Member Info for licker

Why do a buy back. The WACC is driven currently by interest capital costs not equity returns so debt clear down followed by buy starting to pay divi ( big psychological moment) then buy back better in my view than buy back now

Can't fathom why Kelso put buy back as 1st priority. Doesn't make sense as would have to be debt funded therefore increasing the WACC not decreasing it

I expected more than a shoot from the hip non response

What will it take to get fair value here?

Great opps update

+ve ebit and cash flow generation neutral

Big deals being signed

Re envigirated strong board

Activist investors

Heavyweight insiders all staying out or buying

Governance issues behind

Bids at least 3 times this price

Massive discount to smaller revenue ebit peers (some by factor of 8)

Broker upgrades

Directors buying

Sum of parts value 250p

...yet me move a pittance and are around all time lows

Value gap is huge

Great trading update yesterday. Golden share gone. Resilient sector's. Not large debt. Deal soon

...yet we have fallen alot more than any other stock on FTSE today

I'm genuinely perplexed

From my accumulator I worked out if you sold THG just before close and bought in.at 9 am every morning your gain would be 162% over last 12 months

Canary he may already had a plan or exit criteria from them anyway. We aren't saying he ignored them clearly that is not the case but criteria for any bid may have already been agreed and he is empowered to act or plan B iexits amn is maturing

One way or another there is a bigger value plan in play and they trust him on it

Looming fwd to the big reveal

Canary can you explain that a bit more please cheers

Canary

You may be itrect but tlthe worst around asset strip value is priced in.at the moment . Orders of magnitude being peers on every business unit valuation

Hi canary. Thanks f6ir response but it still doesn't answer the underlying question of how the equivalent interests of the 35% are being protected especially when

1. There is a conflict of the board and rolling IIs and the 35% being bought out in an mbo

2. The apollo bid being disclosed is of a marlterial interest to the 35% against the offer of an mbo which the larger holders were consulted on under all previous bids

3. Higher level holders have been treated preferentially. This is not allowed under the takeover code which partly is there to ensure the interests of minority shareholders are protected especially in this situation where there is a clear conflict and risk that the minorities may get lower value to benefit the rolling larger holders and CEO and his cohorts/ Concert parties

It's an anbvous risk and needs adressing

One of the underlying premises of the takeover code is all shareholders of the same class must be treated equally.

The chair must answer why this is not the case

We are way past the starting gun. That was 9 months ago with Qatar

I've been wracking my brains for any reason why he wouldn't disclose the bid.

Most likely is that the IIs all know as they are rolling and the 35% dont know as its their 35% they need to buy out to go private. So he has a clear conflict here as disclosing the offer could up what he has to pay totake private especially if it was 250 or more which is most likely given there high inhenuity valuation. The only way he can remove this conflict and fulfill his fiduciary duty is to disclose it. The chair acts for us not the CEO ( cough cough)and holds the board to account in doing so this question should be adressed to the chair not the CEO but it needs asking for sure and if it can't be disclosed then why and why are they creating 2 investor classes wthin the same ordinary shareholders holding the same share class. This is absolutely against the takeover code

The only other reason it was low and so would encourage lower hostile bids once GS gone and he is protecting against that

Personally I'd rather know

We are way past the starting gun. That was 9 months ago with Qatar

I've been wracking my brains for any reason why he wouldn't disclose the bid.

Most likely is that the IIs all know as they are rolling and the 35% dont know as its their 35% they need to buy out to go private. So he has a clear conflict here as disclosing the offer could up what he has to pay totake private especially if it was 250 or more which is.most.likely given there high inhenuity valuation. The only way he can remove this conflict and fulfill his fiduciary duty is to disclose it. The chair acts for us not the CEO ( cough cough)and holds the board to account in doing so this question should be adressed to the chair not the CEO but it needs asking fir sure and if it can't be disliked then why and why are they creating 2 investor classes. This is absolutely against the takeover code

The only other reason it was low and so would encourage lower hostile bids once GS gone and he is protecting against that

Personally I'd rather know

Just look at the googke chart over 5 year time frame. You will see what I mean. Its still rock bottom

Major multi bag rerate expected

If algos and many traders follow TA then it will be self fulfilling by definition

I really can't get at all excited about 70p. Fair value here is at least 350p based on my posted valuation calls on Tuesday. I remember.how absolutely gutted many posters were when this crossed the line to a penny stock.

Long way to go yet to fair value but it may happen VERY quickly given the owrfect alignment of good q2 results, urgency or moulding MBO deal and sentinent

Lucky think about it ffs

Why would he dilute himself his friends family charities staff close IIs etc etc. That just won't happen

I do wish some posters would use their brain b4 posting

It's not just the 65% who are sticky. Alot of the 35% are too. The real tradable free float here is very small. Just a question on which floor people Weill exit on. I'm in for the end game don't think it's far off at all

No free float sellers either. This is now incredibly sticky. Why leveraged buying stopped?

Any rush will have a far bigger effect on sp than usual. Same reason shorts could easily play it down the other way in the past

Ingenuinely apollo values c 1bn

Beauty 1.25 * 5 to reach peer levels = 5.25bn

Nutrition 2bn

8bn easily back to 500p

Or ebit multiplier which is in early growth 200m *14 sector more = 2.8bn. Or c. 200p.

DcF I've no idea in next 10 year cash flow to discount it but say 400m times 4bn but that is finger in air

Asset value at acquisition prices pretty much with zero for organic growth growth and zero I genuine

65p.is unbelievably low

300p does it for me as bottom of range

Of course insider info doesn't exist. The city is as pure and real as santa