Member Info for Discodave4561

No doubt the usual personal attack as is the norm, point scoring because what I think or thought may happen hasnt as yet - but it’s not binary, it’s not happening immediately, but that doesn’t mean it won’t happen. And yes surprise surprise sometimes my views and instincts are wrong, if said poster thinks every investor / trader gets every call right then he’s living in cloud cuckoo land (note his prediction of a TU before Jan based apparently on the word on the street, complete and utter rubbish).

Any bear points or views are met with personal insults and derision, even holders posting in ADVFN are met with a similar response for having the audacity to mention anything bearish, or to point out any risks that exist. No investment is risk free unless you live in the world of Sparky and his sheep.

Typo : SP Angel are forecasting £715m revenue for FY25 not £725m as in my last post.

Just to keep those here that seem to be obsessed with spelling and grammar etc, my apologies but using a phone which isn’t ideal. Plus this site won’t allow re-editing posts to correct errors.

Meant to add - SP Angel forecast £725m revenue for FY25 (that’s in their latest note).

As for market share, 1.4% from 2024 to FY23. That’s post all the companies that ceased trading and the SOLR handed to YU. So historical market share says to me their target is pie in the sky. Will caveat that by adding unless they have acquisitions in mind. But then they’ve said that and nothing of note has transpired. I also come back to the point about their current liquidity covenants and taking on debt for smart metering despite their cash balance (not to mention no share buybacks).

SNN

£100 sp is complete fantasy. The growth is already slowing, income growth in H2 was half that of last year - so why going forwards will it turn from a slowing income stream to 34% plus uplift. The business will always quote a market share that IMO is more than just stretching its highly unlikely given the market share trend historically.

As for: “As for the £100 SP. It's not certain, nor is it complete fantasy or plucked from thin air. If the trends continue and if they get 5-7% share, then revenue will be £2.5bn heading to £3bn. EPS is close to £10 on that, and £100 is a doable 10 times multiple. It's a definite possibility 3-5 years out. It's not ramping if taken in context and read with a rational frame of mind. It's a possible outcome, amongst others.”

You bought the ramp from NewGacky who has by the looks of it sold up and moved on knowing his £100 was complete fantasy.

Folks seem to believe the growth will continue despite the fact the growth has been solely due to very abnormal energy prices, which at some point will normalise despite what’s spouted here, yes okay it may take longer than I previously thought but it will happen.

Why has the business only been profitable when energy cost’s spiralled over 20x the norm. Even this year the spot price average for FY24 is well below the FY23 average.

I’m patient, happy to trade the trends in either direction and wait for the decline.

“Volume really good a sellers being swept up. If a TU before Xmas as word on the street is Oct was a record breaker and Nov could beat Oct. I would not be surprised to see a TU before Jan”

PMSL Word on the street! - blatant ramping nothing more.

“For someone who obsesses over broker numbers, and in particular the house broker and regards their forecasts as gospel, you are now saying the house broker is wrong?”

Not obsessed with broker numbers at all. Just posting up facts as you are. Consensus is £746m revenue for FY25. The house broker is saying according to the note you posted (pot kettle black) “roughly” £1bn. Thus the other broker / analyst (SP Angel) covering YU would give a FY25 Rev forecast of circa £500m (thus the average being £746m). However, SP Angel are actually forecasting £715m, only an increase of 15%. Normally I’d err on the side of the house broker as they are being fed the numbers directly from YU, but history shows that Rawson is definitely not the best at financial forecasting for the business.

As I’ve stated numerous times the business has only been profitable due to the abnormal rise in energy costs. Their H2 income growth this year has been stated at only half the growth of H1 FY23, it’s not rocket science, a fall in wholesale energy and the business profits are not sustainable. Only this week Centrica have guided their numbers will be “broadly in line” which the market knows means there’s potentially a profit warning coming.

This board like the one on ADVFN has zero balance, constant ramping by certain posters. Where is NewGacky?, the poster that was spouting a share price of £100, well that poster disappeared prior to the July TU yet everyone bought into the sky high predictions that were spouted.

Anyway, yes we all have to assess what the brokers say, whether you believe the figures or not is completely up to each individual.

SNN

Guided to upgrade - really?, a 34% uplift in FY25 income when they’ve already stated in line for FY24 with a reduction of 50% in revenue growth for FY24 H2 compared to last year.

Wishful thinking IMO.

Nimos

If the results were “good” in other words ahead of their guidance then they would have issued a TU before January to inform the market as they are obliged to do.

They haven’t done a CMD in Jan before after their usual year end update.

Could be to soften up their II’s for a fund raise (yes they have a decent amount of cash but how much is ringfenced for their liquidity covenants - at year end have they in fact breached their covenants?), it could be that Bobby is finally selling some stock via a discounted placing?, could just be to explain the year end numbers and why H2 growth has been half last years?. Only time will tell.

Three subsequent filtered posts so can only guess it’s from the incessant non-holding ramper.

Has anyone heard from NewGacky?, was spouting £100 value then disappeared following the July crash.

Then you have other posters quoting their valuations but when challenged can’t even justify what they post.

Folks DYOR DYOR DYOR

unless they move to the ftse350 there’s not much point leaving aim. they would need their market cap to reach £400m plus to manage that, an increase of nearly 40%. their accountancy issues of the past will still be there combined with rawsons profitability **** up for fy19. hitting sentiment no matter where listed.

what debt mutley?, there was the £5m or so they took out for smart metering, which always struck me as very odd given elevated interest charges yet supposedly they have all that cash on the books!, clearly there was liquidity covenants as there are now with shell restricting what cash they need to keep on the balance sheet.

being sold off because no trading update ergo they are assumed to still be in line for the year - despite the unfounded rubbish no doubt posted here by the incessant resident ramper.

