Member Info for SurreyCarrie

The optimists on this remind me of those telling us how successful Brexit has been: deluded and in denial. There is no buying of a single share by the directors at this supposedly bombed out bargain share price. That’s telling me something, if not others.

A bidder would be killed in the rush offering 50p tomorrow if the bid was shown to shareholders. Big institutional names with good track records do occasionally lose money on investments - Baillie Gifford here, Sequoia Capital, Temasek and Ontario Teachers in that recent high profile crypto blow up.

I worked with the new NED many years ago: smart cookie. But one swallow …the rest of the BoD needs a clear out: either they buy meaningful amounts of stock at this level or they are removed as non-believers.

This stock confuses me. In normal times, undoubtedly a quality business. Significant recent buying by directors whilst three funds (WorldQuant, GLG and Citadel) open short positions: sadly the directors have already shown themselves to be worryingly over-optimistic, declaring a dividend in August which they then had to cancel in October, clearly not previously understanding the balance sheet fragility. I suspect the shorters have a better feel for the exogenous economic sensitivities outside the Board's control, which are probably horrendous headwinds, and they are gambling - maybe recklessly - on the company not being bid for at this bombed out price (currently down 75% in the last 12 months), recent share price bounce off the bottom notwithstanding. Joint broker Numis recently published a note - presumably blessed by the Board - mentioning the possibility of an equity raise so no hurry to buy as I suspect new shares will be coming to us anytime soon.

Interest rates, debt, UK recession and high energy prices are obvious headwinds for Marshalls but arguably largely priced in. Marshalls is an endangered species. The rest of the listed UK building materials sector got taken over ages ago: remember BPB, Blue Circle, Redland, RMC, Tarmac, Rugby, Steetley, Ibstock and Pilkingtons. Somehow Marshalls has survived. But with the share price having halved and then almost halved again this year plus sterling weakness, you wonder for how much longer. And its bombed out market cap includes Marley. The current Chair was Chair of Fenner, another bombed out established British company with niche expertise, when it was taken over for a fancy price by Michelin which astonished everybody.

They use a lot of gas and have factories in Europe. Ergo very difficult to forecast profitability over the next 6 months. Have a lot of debt so any downgrade to profit forecast would cause disproportionate neurosis on the balance sheet. In normal times a very good company with high barriers to entry but we are not in normal times. Markets hate uncertainty.

A goodwill write-down of that magnitude is now priced in given £570m reduction in market cap since the 650p placing. If the extent of directors’ buying is yesterday’s purchase of 2,512 shares by an NED, that is a unconvincing vote of confidence.

Marley was not a well timed acquisition, the structure of the deal creates a potential share overhang and consumers are slashing discretionary spend, so nobody can have any confidence in forecasts right now. I’ll buy when the directors buy, not until.

Odd share price reaction. Highlighting EBIDTA is bigger than pre-covid is disingenuous because of large acquisitions in the meantime but EPS is higher than first 6 months of 2019 or 2020, and share price much lower. Market rightly squeamish about low net debt/EBITDA of 2.3x, why dividend is so miserly, but there is a hint of possible disposals in the statement. This is a quality business with high barriers to entry and a strangely low share price.

No I did not but, if correct, encouraging, particularly Chelverton who I rate highly. Where did you find out these holdings if they are sub 3% - they are not normally publicly disclosed ?

There is authoritative research suggesting that 90% of acquisitions destroy shareholder value in the acquirer. Buyers rarely fully understand why the business is being sold - the seller knows a lot more about it than the buyer, and due diligence therefore needs to be exhaustive. Synergies are over estimated and huge management bandwidth is consumed identifying targets, negotiating and integrating, i.e. there is a big opportunity cost of management time. The fact is you’re never quite sure in companies built mainly by acquisition what the underlying organic growth is and what the real underlying ROIC is given the accountancy professions’s difficulty with treatment of goodwill. Put bluntly, investors don’t fully understand what’s under the bonnet. The shares will be condemned to a low P/E going forward, for ever.

Agree BG joining the register is very positive news: they are a class outfit, will have done exhaustive DD and I suspect negotiated hard on the placing price as a price setter not a price taker. This may explain why the discount was so high, but it remains odd none of the NEDs participated alongside them. BG have deep enough pockets to participate in any further equity raises, if needed, so the possibility of that won’t faze them. Further long term institutional buyers would help: they will have noticed BG coming on board so this is a bullish flag of sorts. Also BG will be engaged with the Board and make sure the CEO’s feet are being held to the fire.

The fact that none of the NEDs participated in the placing is the other red flag on this one. They're insiders and shares were offered at a chunky discount: what do they know, or sense, we don't ?

Huge discount to average share price over the previous month and the previous day's closing price. A discount of that magnitude needed to attract investment is worrying. The question is why have the shares continued to fall since: my guess, and it is only a guess, is the stock market reckons they haven't raised enough. Fund managers buy on the last re-financing, not the penultimate.

I think the onus is on the company, not me, to give a detailed breakdown of its proposed investments, i.e. how much, in "multiple pathways to commercialisation" and its growing pharma services businesses. I just don't think £20m will go very far (or last long) in the US, i.e. they'll need another equity raise in 2023. Marketing to clinicians in the US is insanely expensive, although less expensive than it was, and even established big pharma baulks at the cost. If investors sense equity will be coming to them in future, they won't buy today. Make no mistake, parsortix potentially has huge potential and AN deserves credit for FDA endorsement - why I watch Angle's share price - but I remain sceptical on the company's expertise in monetising it. These are proven boffins, unproven businessmen.

FDA approval means nothing if the opportunities it presents cannot be monetised. A lot of “P+L investment” is necessary with a >12 month payback, never easy for listed companies, and that is money Angle does not have and is nowhere near having: raising £20m will not move the requisite needle. The company is now in a strategic doom loop which predators will recognise, having to do further equity raises at ever lower prices as a cheap share gets ever cheaper. Put bluntly, Angle is now an inappropriate parent for parsortix: its expertise is science, not commerce and it can add little value to a scientific breakthrough with FDA endorsement.

A combination of the directors’ CVs and the placing being priced at 80p, 50% down on share price one month earlier, suggest to me that Board is dysfunctional. Company is too financially fragile to commercialise (i.e. market) parsortix in the US. Like many British companies in this space, great at inventing things but not selling them, why they end up being taken over cheaply.

This is a disgrace. The FCA should demand the company either issues a further RNS clarifying why the delay or suspends trading in its shares until there is suitable clarification. The directors must know whether the delay is for substantive issues with the accounts or procedural, for instance an auditor staff shortage. In the meantime silence will be construed, rightly or wrongly, as bad news.

Worth adding that when since share price peaked at £24 in August 2019, AUM were £99bn. Since then, AUM have risen 42% and share price has dropped 54%. That divergence is not sustainable and reflects poor management of the company’s bottom line.

The big activist funds must be running their slide rules over HL at this price. A fundamentally good scaleable high margin business, poorly run. Otherwise, still on too high a P/E for earnings currently going backwards. An activist would think round corners on how things can be done differently and better.