Member Info for lejjb

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.

It was posted and subsequently discussed.

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.

Wig1 - shorttracker.co.uk

Wig1 - not necessarily.

For example, THG dropped by 20% roughly just before very good results (cash flow positive for the first to time since it was listed) which saw it soar last week.

Ceres had dropped for a good reason: its published forecast was bad.

It’s not the case for ITM, making this present drop much stranger.

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.

People talking heat pumps suggests a lack of understanding of what hydrogen power is to be used for.

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.

You are correct. One exists a short by buying back the share, ie shorts exiting = SP moving up.

I wasn't clear: the SP deteriorated possibly because of negative market belief about the hydrogen production sector. The CWR news might have reversed that, hence the SP rise for ITM.

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.

General market pessimism, even for share which might actually benefit from the current macro situation (like ITM).

Boredom due to lack of news (typical for small-ish cap shares).

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).

Determined by the higher SP level and the higher volume than the last few days.

I had honestly not expected it so early in the year. I’m intrigued.

(I’ll respond to Fairdealer in detail later.)

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).

And the last officially reported NAV (about 18 months ago IIRC?) was 98p per share. That does not at all factor in the value of Marston’s as going concern.

The SP is just below 34p as of Friday 5/1/24 COB.

Fairdealer - some of my response is in my reply to barchid. For the rest, I invite you to read all the RNSs since Spring 2020 and the Times article(s) from that year as well as the news of the rejected T/O offers of Q1 2021.

Barchid - assuming you are referring to this, https://www.voxmarkets.co.uk/articles/will-this-unloved-sector-perform-like-house-builders-did--907da66/ ,

unfortunately you have demonstrated that you listened to only one half of the material and publicly reported/ commented on the other half.

Key points:

1- the video covers several sectors, bars/pubs being only one of them.

2- the guest speaker said “lots of intrinsic value” for the pubs and bars.

3- The only moment he spoke of Marston’s was to say that it was the listed pub/bar company with the “highest margins” (at 23’00” approx).

4- However, when going beyond his factual claims, that guest comes across as an incredible idiot: when commenting at the majority of the pub/bars listed (NOT MENTIONING MARSTONS EXPLICITLY), he said that the high “NAV [was] offset by debts”. It’s an incredibly stupid statement: NAV / net asset value is literally [assets minus liabilities].

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/nav So a high NAV means a business is comfortably solvent and can comfortably cover its debts.

Now there are other broader macro considerations also covered in that (very very amateurish IMO) video which do not necessarily paint a fully rosy picture but pubs / bars and Marston’s in particular are not particularly suffering from that direct and indirect (amateurish mostly) coverage, all things considered.

I genuinely believe Marston’s will get taken over above 90p per share by July, unless the SP rises organically to that figure before then.

Anyone who has researched this company and its history since 2020 will know why I’m saying that.

The LSE.co.uk log of trades is wrong (not the first time it happens), TradingView has shown transactions for that day.