Member Info for Svend

Price based on the combined estimates of all analysts covering the company is 1445

Back on the course heading towards port 1300

Can you be specific, please, what was said to be the problem?

Net debts went from £180.7m in 2024 to £144.2 in 2025, which was a 20% reduction!

Operating profit increased by 33% from £167m to £222.6m. Now, go have a look at the accounts its all there in black and white.

*Biggest 😅

Retirment,

''3p

nice buy in !!!!''

You are the bigget 🤡

The sp facts are as follows;

The 1987 Rolls-Royce privatisation issue price was 170p per share (£1.70).

1987 privatisation: 801,470,588 shares were made available at 170p.

1 Jan 2010: issued ordinary shares were 1.854 billion.

1 Jan 2011 / May 2011: issued ordinary shares were 1.872 billion before the holding-company reorganisation.

23 May 2011 reorganisation: 1,872,188,709 new Holdings shares were issued under the scheme of arrangement, but this was effectively a 1-for-1 wrapper swap, not a fresh economic dilution event, as a placing or rights issue would be.

2020 rights issue: the share count jumped from 1.931 billion to 8.368 billion, with 6.437 billion new shares issued. This was the major dilution event.

31 Dec 2024: issued shares totalled 8.505 billion, mainly due to shares issued to the employee share trust.

31 Dec 2025: issued shares fell to 8.444 billion after 61 million shares were cancelled.

31 Mar 2026: total voting rights were 8,401,691,316.

6 Apr 2026: after further buyback activity, the LSE notice showed 8,399,632,003 voting rights.

Bottom line: from 801.5 million shares at privatisation to about 8.40 billion now, the capital base is roughly 10.48x larger, or about 948% higher.

I already did:

https://www.building.co.uk/news/vistry-makes-internal-promotion-for-chief-executive-post/5141724.article

The fact that the CEO appointment is from within the Vistry organisation is highly positive, as they are already very familiar with the company's ways and structure. What would be interesting is if the new CEO/CFO played the short sellers a curveball by announcing another buyback programme ahead of the trading update in August.🙄

Retirment,

You can’t dismiss the fact that decisions evolve. Just because you called it months ago doesn’t make the information any more accurate now. The sign-off happened today as planned internally; this is the reality. It’s pointless to keep pushing a point that’s already settled. Let’s focus on moving forward instead of rehashing what’s already been confirmed.

👍

Stayingpatient SpotOn 👍

Sparky,

If price action is the loud, emotional voice in the room, open interest is the quiet one that tells the truth.

LH,

Aye, sooner than that, I reckon. The strength in the share price amid all this squall and cannon smoke tells its own tale. There is no neat “day after the war” sunrise waiting just beyond the horizon. More likely, we sail through a long mop-up phase, with the Yanks keeping carriers in those waters for years yet, while either the regime changes course or the sea slowly calms.

But mark this well: markets do not wait for the guns to fall silent and the diplomats to pour the tea. They price the risk before the fog clears. So to my mind, there is no sound reason the ship cannot keep climbing, save for the usual squalls, profit-taking, and the odd rogue wave.

Tune1 sounds like a seller's afterthought to me, but I could be wrong, as I am not privy to the sale details of the SL brand name.

Retirment,

Ahoy there, matey, ye are muddying the charts with the calendar again.

I said £15 was a heading port, not that the ship would dock there on the exact tide ye scribbled in yer little notebook. There is a world of difference between plotting a course and guaranteeing the very hour of arrival, though I appreciate that subtlety may have sailed clean over yer mast.

A target price is a judgment based on wind, tide, ballast, and what lies on the horizon. It is not a blood oath carved into the hull. If every estimate that arrived later than hoped were a “lie,” then every broker, analyst, and trader in the market would be fit only to swab the decks.

The Roycey case was never built on bingo numbers and chest-thumping dates. It was built on improving engines, fatter cash flow, buybacks, rerating potential, and the prospect of a far richer valuation over time. Ye may not like the course, but disliking it does not make it false.

As for yer constant squawking of “AI” like a seasick parrot, that is not a rebuttal, lad. It is what a man reaches for when he has run out of powder for a proper broadside.

So let us mark it clearly on the Captain’s chart:

A delayed target is not a lie.

A price objective is not a promise.

And yelling “AI” from the crow’s nest does not make ye right.

If ye want to challenge the voyage, then challenge the cargo, the maps, the numbers, and the route. But stamping yer boots and calling every missed timing marker a lie only tells the whole crew that serious debate is not in yer locker. 🤡🙌IV

DougB1,

Cast yer spyglass upon the monthly charts, matey, and let the market’s squawking, squeaking, and daily flapping blow itself out with the tide.

The market is not blind to the intrinsic value. It is haircutting it because it thinks management has to re-earn credibility, restore margins, and prove that the Partnerships model can generate cleaner cash returns than the last 12 months have shown.

Jimmy, 100%, The market is not ignoring Vistry’s potential. It is discounting it.

There is a difference.

On paper, the shares look cheap relative to tangible asset value, which is why so many keep calling them undervalued. But the market does not pay full price for assets it does not yet trust to produce clean, dependable returns.

That is the problem here.

Vistry still has a sizeable order book, a clear strategic niche in Partnerships and affordable housing, and a model that should make sense over time. The issue is that investors are no longer valuing the theory. They are valuing the delivery.

Right now, the market sees:

lower margin quality,

heavier use of incentives to support sales,

Balance-sheet repair is taking priority over shareholder returns.

and a need for management to rebuild credibility.

So yes, the shares may well be below their intrinsic value on a balance sheet basis.

But shares do not rerate because investors say “that looks cheap.”

They re-rate when the company proves that asset value can be converted into strong margins, solid cash generation and reliable execution.

Until then, the discount can remain.

So, to my mind, the market is not saying Vistry has no value.

It is saying: show me the cash flow, show me the margin stability, and show me that the strategy works in practice rather than just on paper.

Retirment,

The fact is, I stick to the facts as they speak for themself.

You just can't accept that you were wrong and now have to try peddling your way back by turning the point on its head. 🤡