Member Info for Scampthedog

If the F.Times was correct when it reported that Kretinsky had spent over £150,000,000 on his previous position of 82 million shares...then, with his latest acquisition of 15 million 760 thousand, his average would actually be somewhere around £1.78.

Even is this is a mistake in reporting, and Kretinsky's previous position of 82 million shares was purchased for approx £140, 000, 000 -- his average s.p would still be about £1.68.

In it for the short term gain? Not so sure of that!

He cannot think much of Credit Suisse's target price of 94p either. Or why buy in when he has?

Makes one ponder a tad does it not?

cannot dispute that in all fairness.

I have been sticking my neck out, right from his very first investment in Royal Mail, on this one...but from the beginning I have always suspected the Czech Sphinx was in this for the long term. If I am wrong...so be it.

If Schroders are still holding over 13%, Kretinsky at over 9.5% and the posties with 10%, that, combined, takes a great big bite out of all the available shares. Add to that another big percentage held by the Shorts at over 9%, and, well, that is a lot of tied up shares; it actually come to somewhere around 43% of the total shares of the company...add to that all the other shares held by the remaining, smaller, but still major shareholders, and available shares are getting harder and harder to find. Especially if the s.p keeps on climbing.

And also remember that the posties through their shareholder scheme are probably buying, at my estimate, at present prices, over a million shares every month.

If Kretinsky keeps buying as the Shorts keeping reducing their positions...at what point do we get a real squeeze at the top?

And if we do get some commonsense demonstrated, and if we do get some restraint and intelligent negotiation leading to a very satisfactory agreement between RMG and the CWU (we can all hope)...at what point will there then be a mad rush and real panic among the aforementioned scum in the stampede to get out with maybe just their underpants and neckties still intact?

They will undoubtedly, the Shorts that is, make money on this one (they nearly always do) but maybe not quite as much as they would like.

But the one who might end up really winning at the end of the day...could well be Mr inscrutable himself. And as for his real motives? On that one I have no idea; but if he is in this for the long run...things will start changing in a massive way as far as the direction this company is moving in.

The board will have no choice but to start listening to these major shareholders now.

And I personally think...that they already have.

With the short position reported as 9.38% (and, in all reality, probably over 10%) I am not entirely convinced about that, mike1974...although I would like to be.

Who is doing the buying? And why ?

A dead cat bounce? You might well be right there, riby...you might well be right.

The accepted smart wisdom on this one is that it is going all the way down.

Something to bear in mind though: the current price is still someway below Kretinsky's average...and we still don't know for sure if he has only just recently offloaded any of his stock yet.

What you have to ask yourself is this: what happens if he buys, and buys big at that, once again?
And what happens if he keeps on buying big? What happens to the stock then?

And as for a takeover bid? Again I bow to the prevailing logic: highly unlikely in all probability...but far more unlikely things do actually happen in the stock market as we all too well know.

However, your either in...or your out. And if your out, and he makes a move on what is already a company which is ripe for a takeover bid, then you are most definitely out! Because there will be no way back in at these prices.

Not a dead cats chance in Hell there won't.

I was not implying that agency workers are bad workers in the main, although admittedly some are absolutely appalling, no I was making the point that an agency worker cannot be as cost effective as a fully trained up employee...not where I work in processing they can't anyway.

Indeed, there are many, many excellent agency workers both Angard and otherwise.

It is with the full-time employees where the problems with sloth, absenteeism and sickness lie.

You really don't know the half of it, C.B.B ...you really don't.

The terms and conditions? Has anyone mentioned My Bundle (your own personal additional benefits and rewards) to you? MyDrive? the cheapest way to drive a brand new car you could ever possibly find. No? I did not think as much.