Irish

Sorry it bothered you so much. Unfortunately you can’t edit / correct posts once submitted.

As Enzo can’t justify his £25 target price perhaos you could enlighten me as to your target price and provide adequate reasoning and analysis to support your valuation.

Thanks

Ps I see elsewhere you have a tendency to insult posters when you don’t agree with what they say.

Irish

You posted this today on CWR:

“Don't fret - fossil fuels are here to stay asa cornerstone of most societies for a century at least. Ask Glencore !!”

Try using spell check before you post!….,pot kettle black :)

PM reducing, Bayford trimming, their CFO and MD of retail selling over half their holdings.

Irish - it was one typo. My sincere apologies for that, clearly it bothered you :)

Enzo

Give it your best shot on justifying £25. Including how you know more than their house broker in terms of valuation. Strikes me as very odd given you believed at one point the PE was 67 (clearly you couldn’t determine what the actual PE is / was - the maths too complicated perhaps?), also that you didn’t know how to calculate dividend yield or didn’t know if dividends are paid per share held, but you believe this is worth 22% more than their broker but have failed to post up your analysis despite being asked numerous times.

Ps I’m not your mate and FYI my handke has absolutely nothing to do with disco dancing. Just thought that may help you.

Pps I only filter when folks resort to childish name calling.

Ppps look forward to your fundamental analysis and validation of your target price.

Hi Enzo

Very interesting about Bayford, but they’ve trimmed their holdings here from 3.19% to 3.15%.

Still curious to know why you believe this is worth 22% more than the house broker.

Couldn’t agree more, what folks post should be called out!.

Hi Enzo

Two brokers cover this stock, the consensus target price is 2075. Given SP Angel have 2100, this means their own house broker has a target of only 2050. So given the house broker uses all the forecasts and numbers given to them from the company to determine their target price, why do you, who presumably has zero inside info, think fair value is 22% more than their own broker?. You called me out I responded in full, so now it’s your turn to adequately validate your target of £25. Particularly as at one point it was £30, so what’s changed?.

Seems clear to me you just plucked your numbers from thin air, or simply just believe what a certain perma bull (who sold a long time ago IMO) posts.

Hi Enzo

Have been through all your postings and cannot find in any of them any justification for your price target. Post 223 in August you said:

“Was hoping for £30 in the next 1-2 years but looking less likely. Sold few hundred shares into free carry at £18 but still have few thousand shares. My target sp is now £25 before i start to think of selling atleast half. ‘

So your target is £25 not now up to £30. Is your £25 based on what someone else posted here?. Given you struggle to justify your £25, as you did recently with understanding what percentage yield the dividend was, and that a PE of 67x also confused you, then I assume your target price is a comp,eye finger in the air job. Just like NG’s £100.

Hi Enzo

You posted up your medium term price target with zero justification which should be fairly straight forward to do, unless it’s numbers plucked from thin air which in my book constitutes cheap ramping. Your target is significantly higher than brokers consensus so would be curious to know how you get that value, simple really.

I’ve answered your point about the rating here as well as what I think fair value is in my opinion. Different opinions are what these boards are about and what makes a market. You should be able to take on board the basic fact that not everyone will agree!.

Not going to read through every posting to see if you have previously supported your target price with some fundamental analysis.

Enzo

Typo - Looking forward to your reasoning for £25-£30.

enzo

so i post up what i believe is fair value here and you call it deramping, why?, because you don’t agree which is fair enough no problem there, but doesn’t qualify as “deramping” in my book just an alternative opinion supported by data. but then you post up random figures £25-£30 with zero justification / data, so yes let’s call that out too!, why not!.

don’t know what sparky posts as he’s filtered, but going on what he always used to post day after day it was always just about the pe rating and compared to tep, which was his favourite as they are rated higher. well tep as a business imo is not in anyway comparable with yu, they are a “multi-utility” in the true sense of the word in that they offer energy (gas and electricity), broadband, mobile phone and home insurance. thus they can and do command a higher pe rating as income is a lot more diversified than yu, thus risks are also perceived as being less volatile. yu supply energy that’s all, forget water they’ve had their licence since 2017 and as far as i can see from their accounts have not received a penny for supplying anyone with water, so personally would compare them to the market leader, cna, whose pe is 6.6x to 7.9x and the sector median is 11.5x. however i would not rate yu as per the sector median because i don’t believe their profits are sustainable (they’ve only made decent profits because of external factors - war in ukraine and the subsequent energy crisis where gas went up more than tenfold). it’s not rocket science, the price of energy sky rockets yu make very decent profit, energy at “normal” levels with no wars elevating wholesale values and they didn’t make any profit (okay 2017 it was a net profit of £1.8m but the cfo and accounting were iffy?).

plus i don’t personally have too much faith in rawsons financial forecasting capabilities. the oct 2018 blunder in stating they are “confident that the group will achieve profitability for the year ending 31st december 2019” - which turned out to be a an adjusted pbt loss of £6.6m, that’s a massive miscalculation that imo the market hasn’t forgotten (won’t mention the previous cfo’s **** up that would have been missed by bk). hence my rating of 9x seems reasonable to me (and based on fy24 forecast eps matches with where the share price closed on friday).

then it also depends on what fundamental metric you chose to define value, yu’s price to book is nearly 5 times greater than cna’s but will say their peg suggests better value. simply focussing on pe and nothing else doesnt really define value imo. broker consensus target price suggests they rate this on a pe of 10.8 for fy24 forecasts, which personally i think (as outlined why) is too high. not forgetting that there are only two brokers covering the stock which obviously includes their house broker (whose figures will be coming from the business itself, who pay them).

looking forward to your reasoning for £25-£