Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
RickSanchez - I probably overscrutinised / put to much weight on your use of the word "results" (vs "projected results" / "forward guidance") and jumped on it as if you were one of the disreputable posters of this board. Apologies.
Starting a thread with the title "RNS" while there is actually no RNS issued appears disingenuous.
Talking of "results priced in" does not make much sense when said results have not been published yet.
Furthermore, just a few posts ago, I provided evidence of shares dropping the day(s) before very good results (SAGA plc yesterday/today is another good example), but interestingly the posters of the above-mentioned messages did not take that into account.
Several times I have witnessed drops in SPs 1-2 days before strong results (WINE and PETS in summer 2020, THG 2-3 weeks ago) which then prompted thunderous rises up. I’m not concerned, just very annnoyed, by the decrease in the past few days.
Bondy123 - nothing conclusive to explain it. And remember that the marcap is only 10% more than the cash in the bank, with no debts.
My HIGHLY SPECULATIVE theory is that it’s orchestrated to keep the SP as low as possible for the final results of 31 Jan 2024, possibly for II buys or even a takeover offer.
Cash in the bank around £250m. Marcap £275m.
Proof that business turnaround based on the last two official updates.
It hardly gets better value than this company now, and one of the two (the other one being Marston's) that I suspect will get a takeover offer in the next few months.
ITM may have benefited from that news, because it suggests that there is at least still some life in the sector. Which might be the reason the share price deteriorated.
Dennis did deliver tangible results over 2023: the numbers showed he slowed down the rot (stopped it?) and refocused the business. Obviously we want big concrete contract news - the Shell deal is too open-ended so far.
This might the reason for the breakout of yesterday:
https://www.morningadvertiser.co.uk/Article/2024/01/09/Red-Oak-Taverns-acquires-four-pubs-from-Marston-s-Jan-2024
Not huge in the grand scheme of things considering Marston's scale but it demonstrates two things:
- Marston's can sell some of its pubs (although no price provided).
- Lenders are willing to support pub companies (the buyer had a large chunk of debt, yet its creditors agreed to lend it even more money for the purchases from Marston's).
Fairdealer - the calculation of the NAV takes all mortgages, charges and other agreements into account under standard reporting rules. So the Carlsberg "shackles" are taken into account in the NAV.
Likewise, you appear to claim that the Welsh estate has been misreported. What evidence do you have of that?
"You have commented on the declined offer made by Platinum in 2021. That offer was 107p at the 3 rd time and not put to SH's until completely declined by Ralph Findlay."
- It was turned down because it was deemed not to value the company adequately (as stated officially). Yet Platinum still made that offer in the first place, after placing two earlier (lower) offers, so they too clearly agreed that the business was at least worth that in spite of the above-mentioned "shackles".
The market not being confident about the company at present is an indicator of sentiment, it is not hard evidence of the company's health and NAV.
And this is where a takeover would be highly interesting for the company's new owners: if a consortium of parties that together don't need to borrow a substantial amount of money to pay off a large chunk of Marston's debt gets the business, then by indeed making that payment (or part-payment) of the debt, they would then enormously boost its profitability, especially in a period of high interest rates. As interest rates are getting increasingly likely to come down (albeit slowly probably) this year, it makes sense to buy the company sooner rather than later (so long as no money needs to be borrowed for that purchase of course).