Have they explained "Reverse Toil" (being able to borrow days off work and pay them back through "Toil": Toil is when you work overtime but don't get the overtime paid as overtime -- you get paid when taking time off. For instance: Toil 16 hours = 2 extra days off with pay. Sounds good? Yes it is -- jolly good! The amount you can Toil and save varies from place to place; where I work, one chap, quite recently, had up to three months saved. Three months!! I believe the-powers-that-be have now reduced the amount one can save at any one time rather markedly...probably to save themselves from a severe @rse kicking in the very near future -- and deservedly so if it was to happen!

Yes C.B.B its a good old life being a postie......what a shame I did not know about all this a lot sooner.

Oh, and don't forget the £90,000 paid to your beneficiaries if you should die whilst being employed by RMG. And lets not forget all the benefits that the CWU offer like incredibly cheap car and house insurance...and not forgetting the £5000 death benefit the union will also pay out to your beneficiaries if you should go @rse up and snuff it.

Terms and conditions? Yes, I would say, as a postie, we have got that pretty well covered.

P.s nearly forget to mention the extremely generous sick pay (six months full pay in every 4 years I believe...never actually had a days sickness yet so don't know a lot about it)...and all the added little sweeteners that go with it.

You have, once again, made many valid observations, C.B.B.

Before I continue, you understand of course, I can only comment on what I see regarding processing of the mail...not the delivering it.

Yes indeed you are quite correct, or rather the sentiment of what you write is, when you write: "So, you have a company that thinks cost cutting, by a reduced labor force is the way to go, when in actual fact, you are paying more in overtime to your reduced labor force than you would be paying had you not reduced that force in the first place, add to that, those that are covering these higher weekly totals, are not providing 70 hours of work output......."

When taking some of your comments in turn and then commenting on them.

It is not so much that RMG has a reduced workforce...it is more a case of it being a disproportionate workforce.

By that I mean some shifts have too many staff. Some -- not enough. All shifts overlap of course to some extent by virtue of the overtime or the shift pattern...but not all shifts are equal. Far from it! Also many problems arise because much of the established staff still have their duties defined on a 318 form. Although it quite clearly states on the form "and at the managers discretion" many managers are still reluctant to take on many of these older, established posties when looking for some extra hands when the need arises: "not part of my duties, mate" is the normal run-of-the-mill reply. Many times I have looked around and seen a dozen or so grinning faces as I and several others are sweating buckets whilst they just stand idly looking on.

Also cigarette breaks. Apparently, although certainly not encouraged, it is still alright to nip outside for a "quick cigie". Not acceptable for me to have a quick dish of tea though when waiting for them to return.

Royal Mail would, in theory at any rate, do far better to have a bigger, full-time workforce...this way they could drastically reduce the needs for the agency (Angard) workers; but bear this in mind regarding an Angard worker: their hourly rate is far higher than a posties...and that is without the added cost on top when paying the agency for supplying them. Also a full time workforce can be trained on all the things an agency worker cannot: York-Movers, York-Pushers, Dock-levelling, Forklifts, Scuds...etc, etc. This in itself saves time and again keeps costs down.

But why would RMG not do this -- directly employ more people that is?

Quite simply: because a big proportion become influenced by all the lazy, p!sstaking brigade and do exactly likewise.

And as for the work ethic of many of them...well, lets not go into that one again. Suffice to say: how much positive output can you expect of someone working 70 hours a week? Or even a lot less at 55 hours a week perhaps?

Royal Mail have massive problems regarding their workforce -- massive problems!!

And, sadly...it is all of their own making.

I will answer this way, Isleworth.

Firstly. Every time a postie who is previously coming off a 13 hour shift, or does a 60-70 (or indeed longer!) working hour week, is involved in a car accident do they then relay this fact to the driver of the other car, the attending police officer, and their own insurance company?

Secondly. When a postie has an accident indoors, when working these overly long hours and shifts, say they are involved in a slip, trip or fall due to an unforeseen hazard, an accident not of their own making, does this exclude or discourage them from making a claim?

I don't need to answer any of this do I Isleworth...that's because you full well know the answers already don't you?

