George Frangeskides, Chairman at ALBA, explains why the Pilbara Lithium option ‘was too good to miss’. Watch the video here.
Got badly burned too in the Peter Cook fiasco, which nobody saw coming except the ones that inflicted the damage. Recovery from that was always going to be slow, even without the subsequent NSF takeover debacle, the impact of COVID, the overly-zealous regulation and the legions of ambulance chasers. Credit due to present management for getting much closer to the ground, which was essential to sort the outcome of too many reckless changes far too quickly. I'm likely to keep everything crossed that they have turned the corner, and hold for potential dividend income from my ISA'd holding.
I don't think he'll be back, having been proved wrong. He'll be nursing the hole in his foot where he shot himself. He fits the same mould as several others. Doesn't know the backstory of the company well enough to make definitive pronouncements like he did.
Thanks for corroborating the view in my first paragraph. The home credit arm of PFG has been closed and is in run-off. The remaining businesses are healthy, and the group is well-positioned to prosper when eventually freed of the outdated and loss-making home collected credit activities.
Thanks for corroborating the view in my first paragraph. The home credit arm of PFG has been closed and is in run-off. The remaining businesses are healthy, and the group is well-positioned to prosper when eventually freed of the outdated and loss-making home collected credit activities.
Essentially, yes. This is from the web.
"A note is a form of debt security, obligating repayment of a loan, at a predetermined interest rate, within a defined time frame. Notes are similar to bonds but typically have an earlier maturity date than other debt securities, such as bonds. For example, a note might pay an interest rate of 2% per year and mature in one year or less. A bond might offer a higher rate of interest and mature several years from now. A debt security with a longer maturity date typically comes with a higher interest rate—all else being equal—since investors need to be compensated for tying up their money for a longer period."
The home collected (sub-prime) credit industry is completely misunderstood by most people, be they lawmakers, regulators, market makers, analysts, financial advisors, private investors, claims management companies, social-interest groups, most of their own and management and the general public.
Corporate boards of directors and audit committees never get close enough to this business to understand it properly. Well-intentioned but naïve regulatory bodies have also taken many companies to near-collapse by over-protecting consumers at the expense of other stakeholders.
Taking the risk that unsecured loans won't be repaid is a very expensive pastime indeed. Combined with unwarranted regulatory interventions, fines and the upholding of dubious malpractice claims, companies have become much less sustainable as they are forced to employ business practices that leave them unable to at least break even.
Imagine lending your best friend £10 on a Wednesday until payday on Friday, and at the weekend, you get a pint in return for your help. Work out the APR on that deal and you get something close to 6,500%. APR is and always has been a completely inaccurate and misleading tool when applied to short-term commercial lending, yet it is used consistently to discredit the industry
Despite regulatory quangos, ambulance-chasers and bleeding-heart institutions trying to hound these companies out of existence, the high demand for unsecured loan credit is not going to disappear anytime soon. I can only hope that government ministers know where the supply of missing funding is going to come from, but I suspect that they don't have the remotest idea.
I'm not trying to take sides on this issue, merely stating facts after exposure at all levels in the industry for more than 40 years.
It's still at least 40p above your target price.
How's the share price doing, Kewjosh?
Kewjosh. Frankly, you are talking utter rubbish. The FCA doesn't have an issue with PFG per se, but is investigating a small amount of CCD activity in a small time window for suspected irregularities. This is being done with the full co-operation of all parties on both sides and provision has already been made in the accounts for the likely redress. You would know that if you took the trouble to do some background research rather than trundle out your unsubstantiated conjecture. You've got a thick skin, I'll give you that, but I suspect that is more to do with your ill-informed opinion rather than any genuine insight. The FCA has not covered itself in glory either in its quest to protect honest and dishonest customer alike at the expense of shareholders, to the point of driving the sub-primers out of business, hardly within the remit of a government agency. The penny is dropping with the FCA that the huge market for this business is not going to go away, even when they have removed the supply chain. The government cannot afford or be expected to support the levels of unprofitability it expects the businesses to bear, so the FCA will ultimately force consumers down the unregulated and illegal loans path. In other words, if its not careful the FCA will replace the Tallyman with the Taliban. Do a bit of research on the past five or so years, for goodness sake.
I won't dignify that speculation with an answer as you do obviously don't understand the business and have no idea of what you are talking about.
Kewjosh, why don't you mug up a bit on the company's background and history if you think that PFG and its investors haven't already been punished severely for regulatory breaches. You offer opinions from a position of zero knowledge. Your prediction for this week's share movement has already been proved wrong. Sad to say there isn't much basis for your doom and gloom scaremongering. Best find another room to share your misery.
That's a matter of opinion, and the view of someone who patently doesn't understand the historic value of the home collected credit business to its customers and its shareholders too for that matter. Some private investors have held this share since long before many of the posters on here were born. Over the years, it's been impossible to get anything wrong about the performance of this business, as it's been through thick and thin until it finally imploded, mainly owing to the actions of people who know next to nothing about it. There is nothing clever about shorting this stock to make the price of a couple of pints. Those who believe based on a deep knowledge of the company and its story will hold for as long as it is necessary to see the business prosper again in a rather stupid world.
Cheaper to write of the debt than chase the payments. Customers happy. Nice goodwill greasing of customers. FCA happy. Value stagnation and withheld dividends for four years. Investors not happy.
Gray. Would you care to offer some evidence to support this view?
Meanwhile, some food for thought. I understand the court hearing is Wednesday 19 May.
The Guardian: Amigo Loans rescue in doubt after FCA says it will object in court.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/may/11/amigo-loans-rescue-in-doubt-after-fca-says-it-will-object-in-court
This appears to be a quote from analyst Gary Greenwood at Shore Capital rather than from PFG management as implied. It's a pretty insensitive statement though, whoever said it and however accurate it might be.
The forward-looking information contained in the FCA news release looks like blatant disregard for insider dealing rules.
Think it's more likely to anticipate an announcement that the HCC business in PFG is now considered to be non-core and some or all of the book debt may be up for disposal. NSF intention was to use the proposed takeover to merge the HCC and Loans At Home businesses. The rumours seem to have benefited their share price today.
Share Pick by Kirsteen Mackay (Motley Fool): Provident Financial
"Provident Financial (LSE:PFG) has said its business is picking up again after sinking to a £37.6m loss in the first six months of the year. It now plans to repay furlough money received from the government as its Vanquis Bank and Moneybarn subsidiaries remain profitable. It has streamlined its business through job cuts and should be stronger going forward.
As furlough payments come to an end, finances will be tight – and with Christmas on shoppers’ minds, I think Provident will continue to see a rise in doorstep lending. It has a price-to-earnings ratio of 7, though its dividend remains on hold. Kirsteen does not own shares in Provident Financial."
I saw this piece this morning in the Motley Fool from a market analyst. As well as not owning shares, Kirsteen Mackay doesn't seem to know much about the business either. Cold doorstep lending, as she is implying, isn't legal anymore, and in any case, PFG are collecting 80% of home credit receivables, now a minor arm of the business, through remote means. Activities of the major arms of the business are not conducted in the home or on the doorstep either. Even without that, the analysis is conjecture and even worse, customer exploitative, suggesting lack of knowledge of the company's regulatory history by the writer, and therefore reprehensible. The FCA is often looking in the wrong place when doling out its fines. It's high time some of these so-called analysts were brought to account as well for failure to check the facts and offering irresponsible 'advice'.