Member Info for Discodave4561

BK initially held over 62% of the issued capital and at some point he will be selling some IMO. Nothing wrong with that, but it would have to be via a secondary placing if he wants to sell a decent amount. He will be losing out on a few million quid just with CGT increasing 11%.

Will BK be selling some before the CGT rise?

Lots of executives have been doing just that recentlyhttps://news.sky.com/story/amp/business-jitters-ahead-of-chancellor-rachel-reevess-painful-budget-13231887

Ipc, you did say +30% H2 now your saying +50%!. How about we take your mid of 40%?.

“so I would not be surprised at all if H2s growth is more than 30% up on 2023 H2 needed to beat the current £670m forecast especially given the rise in energy prices we have seen over q2/3”

Q2/3 rise in energy prices - what rise in energy prices?, not when you refer to YU’s evolution of gas price chart in their AR. Plus Q2 impact has been reported and Q3 would be in their outlook - okay there’s contractual lag. The spot price of UK gas that’s constantly “ramped” is irrelevant, it’s the margin between what Shell charge YU and customers contracted charge that’s key is it not?. Looking at their reported cost of gas that is trending down not up. Besides which even the UK spot price hasn’t even reached what the average price was for 2023.

Thanks ipc for your response, and fair points made. Just a correction though, revenue FY23 was £460m not £480m, but yes an 8% beat compared to forecasts in place Sept 2023 of £425m. Things are a lot different now, gas price isn’t anywhere near as high plus it’s an unknown with regards to Shells margin and how much they charge.

You mention that you wouldn’t be surprised if H2 is 30% up on FY23, surely they’ve confirmed it will be +40% (they’ve stated Rev in line at +50% for FY24, with H1 at +60% then unless I’m wrong that’s +40% for H2).

Who knows what their free cash will be, it’s obvious though that the liquidity covenant has significantly constrained their distributable cash. Their cash inflow for H1 was also a lot lower than H1 when you net off the windfall cash collateral return.

Agree they have to have targets with respect to market share, but IMO it has to be realistic and 7% in 3-5 years is definitely not realistic, not going on the fact it’s taken 10 years to gain 1.8% during the optimum period of the growth cycle, growth / order book is slowing (25 to 30 years would be more realistic!).

“Suggests H2 revenue could be therefore significantly more than current guidance.”

You mean growth H2 will be more than 40% when last years growth was 78%. IMO they would have informed the market if their revenue was forecast to be ahead of their previous forecast, and on two occasions they’ve declined and their broker isn’t disagreeing. I’m sure BK would have taken every opportunity to get the share price higher before he offloads some via a secondary placing before his tax bill becomes even higher following the budget.

As for their 7% target, it’s simply PR, after 10 years only 1.8%, do the maths it’s completely unrealistic but gains punters attention.

Then there’s all that cash on the books, but a large chunk is non-distributable IMO due to Shells liquidity covenants. No other reason for not putting this cash to work and / or initiating a decent BB, £4m is hardly going to move the dial in terms of enhancing eps and would the market be impressed?. Nice dividend increase but still a fairly small cash outlay versus their cash pile.

Wood

Another one filtered, a poster that seems to actually be the “keyboard warrior” here.

Will see you all later next month and in time for the interims. Could be another decent trade.

SP1

Wow!, PMSL

Have posted on ADVFN. Not clogging this board up.

Filtered

Sparky

Not going to keep answering your stupid questions on here, nobody’s interested. Please stick to debating the company.

Sparky

Why do you always resort to stupid accusations, jeez. I’m posting in response to ipc. I’m posting facts, such a chequered background is a red flag for me, end of.

You need to look at the price of energy against YU’s profitability. It’s pretty obvious to me why they’ve made phenomenal income growth and profits. A CFO selling £3.6m over half his holdings has to be seen as negative IMO. And taking what the market thought of the TU it’s no wonder he sold along with the Director of Retail.

Tbh I’m fed up with your stupid accusations, you can’t stick to the subject matter but constantly resort to making personal accusations, pathetic tbh.

Ipc

Sorry but the Jan 19 TU was still saying everything was okay, zero mention of a potential loss for that FY. Yes they mentioned lower margins but they didn’t issue a profit warning, the broker forecasts were still saying a £5m net profit for the year. A loss for H1 was only mentioned in their July 2019 TU but forecasts still only changed to a loss in Oct. I’m just reviewing and commenting on the facts given, I’ll take your word as to the difficulties Rawson May have been facing in terms of the business admin issues etc, but that’s subjective and as I’ve said Rawson is the CFO and it’s in his shift irrespective.

Will leave it there as I’m upsetting some folks.

Phone typo - that’s “from a profit (not pricy) of £5m…”

Ipc

Final point - It took Rawson nearly a year to go from a forecast of profitability to first flagging a loss. Over a year before broker forecasts went from a pricy of £5m to a loss of £5.3m. Using the previous accounting issues as an excuse doesn’t wash IMO.

adekela - Definitely Not gloating. Posting my views on the business. Resorting to personal comments is of no value here whatsoever.