Thirdly. And as you already are well aware of this appalling practice, and obviously have been for far longer than I...where do the CWU and you yourself stand regarding the moral high ground?

You and all the postal executive have been employed by RMG for hundreds of years longer than me...that's right -- hundreds of years!!

So then, tell us: do you and the union condone this? Do you think it is healthy, beneficial to both employer and employee...doing both a favour in fact? Because I don't!

I repeat again more forcefully -- a shameful state of affairs!!

Good night.

OliGarch. As always, your comments are pertinent, informative and to the point.

Whilst agreeing with your comments in the main I would though like to reiterate that one of the main reasons that many people, as indeed people just like myself, don't do any or much overtime is the fact that they are not physically capable of doing so because of all the effort they have put in during their normal 38 hour week -- they are simply too exhausted!

The vast majority of staff (actually, make that -- all of the staff!) who work over 55 hours a week work like elderly snails...it is an absolute embarrassment to witness. Hard working STC's who want full time work, and also the same can be said of many decent, hard working Angard staff, having to look on as these pedantic, shuffling, disgraces to their uniform plod about at a pace that would be shamed by a bent-over, geriatric octogenarian lurching along on their zimmer-frame.

I will tell you all something. In my opinion the people who allow them to work these ridiculously long hours should be prosecuted. Why, you might ask?

For failing in their "Duty Of Care" that's why.

Plant managers, Line managers, and the Health and Safety reps have a legal responsibility to ensure that everyone in that plant is, training apart, first and foremost, working in a responsible manner.

Health and Safety states that by ensuring you work responsibly -- you therefore ensure the safety of others.

By failing to curb the excessive hours these physically and mentally drained people are attempting to undertake fails both in that duty of care and their responsibility towards other people who might, or are, working in the vicinity of these "tired" people.

I have seen some very alarming behaviour regarding people who are working these long, long hours. So alarming in fact I will not go into it.

And what about the drive home? Where is the duty of care there then when these people leave work to return home? Putting aside the fact that on countless occasions I have seen people fall asleep without even starting up the engine, what about pedestrians, cyclists and other drivers that are using the same roads? Wheres the duty of care regarding all these other road-users when someone not only allows but endorses the practice of allowing these people, now attempting to return home, to work these long, torturous hours? And thus, as I say, putting the lives and well being of these other road-users at greater risk.

Its an absolute bl00dy disgrace!

The National Health and Safety Executive should be informed about it all -- and so should the police!

You raise some interesting points. Regarding the overtime...you understand of course this is my own personal opinion from what I see in my own particular place of work.

For many years now Royal Mail has operated by offering, and in particular full time employees, generous amounts of overtime. That overtime is covered by what is known as S.A (Scheduled Attendance) and Pressure.

S.A is granted to employees to cover work that is is supposedly there constantly throughout the year...based upon historical or envisioned volumes for want of a better phrase. You sign for these hours and it is therefore regarded as a contract: you have an obligation to do these hours every week...and it can lead to a lose of those hours if you do not attend religiously. S.A has two big advantages over Pressure: 1; it is guaranteed every week (Pressure is not) 2; it is paid to you when you take annual leave. S.A can be revoked at any time with a certain amount of warning beforehand...and this can happen now and again when there is need for a review of the work available. After any such review there would just about always be a resign.

Pressure is simply any overtime available that is not covered by S.A that particular week. Any remaining hours not taken up by the posties by Pressure is offered to the agency staff.

As you can now assume...there is a Hell of a lot of overtime available.

I myself do only 6 hours S.A a week (although I was, at the last resign, offered considerably more) and seldom do I do Pressure. Why? Because I am just too exhausted to work more than 44 hours in any one week that's why.

