Member Info for Orangetree

Recently I covered this company and made a prediction that if it can grow LFL by 2.5% or more the shares reach a �1 per share. Although that hasn�t happened, the shares did from 65 pence (the date I released this article) to the current share price of 90 pence. A decent 40% rise in less than two months. If you are interested in that article, click http://bit.ly/2BkrhEl But, there is another company which relates to this space but runs a distribution network of delivering floorcovering to customers. It�s called Headlam Group, and I think it is a decent company operating in less competition and produces stable earnings. It is a progressive dividend payer at 5% yield. I think it fits well with people looking for a reasonable dividend income in their investment portfolio. For further details on Headlam, click http://bit.ly/2mLZyHa

For those who have been disappointed with Carpetright, there is a much simpler, and less competitive company in Headlam Group. Headlam is a distributor of floorcovering and most of their business derives from the UK. It is a progress dividend payer and currently pays a 5% dividend yield. For further details on Headlam, click http://bit.ly/2mLZyHa

To those who want a more stable company to invest in than UCG, then look no further than Headlam Group, which is a distributor of floorcovering and most of their business derives from the UK. Like UCG, it pays a high dividend yield of 5%. The best thing about Headlam is less competition for distributing floorcovering. For further details on Headlam, click http://bit.ly/2mLZyHa

The drop in Provident Financial is down to internal operational troubles and tighter financial regulations. People making a comparison with Carillion is misunderstanding PFD business. PFD is in the business of selling debt (now its mostly deposits) to the everyday borrower for a high-interest rate.

Do you want to know if GAW share price will continue to rise or has earnings peaked and become unsustainable? The analysis is right here: http://bit.ly/2D1OnnF

After crunching some numbers, I made some forecast for 2018 regarding sales and pre-tax profits. So, for 2018: Sales: �235m vs. forecast �195m. Pre-tax profit: �104.6m vs. a forecast of �65m. This means after tax, it makes a net profit of �82m or fwd-PER of 9.63. Here is the table showing my calculations: http://bit.ly/2D0EOpd I guess this could be a short-term (the next three months) buying opportunity. Unless brokers revise their sales and profit forecast for 2019 and 2020, I'm the shares will continue to trade under pressure. Current 2019's forecast for sales and pre-tax profit is �185m and �55m, respectively. which is projected to fall to �185m. Also. pre-tax profit to fall to �55m.

Having read the Crawshaw trading update on Friday, I noticed some readers were confused if it was a good or bad update. Looking back at prior years� updates will put the 0.6% sales growth into perspective. Below are the results: In January 2017, group sales grew by 13%. In 2016, group sales grew by 64%. In 2015, group sales rose by 21%. Therefore, 0.6% sales growth was the smallest on Crawshaw record. And despite opening 10 new stores, which could represent 10% sales, it got 0.6%. This means the LFL sales decline of 6% is eating away growth from stores opened less than a year. For more about 2Sisters, their founder and a look back at Crawshaw�s fundamentals (since 2002, in some cases), then click http://bit.ly/2CFNRZb

Maybe because of the following: 1). Sales up 80% vs. Op. profit growth of 37%, a sign of falling margins; 2). Existing biz saw a $20m decrease in sales. 3). Net debt over $4bn, up 157%.

I think Paul Scott raised the point of economies of scale. If G4M is able to emulate what Rightmove did in the property sector, then it's only the beginning. As Graham has said in his coverage, valuation is priced in three years ahead of time. I would put G4M on my watchlist until they release their final results. If there is a stark improvement in gross margin and operating margin, then it is a sign the company is growing in competitiveness and it should do as it eats more of the cake. Maybe then it could negotiate with manufacturers on bulk discount buying and more.

I think Paul Scott raised the point of economies of scale. If G4M is able to emulate what Rightmove did in the property sector, then it's only the beginning. As Graham has said in his coverage, valuation is priced in three years ahead of time. I would put G4M on my watchlist until they release their final results. If there is a stark improvement in gross margin and operating margin, then it is a sign the company is growing in competitiveness and it should do as it eats more of the cake. Maybe then it could negotiate with manufacturers on bulk discount buying and more.

