Member Info for cyberduck

Well the directors may well have pulled a blinder by devaluing their portfolio by 7.5%.

From UBS: "NRV is a function of costs and selling prices, says UBS, and the builder is assuming deflation of minus 7.5% for house and minus 32% for commercial property.

The broker says while the possibility of other housebuilder’s taking doing the same cannot be ruled out, the assumptions are subjective and Crest appears to be being careful.

“We think Crest may have taken a somewhat more cautious approach," said the broker.

“Historically, better-realised prices vs the assumptions made at the time of NRV provisions have been booked through ordinary operating profit rather than as an exceptional charge.

“In that regard, NRV provisions may have the impact of favourably impacting profitability in future years, although cash flow would be unaffected by this.”

>What do you mean by book value?

Net Asset Value.

About 315 pence per share book value at end of H1.

Forecasting between £35m and £45m PBT for the full year. So arguably 12p EPS.

Trading at about 0.7 times book value. Other builders trading at significantly higher PBVs and yet to report the effects of COVID-19.

>Isn't this what the record discount to NAV is telling you?

It's telling me that the market has pretty much completely ruled out the bull case. Now the bull case may be unlikely but it's not impossible so you'd think the market would factor that in a bit more. There's another company which does essentially the same and their discount to NAV is about 10% less I think.

For me it was an investment with a potential 10% downside and a small chance of an 80% upside. We've had the 10% downside but there's still a bull argument out there.

>Not a significant difference really, but I will double check manually my script is doing it correctly later this weekend if I get a chance.

Thanks bullen.

Like I say it's just a proxy in my mind. Just something quick and dirty I thought would help and I know I'm not far off what others are saying so it serves its purpose. But let me know if you spot a mistake.

Jefferson,

I presume you are talking about Enterprise Value when you say EV. I've never really been able to tie down a standard definition of this and it seems to incorporate market value whenever I've looked at it so I'm not sure if it's the best measure.

For all intensive purposes YCA are pretty much just holding a physical commodity.

I put together my own spreadsheet which I think of as an approximation. I include the shares held in treasury in the NAV calculation on a cost basis.

It's not as fancy as bullen's method because I enter the U price manually. The SP and dollar exchange rate come automatically with delays on the SP. You will also see my calculation of the average pre-virus discount.

It's here for people to view and any questions or comments on mistakes or improvements welcome...

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1mOQOa4kK6_lPzs_uFwTLEL42CnhiO9iLDrzUDetnjsw/edit?usp=sharing

All good points bullen.

> I've taken a look at UPC's historical discount. From the end of 2016 to Mid 2018 (and again in mid 2019 briefly) it has traded at a premium to it's NAV.

If you look at YCA's quarterly pre-virus NAV reports they have an average discount of 5.9%.

It seems likely the 31% current discount demonstrates the market isn't convinced (in fact far from it) by the Uranium bull case and is expecting the Uranium price to come down. If the U price dropped back to its year low of around $24, just prior to the sharp rise up to around $34, and the SP stayed at its current level, the SP would be at a discount of 5.5% to NAV.

Yet the SP keeps going down.

If there's a logic to the company buying shares in the market there must be a case for selling Uranium and buying more of them. I think failing to do this sends a bad message.

>I suppose it's a bit of a staggered approach, averaging in every day

In the prenetation/interview video link which I posted below they do say in the interview/presentation that a more significant buyback is possible and their motive for the current buyback is not to close the valuation gap but to essentially acquire Uranium at a cheaper price than spot. But they only have $6m in cash and this was supposed to give them a couple of years of working capital. Just $434K spent since the buyback started. All very small in the general scheme of things when the company owns nearly 10 million lbs of Uranium.

This is discussed from about 20 minutes on in the video .

It sounded to me like there was a reluctance from the CEO to go down this route though and he said something about wanting to grow the company which didn't exactly make sense to me. If they want more investment then surely they have to track the Uranium price?

Sell Uranium, buy back significant amounts, close the valuation gap, show they can track the Uranium price. Surely that's the way to go?

Shareholders could of course get together and force the company's hand. Something needs to be done.

Another whopping 10,000 shares bough back yesterday for £20,506.

Why would a company with a market capitalisation of £175m be bothered doing this? No wonder investors are selling up, they can't be taken seriously as a fund that tracks the Uranium price.

Currently at a 31% discount to NAV. How embarrassing!

>can’t get away from the idea that this is an ideal takeover target at this sp

According to Yahoo 83% of the company is owned by insiders or institutions. I don't think we know the price the big deals have been going through at. I could be wrong.

It doesn't take much volume to move the SP so what chance of increasing your stake in the market at anything close to these prices?

PB still have a lot to prove. If I had a big stake I'd want to see signs they haven't hit a glass ceiling in terms of UK market share before taking a controlling interest.

Not sure what they're playing at buying 5000 shares in the market so that they can effectively buy uranium at a discount to the spot price.

They own 9.6 million pounds of Uranium. What is the point? It's a bit embarrassing.

They should sell millions of dollars' worth of Uranium and buy back a serious number of shares in the market. That would close the discount to NAV gap.

>They have been advertising on ITV 2 and 3 with their Olympics theme . I think they have only just started it up again

I'd be interested in the timing because instructions do seem to have seen an uptick since about 18th May and if this has been achieved without TV advertising then that's purely on brand recognition which would be very encouraging for PurpleBricks.

Has anybody seen any recent TV advertising by PB?

Anybody know anything about what they are spending currently on advertising?

>We may get next week but who knows? Morngingstar are saying the 10th of June, but then they've been wrong 4 times already on the Q3 date..

Thanks.

I'm pretty sure it's always closed on a Friday but open on Sunday.

>closed down yet again in Dhaka

Are you sure? I can't find any announcements.

The market would be closed now anyway because they are ahead of us timewise.

Does anybody know why we haven't had Q3 results yet? Pharma Giles?

Just closed up another 7.65% on the Dhaka Exchange. An equivalent of about 69p.

https://thefinancialexpress.com.bd/stock/bangladesh-stock-exchanges-to-resume-sunday-after-two-month-shutdown-1590666876

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=9&v=0K8-J4YLbe8&feature=emb_logo

>Nice safety margin to have before we even start talking about the uranium price rising further.

I agree. Seems like a good risk/reward opportunity.

If the bull case of a $55 uranium spot price comes good then very good gains to be had with YCA's NAV moving up to nearly £5.

If the bull case doesn't materialise any time soon, all the mines re-open, then we should trend back to the pre-virus situation with the SP perhaps 10% to 15% down from here with the discount trending back from the current 29% discount to NAV to something more like the 5.8% pre-virus average discount.

Although not my field, I do think the bull case makes sense with it looking like a sellers market and the utilities may well have to enter into long term contracts that provide profits for the miners.

Also something that crossed my mind. YCA hold all of their raw material in Cameco's facility. Cameco were talking about borrowing yellow cake to fulfill contracts while the mines are closed. YCA could well be a beneficiary there.