And yet believe it or not (and I don't care if you don't believe it in all truth) there are plenty of people where I work doing 15 - 20 hours overtime, made up of both S.A and Pressure, every single week. I know several, who, every week, do 38 hours normal time, plus 12 hours S.A and 10 hours Pressure. But that's not all they do, they then throw in another 8 hour shift on top of all that on Saturday night -- unbelievable! That's a grand total of 68 hours!! And guess what? Some are reputed to be doing over 70. I kid you not.

And here is the rub, matey. Would you think you get 68 hours work every week out of these people? Well, just in case you are struggling with that one, here is the answer -- not a bl00dy chance!!

And yes -- it is a great big ball and chain! And yes -- it is dragging RMG down!

And regarding those Short-Term-Contracts, those hardworking hopefuls working 20 hours a week with the aspiration of being rewarded a full contract of employment: would any of those greedy, self-centred, lazy posties robbing unwarranted overtime off Royal Mail give just several hours a week up to help someone get one of those full-time contracts? Answer -- you bet your sweet @rse they wouldn't!!

Millstone around RMG's neck? Eerrr...yes something like that.

Massive changes coming...as seen this morning with the announcement concerning the managers.

What is it that Royal Mail has been promising for at least the last six months?...ahhh yes: "no compulsory redundancies"!

Perhaps what they meant all along was no redundancies for full time posties? I wonder if they made the same pledge to Unite when they were negotiating that last deal last Christmas?

Other savings in man hours will presumably come about by cutting the amount of overtime available and therefore reducing agency staffing levels; perhaps even declining to renew many Short-Term-Contracts even...not a nice thought.

Yes...times are going to get a whole lot tougher. Some staff might even have to start working for a living -- perish the thought!!

I also note, with great interest I might add, that they are very keen to highlight the point that GLS and UKpil are as different as chalk and cheese...in their own words: "Royal Mail and GLS are different businesses with different strategies". Although they say it is their intention to use profits from GLS in 2021 to help towards the dividend payment it still does rule out the possibility of GLS being sold sometime in the future.

Lots of change in the air...and that air, if I had to bet my last pound, is about to turn rather foul.

Or rather it will when Terry and co sit down at the table with R.M's negotiators. "Extra hour? no chance, mate"! "Pay rise backdated to when? your joking, mate"! "Job security for who? you having a laugh, mate"? -- we have just sacked 2000 managers for f..ks sake"!!

Yes, you can just see it can't you: Terry and other certain CWU postal executives, sat open-mouthed and dumbstruck, desperately trying to look unruffled and still in total control...whilst having what amounts to a large bucket of steaming p.ss being poured right over their ardour.

Oh yes it will go down well. Like a lead brick off a ten storey building!!

I note that the s.p dropped to 1.61. That's four or five points below Kretinsky's average I believe.

Wonder if he sold any in the last day or two?

Much rather he buys of course.

Either way...we might just a confirmation in an RNS -- and sooner than later I would think.

All in all a far better update than I myself anticipated.

Have to agree with Nuri though...there could well be a split of some kind -- also a bid!

Particularly eye-catching that bit about the USO: "Thirdly, we're working with all stakeholders to underpin the USO to ensure it reflects user needs and is modern, contemporary and sustainable".

Working with stakeholders? Reflects user needs? Modern? Sustainable? Hhmmm...lots to read into there I would suggest.

I would not know to be perfectly honest, 200iq...but I am prepared to accept it at face value.

In all fairness it makes no difference to me.

I would agree completely with your summing up here of teslo's comments, OliGarch...from what I can deduce myself there does not seem to be any interaction, certainly no representation, by the CWU in regard to GLS.

There would be the usual condemnation of course, the kind you would expect from any big union when part of the company/company group whose employees it represents is sold off...but would very much doubt that this would lead to balloting for strike action.

Like you said, OliGarch: "One thing that is for sure is that RMG is going to be interesting this year and I suspect that there are a couple of plot twists in the offing".

For example: the "Five Year Plan", appointment of a new CEO (Stuart Simpson perhaps?)...and let us not forget the possible TUPEing of Parcel Force into a separate company.