Although I can�t quantify what slightly above management expectation means, I see the share price responding positively well. I know in the past nine years it has delivered shareholders awesome gains. But, I do have a few concerns about this business 1). It cylindrical nature of the laundry business depends on the growth and unemployment rate of the UK economy. 2). Will it be able to maintain high level of earnings growth without too much borrowing? That will determine its future share price. For more details, here is the analysis: http://bit.ly/2CIwjzH

After reading their trading update, I conclude the following: Sales growth is impressive but the rate of growth is lower than last year 55%, this is because of the business getting larger. But early investors of G4M have made some great gains, but I feel the next two to three years will be testing period for the online seller. There is one nagging concern that I have with G4M and that is the lack of profitability. Brokers forecast for 2018 is �2.11m in net profit, rising to �3.69m by 2020. If that�s the case, then expect the share price to fall to �4 per share. However, if you are a believer that earnings will smash expectations. And assuming it makes �10m by 2020. Then the share price outlook is completely different. Expect the shares to trade between �22.50 and �32.50 per share. To find out why a difference between �3.69m profit and �10m leads to such a high variation find out here: http://bit.ly/2CIAYSj

For traders, there could be a long-term technical play here because the last time the shares were this low is back in 2009, where the share price touched 16 pence. This isn't a certainty, but given the poor trading coming out of Debenhams, it is becoming a reality the shares will continue to trend lower. With department stores out of favour in the U.S. and Debenhams poor delivery services, compared to NEXT "next day delivery" it shouldn't surprise people that their digital sales aren't growing at double-digits like NEXT, despite Debenham online division is smaller in proportion to the rest of their business.

Can't completely put the blame on Debenhams, they got the curse from being owned by private equity firms. In 2003, total borrowings were �100m before PE firms leverage the balance sheet up to �1.2bn of debt. By 2006, they made out like bandits when it got re-floated. Since then, Debenham was focussed on paying off their debt while the competition went full steam ahead. They didn't invest in the necessary infrastructure to keep up with their competitors. Now, it's a little too late. I think it's time to downsize the firm and optimise profitability, given that sales are close to �3bn.

Kromek still needs to prove themselves they are a viable business. The latest management update looks positive, but we need them to deliver. I know they have been securing contracts and increasing their order book. It's whether they will make a profit from these contracts that would benefit shareholders. Otherwise, it is enough to pay their bills and staff, including management. The next few years are critical for Kromek's management because it will determine if the share price could potentially double in value or collapse by 80%. I wish shareholders for the best. If you want to read the interpretation of Kromek's financial accounts for the past six years, it is here: http://bit.ly/2kXBlfX

Looking at management strategy I'm disappointed. They are prepared to waste hundreds of millions of pounds on other failing publication without addressing the biggest problem in the room. The collapse in advertising revenue on print. I know they have increased digital sales to £90m, but it represents 15% of all group sales. Over the medium term, the shares will take further tumbles, here are five reasons why: http://bit.ly/2zfKuG1

The market is valuing JKX oil reserves at $0.3 per barrel. I guess it's about profitability and oil output. Compared to Tullow Oil of $3 per barrel, it looks cheap. I feel that winning a case against the country you are operating in means there could be a possible backlash from the government and I would feel uneasy.

TW is like everyone else, sometimes he gets it right and sometimes he gets it wrong. Putting our differences aside, I did punt on OPTI at 22 pence in 2015, based on the credentials of SOH. Also, I know OPTI needs time to test the market, which will take time, lots of it. But TW coming out saying this stock is a flyer is a bit like ramping and not being realistic, especially when cash profit hasn't been proven yet.

I'm pretty sure that Tom Winnifrith promised the share price of Opti will breach pass £1 by the end of 2017. Chances of that happening looking slimmer by the day. Unless SOH announces a £50m deal from somewhere.

Having written about stocks in the past 15 months, I noticed some pattern forming. If I write a bearish piece about a particular, most readers would say you don't know what I'm talking, saying it is a rubbish article or the company is going to reach for the stars. Then when I am bullish on a company, the attitude changes. People start to say this is the best analysis I ever read and so forth. Given we are in a bull market and most investors can only know to go long on a stock, there is a bias for being long rather than being short.