Member Info for Ephemeral

Stevie I think the divi at 50p is at risk - there’ll be a divi but perhaps not that high given outflows - and I expect a poor quarter (consequent to Trump effect).

30p was also pre-trading statement and FT articles shining a light on hidden (or at least not explicitly communicated) shenanigans. What will drive this SP is a challenge at BoD (won’t be from within so will have to be from without) and concerted effort from major investors to hold MM and BoD to account. The AGM is the conduit for this. As difficult as it is I do think cost reduction (read head count re: redundancies) are another means of achieving value. THG simply does not need the staff compliment it holds : 3 No CEO’s being a clear example (Matthew; Lucy; Neil)

I think this a good thing. No discernible shift in SP however?

As many will know, I am no fan of MM or Neil Mistry (CEO Nutrition) - but - through gritted teeth the MyProtein rebrand on clothing is actually quite good (very good) minimalist branding. Don’t know how it performs but it is a good line. Perhaps a Hyrox / MyProtein clothing line would do well.

It would be good hear MA’s book talk…. what’s his rationale for investment… how does he see route to a return (as a 10% shareholder underwater)… what actions will he be taking?

Pmh… sadly I don’t think something is brewing. The BoD silence is simply that; silence. The shareholders are not (and have not been) of concern to BoD; else there would have been some commentary and action on SP destruction and obscene ‘exceptionals’ in accounts. Instead GLA is gaslighting the shareholders with an extremely positive statement in the AR. My hope is Kelso / MA start a protest and register such as a vote against Chair at AGM. What value or good governance processes has he brought?

SP is middling. Please share buybacks are at this level. I’m not sure what shifts the SP here. Assets are good and simpler; so perhaps a buyout at some point?

Lowering average (repeatedly) is how it got into this mess… I remember the board chat on …. this will never go sub 100p … deep value here… the only consistent is every average down precedes a further destruction in SP by THG Exec whilst simultaneously declining offers in excess of SP Exec are responsible for.

Thanks Ryanf; Okehurst, 404. Neil Mistry (Nutrition CEO) needs to go. To be fair (although inexperienced) Lucy Gorman done an okay job on Beauty. A Frasers purchase for Beauty would bring Selkirk back in for Nutrition. It would also help reduce headcount. Only need one CEO etc. I’m not sure just how much brand loyalty Nutrition has… India would be place to go big given demographics but from update doesn’t figure in numbers… does anyone know how popular MyProtein is in Japan?

Okehurst on your Frasers analysis then the bid price would be in the 70-80p region. Do you agree?

In all seriousness how does a PI hold MM to account. Is it a letter to Senior Independent Director? There seems no obvious way as a shareholder (other than sell) to protest that both the BoD and CEO are not acting in the interests of the Company. A protest vote at AGM is all that is available. I doubt there is enough organisation to vote Directors off the Board esp. with MM and THG employee trust owning so much. Hopefully MA; Sofina: QIA : and many PIs do the necessary to object. I will be voting against Renumeration Policy and reelection of the Chair.

Thanks oke; my concern is the II’s inc. MA have given up. One thing not to believe in MM quite another when the BoD appear MIA esp. Lord Allen who has been an awful Chair. Ingenuity handed out for almost free (given said valuations) and then a millstone around Nutrition and Beauty neck. That’s okay the CEO of RemainCo will use another supplier … the issue being the CEO owns the incumbent supplier - you couldn’t find a more straightforward conflict!

Another way of viewing situation is THG lost c. 1/6th of remaining market value on back of trading update … pre update ~30p post ~25p well below placing. It follows it wouldn’t take much to reverse. Better corporate governance (replace MM as CEO); a decent set of results (follow six poor quarters if you ex. Ingenuity); remove the bizarre adjusting items (hotel etc). Add to that a significant headcount reduction and say a +ve whey movement… I can see a material SP uplift … 50p on above alone… but still well below my b/e around 90p. What still irks me is the ingenuity contract is not market facing.. is RemainCo really getting full value or is the CEO RemainCo supporting the CEO of Ingenuity (who happens to be the same person!!) … surely the BoD must see conflict … no ‘related parties committee’ fulfil its role with such a situation. Hopefully someone like MA or KLSO will point this out.

Could RKH go +100p this year?

I think a OM Determination and FID decision may put it near there. What do others think?

Licker you need to read the two recent FT articles. The FT are (a) doing a better job at holding THG to account than either the BoD or the analysts who cover it. And (b) THG did not respond to FT request for comment. That says it all really. I hope MA votes against Chair reelection at AGM. As I hope do other IIs and PIs

BP has better corporate governance and an activist investor in Elliot who is holding the BoD to account. All previous is absent for THG. Further THG has a Chair who is asleep at the wheel. A CEO who is also CEO and majority owner of a major supplier. A CEO who offloaded hotel redevelopment costs to business when extracting Ingenuity - as pointed out by FT. It is a farce. The route out is a protest vote at AGM. And or requirement by BoD (or requirement placed upon them) to remove MM CEO given major conflicts.

The worst part of it was that written by Charles Allen. Complete gaslighting and no mention of SP destruction. The graph in the remuneration section; THG SP vs other stocks says it all. It’s only in there because they have to present it.

To add AR cites 6791 employees (this may include. Ingenuity). That many simply aren’t required for Nutrition and Beauty. A circa 2/3 headcount reduction should be possible.

I was somewhat surprised MM conflict was not a Q the analysts put to THG on the results call. On Admin I would suggest it is not necessary to have a CEO of Nutrition (Neil Mistry) and a CEO of Nutrition and Beauty (Lucy Gorman) and a CEO of THG (comprising Nutrition and Beauty only). Ideally Neil is asked to exit (awful BU performance) and an experienced FMCG CEO replaces MM with Lucy remaining in role. It appears there a no consequences for poor performance in Senior THG roles. Exiting Nutrition CEO would be a good start.

I should share good post save for the security statement : not necessary.