Of vital importance will be that new CEO appointment. If Mr Simpson, then I suspect "steady as she goes". But if someone like Sir Ian "Mac The Knife" MacGregor...then, hmmm, oh dear me. Well, lets just say it does not bear thinking about.

A lot of you will not be able to recall "Mac The Knife": the man who headed the National Coal Board during the miners strike...he told Yorkshire miners that woman miners in the USA were more productive than them. An extremely tough and abrasive, uncompromising individual.

That proposed TUPEing of Parcel Force members will not be dead and buried either. It will be back...in one form or another. Ironically, after the new Parcel Hub Network is fully up and running, it might just make financial sense to sell Parcel Force. Now that would most definitely be fireworks. Light the blue touchpaper -- and stand well back!!

Yes, lots of fun and games this year...and into the next also I should think.

In fact the next few hours will probably prove rather eventful...and if not, certainly the next few days. Never a dull moment.

"I lost money on RMG because i focused far too much on asset value."

Don't lose any sleep over the fact you lost money -- so have most people! Lost money on Royal Mail that is.

As for the asset value...it only comes into play if the group is split up.

But...and its a long "but", if the group did get split up, then it might be a nice little bonus for the shareholders; would not be so nice for any ex-shareholders though...shareholders who had only recently just dumped their shares that is.

Who knows what the board will decide in the very near future...or perhaps more a case of: what some other persons might decide for them in the very near future.

Time to take a cold, logical look at the current position.

1. Credit Suisse (as I know you are all painfully aware) have just recently slapped a target price of 94p on RMG shares.
2. In this mornings Evening Standard, Alliance Bernstein (calling for the break up of RMG) are reported as saying: “In its current form, Royal Mail Group is worth less than the sum of its parts...".

Who is right then? Credit Suisse with their 94p price target...or Alliance Bernstein who make the contention that at £1.80 a share this does not reflect the true, intrinsic valuation of the company?

And by all of that, I take it they mean the value of GLS plus the value of all the valuable real estate RMG own in just about every major city and town in the UK.

And lastly, and this is what I am leading up to, and leaving Kretinsky completely out of it for the time being, or any other existing major shareholder for that matter: at what point, whether it be 1.60, 1.40 or even 94p, does somebody out there say (or words to the effect) "this is bl00dy ridiculous -- the land value, plus GLS, plus the other business interests in North America are worth a damn sight more than this!!"

In other words: at what point does a value investor say: "I can take control at this price, break it up...and recoup my outlay plus a nice whacking big profit".

Because one thing is absolutely certain: that point will surely come a long way before 94p.

Credit Suisse? Errr...did they actually think this one through?

OliGarch, you have just, and I suspect knowingly, answered your own questions with the answers you also suggest.

The article proposes that any profit coming from GLS over the next several years would be gobbled up by a cash-strapped UKPIL...therefore sell it now for the very same reasons you yourself give.

Makes perfect financial sense to me in every way.

Top city firm Alliance Bernstein has called for Royal Mail to be broken up.

They argue that that the UK parcels and International and Letters division should be separated from GLS...and GLS then sold off.

Daniel Roeska, analyst at Bernstein, said: “We believe it would be in shareholders' best interests to split the company in two and let shareholders themselves decide on the future of the two businesses".

They also make the point that now that Rico Back, an obviously very strong supporter of GLS, has left, there should be no obstacle in doing just this.

They go on to say: “In its current form, Royal Mail Group is worth less than the sum of its parts. Why is Royal Mail the best long-term owner of GLS?”

Now it is no longer just unimportant posters like me musing about the possibility of a break-up of RMG...now a well renowned and respected analyst is openly calling for it.

Makes one wonder about Kretinsky all the more does it not?

Add to that, makes one also wonder about why Herr Back suddenly threw his hand in with no prior warning or indication.

The plans of mice and men perhaps? Or maybe an imminent announcement even?

Makes for an added bit of interest at the very least.