Ipc

In 2018 when accounting issues were identified, the FCA commenced an investigation into the FY18 accounts, the previous CFO was booted out, and they appointed Rawson on 3rd Sept 2018. Within 2 months of the appointment being announced they issued an RNS on 24th Oct 2018 (“YU Group PLC Trading Statement and Accounting Review) and clearly stated in their summary: “The Board are confident that the Group will achieve profitability for the year ending 31 December 2019,…”

For FY19 they made a net loss of £4.97m, an operating loss of £5.9m. So clearly Rawson got his numbers / forecasts significantly wrong (worst case scenario he got them right which plants doubt about the BoD but won’t go there!).

Not until their trading update in July 2019 did they first start to mention profitability was actually going to be impacted in FY19 H1 (an adjusted EBITDA loss of £2.5m to £3m, it was a loss of £2.7m for H1). Prior to that TU all was well and the business was doing fine!, ie in line with broker forecast of net profit of £5m. It then looks like the house broker issued notes possibly as late as Oct with a forecast loss for FY19 of £5.3m from previously forecasting a profit of £5m. So the business financial forecasts for FY19 were originally a net profit of £5m which ended up with a loss of £4.97m. That’s some major oversight / error by the CFO IMO.

As for the BoD buying shares, or not buying after the share price has crashed over 30% (from eop 22nd to intraday low 25th). If they don’t back the lorry up, I’m talking six figures, then IMO it doesn’t indicate to me that they have much conviction and belief in the profitable growth of the business and / or the share price (I’d exclude BK from that statement). Share options are heavily discounted and thus minimal risk in terms of virtually a guaranteed return - they don’t after all have to take them up if a loss is likely. So forget options, if they aren’t seeing a bargain at the current price or the 30% discount then why should I dip into my pocket!?. Previously when Rawsin sold a significant amount of his holdings, the business bought at £17, IMO Rawson knew what was coming!. Pity he didn’t in FY19…..or did he?. Either way I’ve not too much confidence in him / the BoD.

Just my opinion, not everyone will agree which is fine, this is a market after all and there has to be bulls and bears.

Rawson has only ever bought on the market once, five years ago c £54k. He’s recently sold over 50% (as did the Director of Retail) in a couple of trades for £3.6m. If BK were to sell I’d think he’d do via a placing. Sorry but I don’t rate Rawson as CFO given what happened in FY19, likewise a CFO selling as much as he has just before a TU where the market reacted as negatively can’t IMO be ignored or perceived as a positive signal.

But if he has bought a decent wedge post the TU then fair enough.

SP1

I posted: perhaps a BoD has bought?, why as yet haven’t they bought?.

The only way we would know if they have bought is via an RNS. As posted as yet there has been no holdings RNS. Lets see if an RNS pops up next week.

Closing auction was 1510, the 16:31 @ 1500 may have been a buy, likewise the trade at 16:04 @ 1500, but none of the other trades were above mid price, plus there’s duplicate prints.

Perhaps a BoD has bought?, why as yet haven’t they bought?. Why isn’t the CFO selling £3.6m pre TU of concern to holders here?.

YU aren’t in control of quite a few things not just the commodity price (that’s now Shell who want a piece / the business hence the covenants).

Since 2013 YU have only been profitable:FY17, FY21. FY22 and FY23. Profit FY17 was only £1.7m, as for FY21 onwards IMO that’s solely down to the impact of the energy crisis.

Just some balance.

Blade

May I respectfully request you go forth.

All you post is personal insults and stupid comments.

Ipc

So why don’t they provide energy supplied figures and forecast and align with KPI’s?. Personally using avg monthly booking data and new customer meters etc, isn’t sufficiently robust to determine 6 months hence what income will be. Then there’s their margins which is completely dependent upon Shells performance (not to mention commodity futures contracts, the weather, fixed contracts numbers and variable contract numbers, multiple metered customers, etc etc etc). Giving energy supplied, energy per customer, energy per meter, would just give a much clearer picture on what their income profiles were / are and folks could get a better feel for profitability - brokers are simply repeating what Rawson tells them (which doesn’t in itself give me much confidence). If the company have much more information then one could do your own forecasts without paid for broker bias (if this was covered by more analysts then I would check my forecasts against consensus but with just two its how good the CFO is (won’t go there against!).

Sparky

Yes you are correct about the Opus info being posted, my apologies for that. As for the energy supplied volume you are not correct. I’ve always held the view that number of meters is irrelevant, so when I was trying to fund the usage data it was only in the last AR where it was mentioned, I posted that and mentioned there’s no way of determining the trend.

I’ve always been civil, think you need to re-read your postings both here and elsewhere.

We will never agree so will filter you here otherwise I will continue to challenge all the misinformation you tend to post up.

You’re welcome Sparky, no problem.

Guess the words “was loss making” will get your usual spin on other BB’s.