Member Info for Hexam

"Topshop is simply a brand. Boo has net assets of 250m from memory, so simplistically all of Boos brands are currently worth less than Top Shop

Do you see how silly that is?"

It doesn't mean that at all. Just a silly inference.

I do have the sort of qualifications and experience you're talking about JO and also have the view that financials have been very poor, especially as far as profitability and cash flow go (though wouldn't go as far 'diabolical'). Where I disagree with Savage is in the future potential. The balance sheet (which certainly has improved) and the actions taken (around costs, more selective and less cutthroat tendering for contracts etc.) should help them improve but the actual results are yet to show too much evidence of it. The next set or two of results should change that...hopefully.

Agree Culley, hence the current sp. I think the market is also looking forward though, but you can't blame it for being sceptical of the improvement without clearer signs that it will happen especially as recent results haven't exactly delivered on past promises and optimism.

The balance sheet has certainly improved but the jury is out on profitability, though personally I think they'll get there given what they are trying to do and are doing. The wider market though seems to want more concrete evidence and maybe the next set of results will help...

Exactly AIM4.

"What you just said doesn't make sense. "

It does as they are repurchasing the old debt at a discount so it's not 1 to 1.

Yes, I am net positive on CPI at the moment at this sp so do disagree with you Savage I'm afraid.

I agree though that the recent results have been somewhere between mixed and just outright disappointing - and have been largely propped up by one-offs which CPI have a genius for using to help obscure what's really going on.

BUT - the now net cash position means they are on a much sounding footing and even if results don't improve there should be no need in my view for more cash in the immediate future. I think results will improve though with the actions being taken though of course a lot can wrong both within and without Capita's control - but at least they seem to be doing the right things to succeed. Just my view though.

"Then there’s the debt refinancing. Higher interest rates? That’s a red flag."

No, it's not. It's mainly a reflection of the higher interest environment we are in. Yes, the terms are more onerous but on the flipside it meant they were able to repurchase much of the old debt cheaply. The net result is that they have reduced debt by more than just the TSTM proceeds and though the interest payments are higher the loan repayments are pushed back which gives them much more breathing space to get back on track.

There was a lot to take in from yesterday's announcements and it's hard to be sure overall whether it really is good news but the market certainly seemed to like it!

Just for the record I am not short on CPI and have never shorted any company.

As for CPI I admit I'm not a great fan of the company itself but that's just from personal experience with them but I do think they are a very good investment opportunity at this sp. They have got themselves into a good place with the debt (now in a net cash position). They now just need to improve their profitability which won't be a gimme but they seem to be heading in the right direction with AH at the helm rather than the hapless JL - even if that means reducing revenue by turning down unprofitable contracts and selling businesses like C1 to improve focus (and the debt position).

Seems I've picked up a stalker though who is just bitter they got banned from a particular board (and where the sp has plummeted) for excessive ramping and making false accusations of the sort they are now making against me here. Oh well.

…or just before eight this morning 🙂

Thanks Kipper but mine has always been around 120 to 130 over 70 to 80 so at least that's one thing I've never had to worry about thankfully :-)

My blood pressure is just fine Kipper. If anything I'm too laid back. I just have a thing about posters who post misleading information either wilfully or through a lack of understanding or due diligence - especially if they dress it up as the bees knees and talk about how wonderful they are for providing such dodgy data. If I filtered then I wouldn't know the misinformation being spread.

Still, I let most of NF's nonsense go anyway but occasionally I speak up to correct or caution but obviously posters, including yourself, can choose who and what to believe. No worries.

Yeah, of course you did.

Problem is will the next thing you post be viewed as an honest attempt to pass on news or just another prank to fool people?

"I quickly ran a post for all good and bad to fall for it... What we've learned today is that always do your own diligence. All my previous pdf factset files upload here previously are 💯% true and accurate from the source.

Seriously - you're trying to claim that your 13 year old breaking story was a deliberate move to see who would fall for it? Clearly you just didn't do basic due diligence on the article...or on your factset files - if you did you would know that they are not 100% accurate.

Priceless own goal - proving you just post stuff without checking, thinking or understanding.

Where was the abuse? It was deleted because you reported it. If people were like you and reported your posts (for far better reasons) then they'd be deleted too. Thankfully they are not all like you.

Mikeydj - Phimx has simply claimed you were misleading which is something you accuse plenty of others of being . That's not abuse and if it then you've been guilty of it a lot more.

Also has to said that Phimx is perfectly correct as clearly you cannot have risk as being 'infinitely' higher - unless of course there is zero risk in what it is being compared to (which in this case there obviously isn't).

I suggest you put those stones down, step outside of your glass house and stop accusing others of what you frequently do yourself.

That way this discussion board can get hopefully back to discussing issues...

Yeah, I must brush up on conspiracy theories - perhaps there’s something in them after all?

Can’t see what’s wrong with Craw’s statement so not sure what all the fuss is about. Perhaps I’m just another ‘complete novice’ though…

Yes Kipper, maybe best to amicably agree to disagree but although I'm an oldish dog now I'm still up for learning new tricks so would be genuinely interested in why you find such data useful? How does it influence your decisions? The data doesn't interest me for the reasons I gave (whether it's on shorts or institutions) but maybe I'm missing something?

Kipper,

Yes if you go back far enough there are some big jumps for Schroders (for example in Sep 2020 they went from 5% to 10%) - I was referring to more recent movements.

In any event, as you say, they have got it wrong just like we all can do. Just one of the reasons I ignore the institution data. Another is if Schroders, or whoever, are increasing their holding there must be others that are decreasing theirs (unless it is all coming from PIs which it isn't). So which ones do you believe/follow - the ones piling in or the ones ducking out?

A further reason is the data is not all it seems. For example the headline is that over 90% is in institutional funds when clearly it isn't as that figure includes money held in nominee accounts e.g. with Hargreaves, Fidelity etc. So my holding appears on that 'institutional' list - and probably so does yours somewhere on it. Also there is double counting going on.

All I care about is how the company is doing/may be doing in the future and any director dealing perhaps - not what institutions, shorts, MMs etc are up to. As a LTH - it wasn't these things weren't a factor when I chose to invest, why should they be a factor now? So for me it is just noise but for those like NF who have admitted to being traders (nothing wrong with that) then it might be more useful. For me I'll just focus on company performance which hopefully will show more signs of perking up soon!

Stupmy - good to see your familiar face here too. I'm still in TUI but haven't posted there much since the last RI though still confident it is undervalued.

Kipper,

The mountains of bloomberg data is obviously useful to some (if that's what you are referring to i.e. the Bloomberg terminal stuff posted long ago) but more so for daytraders etc. My question is why is it important to LTH?

As to data on institutions like Schroder it looks like the vast majority of their investment is via funds (Schroders Recovery fund etc.) so if they increase their holding it is more because the investment by punters like us in such funds has increased so all the constituents need to be raised. This explains also why they keep issuing RNS with the holding bobbing up and down by small amounts as they flip across thresholds. Of course they could choose to add or to ditch Capita to or from particular funds which would be more significant but the percentages aren't changing by big amounts that I can see to suggest that this is happening.

My point is that data in itself is meaningless and a lot is posted on here without much by way of coherent explanation, context or commentary. It is the understanding and interpretation of it that is key and for me all the institutional data says (excluding some obvious double counting) is that Capita is a staple of many institutional funds (as many big UK companies are) and this hasn't changed much. So I don't think they are increasing in the way you suggest but that's just my interpretation. If yours is different then that's your call obviously and of course the fact they aren't going down much is at least something (though still not something I personally factor into any decision making - along with any information on shorts).