If you would like to ask our webinar guest speakers from WS Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund a question please submit them here.
@erratum You are clearly very knowledgable in relation to and put the case for Ince well. If you are interested in working with me to help solve the underlying issues of Ince, lack of profitability in the core business, then I'd be delighted to hear from you. Kind regards cmec11@gmail.com
TShaw2, I have read your posts and would be delighted to hear from you to discuss a way forward for Ince. I am a genuine shareholder and an occassional poster who wants to see Ince succeed. I know Ince, and I know it has huge potential if well-managed, as well as the P/E opportunity. If you’re a shareholder and would like to support a move to improve management, please email me at cmec11@gmail.com. I already have the support of quite a lot of shareholders, probably enough to call a general meeting, but the more supporters I have the more likely I am to be able to press for needed changes without having to take that kind of step. I’d like to remain anonymous for the time being. I’m not an insider. Hope to hear from you, your anonymity is guaranteed. Kind regards
Like Salmon33, I am a genuine shareholder and an occassional poster who wants to see Ince succeed. I know Ince, and I know it has huge potential if well-managed, as well as the P/E opportunity. If you’re a shareholder and would like to support a move to improve management, please email me at cmec11@gmail.com. Adrian Biles is actually a good operator in some dimensions, but needs help if Ince is to realise it's potential as a profitable law firm. That has to be the underlying source of value for several reasons. I already have the support of quite a lot of shareholders, probably enough to call a general meeting, but the more supporters I have the more likely I am to be able to press for needed changes without having to take that kind of step. I’d like to remain anonymous for the time being. I’m not an insider. Hope to hear from you, your anonymity is guaranteed. Kind regards
So the Arden deal is like the legal response to being hacked - a ‘brilliant’ commercial strategy with no possibility of upside, only downside, and the meta message, ‘we really are incompetent’. I know Ince, and I know it has huge potential if well managed, as well as the P/E opportunity. If you’re a shareholder (as I am) and would like to support a move to improve management, please email me at cmec11@gmail.com. Adrian Biles is actually a good operator in some dimensions, and his father John is v smart, but they are not well advised and they have blind spots. I’d like to remain anonymous for the time being. I’m not an insider. Kind regards
So a brilliant legal strategy with no possibility of upside, only downside, and the meta message, ‘we really are incompetent’. I know Ince, and I know it has huge potential if well managed, as well as the P/E opportunity. If you’re a shareholder (as I am) and would like to support a move to improve management, please email me at cmec11@gmail.com. Adrian Biles is actually a good operator in some dimensions, and his father John is v smart, but they are not well advised and they have blind spots. I’d like to remain anonymous for the time being. I’m not an insider.
What about Arden’s £5m cash?
Hi CaneToad, are you a Queenslander?
Yes, there’s a risk it’s a partners club, but the CEO is a v significant shareholder. One would expect him to benefit more from a multiple of profits than from giving himself a bonus. On the other hand, he gave himself a £500k bonus...
Yes, I had that problem when purchasing over 500000 shares, they appeared in red as a sell. But subsequent purchases of another 2.5m shares were fine... who knows, I just blamed the platform devs
I think the issues are:
1. The strategy of buying firms is correct, but historically they’ve bought failing firms, whereas competitors seem to be buying better quality. It’s not yet clear which model will work better, and it’s not hard to switch strategies.
2. It’s taking longer to integrate firms than expected, but that’s partly because of covid, and partly because they’re international. I like the international dimension because it’s ultimately got more growth potential. Harder at first, but they’re probably gaining skills and experience that will pay long term.
3. Some of their technology ideas are good, but not well sold to the market. There’s a lack of sizzle.
4. Generally there’s a lack of aggressiveness, sizzle, growth. Biles (CEO) has the ideas, but seems restrained by the culture.
I do have faith in this company, it’s v well positioned, but others are also jockeying, and they seem to have sharper elbows. My faith is based on their remuneration model (the very model that has caused confusion) and the ability of their software to make it work - having worked in law firms I can tell you that’s not as easy as it sounds, partners can be experts at gaming remuneration models. But I think Ince are getting it right.
Thanks Luna
I came up with £4 for similar reasons, my hesitation is around the timing and the ability to demonstrate/communicate the law tech/innovation capabilities I believe the market is looking for in this sector.
I’m not sure about £4 in the next year, but perhaps in two years. Perhaps £2 by the end of 2021 if they make a couple of good moves.
Yes, the numbers aren’t spectacular but in the light of covid they are solid. The big decision will be whether to pay a dividend or keep the cash to fund more acquisitions. I’d favour a dividend to at least maintain, probably pump the share price, then do a placement (perhaps to the incoming partners) to fund a really good acquisition. In fact the strategy of being a back door listing entity for *successful* law firms could be a real winner because their technology platform means that they have more benefits than costs from scale. Biles (CEO) mentioned £500m last year and I think that’s achievable. Much better for mid size firms to join Ince than try to list themselves. Listing favours current partners ahead of future partners, but technology changes will make the interests of future partners even less significant than they are now. This stock will get to £4 imho
I think the profit will be increased because they let (presumably unprofitable) people go last year. The Ever Green business should help a bit, but mostly they are hugely undervalued compared to other law firms despite being in generally more robust and stable practice areas.
The fundamentals of both this business and most law firms are v strong, the technology rollout is going well, and they are well placed for both organic and acquisitional growth, but the tone of the RNS fails to communicate that.
Badly written RNS though