My concern would be his limited sector experience other than a couple of years in the Dutch business. This seems to have been a feature of recent (last 10 years) of Executive Appointments and it has served them very badly. Renewi have under-performed most of the sector, both quoted and unquoted businesses for a long time and if you look at the executive Boards of these competitors you will usually find at least one executive Director with very lengthy experience; look at Biffa and Augean both of which are quoted. I have been a long term holder and believe it is a good underlying business that has been badly managed and I do have some concerns that a couple of their U.K. PFIs are well over halfway through the 25 year term.
Amers, comment like yours were so common on the Debenhams and Carillion share chats. Whilst I would like to think you are right, as I have no time for shorters, I fear you are wrong. Just too much time has passed without positive news and judging by the funding requirements the business looks to be leaking cash.
Agree with you on smart meter. Do not know anyone who used it beyond the first week novelty. Last week I was visited by a meter reader. When I asked why this was needed he advised that they need to visit at least once a year to check. As you say, manufacturers and installers (often 3rd parties) of meters have benefitted but at our cost.
For information I wrote to the Chair of the Remuneration Committee a couple of weeks ago asking when shareholders were going to see a re-basing of Board salaries to reflect the much lower market capitalisation and dividend payouts of the business. No surprise that there has been no response. Suspect if dividends and share-price had doubled we would have seen a substantial upward movement in base incomes. It really is time for the large institutional shareholder to force through some more realistic income levels but all too cosy and full of self interest.
My experience of multiple buys by directors is that it is nothing to do with positive news coming out but rather that the Chairman suggests the directors buy to demonstrate confidence in the business. There is then some degree of peer pressure. Bear in mind that these individuals are now so overpaid, relative to performance and market cap that their purchases make little impact on their total wealth.
You were advocating a “strong buy” at 11.2p less than 10 days ago. Not a great recent track record. This is a very high risk share that in my view now carries a high risk of almost total shareholder wipeout and any inexperienced investor should be vary cautious about sinking more than they can afford to lose.
Suspect we are at the point when technical analysis counts for little. Prices are being moved by sentiment, speculation and wishful thinking with the odd RNS thrown in for good measure. It has been a pure gamble for many weeks now and anything could happen. My personal view has changed from two months ago when I thought administration was unlikely to one where I think it has at least a 50% probability. Too much time has passed and when a company is in distress my experience is that the downside risk increases as days go by with no positive outcome.
Very grateful I took my long-standing £5 buy order off the table last week when I realised it was impossible to predict a floor. Still think there is an opportunity at some price but no idea where and consequently far too risky.
I think private investors should write to the head of the Remuneration Committee asking what they plan to do about rebasing basic salaries to reflect the massively smaller market cap and shareholder value destruction. It might at least get feelings over as the Institutional Investors just continue to wave through absurd remuneration packages for failure.
Paul,
Sorry but suggest you read up on directors roles and responsibilities They have a fiduciary duty to act in the best interest of shareholders to the point where, based on cash flow projections, there is reason to believe they may not be able to meet liabilities as they fall due. At that point there duty is to act in the best interest of creditors which may be detrimental to shareholders. There is always a grey area when they will act with caution taking e thermal advice. We do not know what their forecasts are showing but it is quite likely that they show a position where they can not meet liabilities. Consequently it is highly likely that banks/bond holders are in control, as was the case with Debenhams,
If you have not seen it, read Mike Ashley’s report in the SD accounts. An absolute classic the like of which I have never seen before. Beginning to wonder if the delay to the accounts was due to lawyers having concerns over what he has committed to print. Accuses MPs of lying, suggests drugs tests for CEO/CFO of listed businesses and lays into the Board of Debenhams and advisors unmercifully.