I don't remember DSM ( or anyone else for that matter ) formally declaring that ... it just changes on the Provexis website.
Anyway, I digress, as far as I'm concerned the only important thing to take from all that is that DSM-V plainly aren't joined at the hip to their shares and have sold some in the past, quite possibly the recent past.
Gixer
If memory serves me right the "Major Shareholders" page was updated on the 8th March to reflect the change in "not in public hands" info.
So, at that point, the only info ( well, formal info, it's possible, but unlikely he knew different ) Ford had on DSM Venturing's holding was their last holdings RNS. They dropped to 143 million back in 2010 ( or thereabouts ) btw. My guess though is they started to unwind their position some time since the AA ended but havn't gone through 6% so didn't need to inform the market.
Incidentally, as far as I can see, and I may have missed it, DSM Venturing no longer list Provexis as part of their portfolio, not even under Legacy at https://www.venturing.dsm.com/en_us/portfolio.html and havn't done for a bit now.
BB
Alf
Re evidence of drip feeding shares ... 2 points
1. I said "if they're so inclined", so was stating it as a possibility, not a fact, but ...
2. Yes, there is evidence of it. Take a look at the major shareholders part of provexis.org which currently, based on info from the 8th March states DSM Venturing hold 143,769,230 shares. Today's RNS has them, pre the issue of new shares at 130,923,358. So, since they last declared they've sold just under 13 million shares.
Their ffs
*hangs head in shame
Also, if they're so inclined, DSM can instruct someone to drip feed there shares into to the market as and when they think the price is right, so they're happy too ( and Kev can buy them, which'll make him happy too ! ).
Credit ( pun intended ) where it's due, that's a decent way of solving the cash flow issue and doesn't fundamentally change the value of the company because we've directly swapped equity for stock of the same value.
With Lucas having been a whisker under 10% I wonder if he passed on the opportunity to increase because, under the AIM rules, going over 10% would see him treated as a related party ?
BB
The £15m trade was the end of day auction rather than a single trade, so I wouldn't read too much into that.
There were some chunky trades declared after the close though, just not quite THAT chunky !
Sounds like they're no longer treating DSM Venturing as "not in public hands", so basically saying that DSM are no longer treated as being a related party.
So the shareholdings havn't changed, but how they're treated has.
Fwiw - which, given my not brilliant grasp of accountancy, isn't much, as far as the Profit and Loss goes, I expected the royalties to be treated as a selling expense
Given they only increased from ~20k last year to ~30k this year, I'm hoping I was wrong and the royalties are being treated as part of the cost of goods.
BB
Ah, I thought I'd lost the text so started again. Apologies for the duplicate info and wall of text
a million in revenue from ff sd ii isn't going to get us in profit sphinx. look at today's numbers :-
290k revenue from ff sd ii gave us a gross profit of roughly 70 to 80k ( ff+ making up the rest. on that ratio,1 million would probably generate a gross profit of between 250 and 300k.
if we effectively* pay less royalties to dsm in 2024, maybe that'd stretch to a gross profit of 350k ? add in the profit from ff+ and you're probably in the order of 450k as gross profit.
sphinx
based on today's accounts, a million in revenue won't take us into profit.
back of a *** packet calcs suggest that 299k in sales of ff sd ii generated a gross profit of roughly 75k ( with the remainder coming from ff+ )
all things being equal, a million in sales of ff sd ii would give a gross profit of between 250 and 300k. assuming* we pay dsm less royalties in 2024, maybe we'd be looking at ~350k as a gross profit ?
add in the profit from ff+ of 100k and that's 450k. our annual costs are in excess of that.
bb
*the royalties thing is worded strangely in the rnss. it sounds like they'll drop over the next 3 years, but it doesn't specifically say that, but i'm hoping the result is the same.
he rns's also say that, for like for like sales and margins, we should be better off now than what we were under the aa, but we're getting less profit from sales than we received under the aa, so either sales or margins, or both, are down.
Well, finally, they're with us.
There's really no excuse for being so much on the last minute, but, putting that gripe to one side, they're better than I expected.
I thought we'd have had no more than 250k left at the end of September, so we're better off there, and sales in Q3 are healthy with more coming through in Q4 ( or a bit beyond )
Hope everyone's had a decent Christmas.
BB
Pixie, take a look at
https://www.londonstockexchange.com/equities-trading/business-days
Trading closes at 12:30. That doesn't mean the Interims can't be posted after time, but it'd be poor practice to do so.
With roughly an hour to go to the bell Ford could do with getting the Interims published. I dare say they could be published out of hours, but, if they're not published at all I think we'd be looking at a temporary suspension.
BB
Unless we've either added to our stock of FF+ ( possible ) or bought more FF2 from DSM that we don't already know about ( seems unlikely ) I think we'd have had between 150 and 250k net cash at the end of September. We'll know the real figure some time in the next 10 days.
We're hopefully going to need a cash injection of some sort fairly soon. I say hopefully, because I'm hoping we need to restock FF2 sooner rather than later and any half decent purchase would surely be pushing it cash wise ? From what people have said about the AGM, Ford seems keen to avoid dilution, but the cynic in me thinks he would say that in front of shareholders. Although it's a long shot, I wonder if he's trying to get some customers to pay in advance for FF2 and then use that cash to either get more stock from DSM or pay more a manufacturing run ? Admittedly, that's almost certainly wishful thinking by me, but if, as was apparently said at the AGM, he got customers to pay upfront for the FF2 we sold them ( as opposed to being on 30/60/90 days terms ) then, heh, you never know.
BB