The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
"While this will be incredibly disappointing news for employees and customers, we expect it to be welcomed by shareholders as it will lance a boil that has proven to be a source of significant financial pain in recent years.“
Another winning statement from the PR team of the Board. If this is the language they use publicly....what is a) the language they use internally and b) what they really think of their customers....?
Source: Yorkshire Post
So I’ve watched from afar the continuing debacle that the PF Board have tried to pass off as leadership.
2017’s tech failure masked Vanquis’s £200m fine (before anyone starts, being made to pay back £197m in ‘redress’ is a fine in all but name) and Moneybarn’s wrongdoings which later cost c£30m. They then bring in their ‘boy’ Gillespie who promptly did what he has done in every company he’s been in (including PF!) - drags performance down even further, losing customers at the rate of 1,000 per week, with an impairment blow out, and then decides to nip off to Steptoe and Son a few weeks before the FCA announce an investigation his last year’s lending. But the Board, in their infinite wisdom thanked Chris for “leading CCD at a time of crisis”.
PFG is un- investable under Le May and Snowball , as their decisions in the last 4 years have shown, including hiring the guy who took BrightHouse and Amigo to the brink of collapse (with the former finally going under) so if high cost lending is your market of choice, Morses are steadily climbing.
But of course....DYOR
Direct from the T/S:
Vanquis - customer numbers 13,000 lower than the third quarter of last year with further 100,000 accounts to be closed
Moneybarn - FCA fine expected to be £20m and unprofitable underwriting
CCD - losing 1,000 HC customers a week since last trading statement and still falling, average issue values still low, and workforce reduced to levels not aligned to a growing business.
All of the above couched by words like ‘satisfactory’, ‘continued momentum’ and ‘progress’, but, in essence, is evidence of failure to deliver on a turnaround plan that is now 2 1/2 years old.
This BOD has to go.
I’d be very surprised at anything other than what we’ve been told on every Trading Update for the last two years. Noise out of HQ is that the home credit side has been haemorrhaging customers to the point where field roles are being pared to the bone, Moneybarn still has its FCA issues and the cash cow Vanquis’s growth has plateaued. I agree in part with Echo1 re sentiment, but the Board have simply failed to turn this around and should go.
So its been a while - due to having passed out from receiving pleasantries from Binlid - but I came round to find the annual report on my doormat. If anyone needed any pointers as to why the NSF offer should be accepted, read pgs 106/107. Provident still blaming activity from 2 years ago, Satsuma still not commuting to delivery a profit, Moneybarn sees no end to the FCA crawling all over it and Vanquis still refunding. This lot need to go (rumour has it some are even trying to jump ship now) and all the reasons given in the UKIP-inspired literature instructing is to ‘Reject the Bid’ are all the reasons why it should be accepted.
Strong growth? Nowhere in the last 3 trading statements does it state ‘strong growth’.
Customer numbers? Until they actually release up to date numbers yours are as robust as mine.
Offer tabled? Absolutely - but being purchased rather than being the buyer more likely.
As binlid states, an interesting post....
Sigh..... Active, Binlid, in trading starement speak includes customers who aren’t paying regularly and have missed for at least 12 weeks Active in the ‘real world’ is the customers who are paying regularly, and I’ve been told that number by 3 different sources in the field and 2 in the head office. Add my two numbers together, take off the 1k per week loss from the TS date and guess what? My numbers add up.
“Hi Titus I have to admit - interesting posts! Binlid”
Your last post to me - I took that as an friendly post hence my respect to your handle. My bad.
If you doubt my sources Binlid then ignore my posts. Can’t? I thought not
I also remember the direct correlation between Chartist2 bigging up PFG and the SP falling....
I’ve kept schtum over the last few weeks as Friday’s TS was the real yardstick.
Velo is spot on in their assessment of the business and, if you look at the last three statements, they all say the same thing
- HC collections down
- Vanquis stagnant in volumes
- no authorisation.
Now that Sweeney is at last stage for another job, their most productive leader is looking to go so who is going to drive the change in fortunes operationally?
For the avoidance of doubt, this is a workable, profitable business - it’s the leadership that needs changing
Mucking out the stables indeed. Youur point re the selling of the shares is also pertinent. . Someone of that seniority and knowledge sells a large proportion of his holding literally days before the first of two profits warnings, with the second warning being driven by the ROP, which was an issue to the FCA for a number of months? Maybe more ‘Goblin of Godwin Street’ than ‘Wolf of Wall Street’, but insider trading is insider trading, however you dress it
My cleaner/insider told me that Kenneth Mullen, Company Secretary and Group Legal Counsel announced his retirement, which will be next year. Next FY starts in c6months, which could be him working his notice. He is one of, if not the last of the remaining leaders of the catastrophe, and also responsible for managing the multiple litigious actions from previous employees so maybe the new Board are continuing their cull?
Hahahaha!!!! Gettin to you Binlid am I....?
Gillespie’s return had more to do with who he knows rather than what he knows - Woodford looking after his investments by bringing back his mate More media attention is on the horizon, fed no doubt by the Parkinson tribunal findings and fits nicely with both the Sun’s and others crusade on lending, but I agree with you, this particular industry is not only has huge profit potential, but has no one who has the skill or expereince of modernising the model.
An excellent post Romaron and your comparison to Woolworths is spot on. The lack of movement in the share price in the wake of the Wonga news is not surprising, as PFG’s only foray into payday lending - Satsuma - was an abject failure that saw zero profits in its four years and is probably sitting in the same solitary confinement cell as Glo, so there is no reason for anyone to believe PFG wil profit from Wonga’s fall. Your point on challenging area is very apt and links to my challenge of the leadership - don’t forget it was Gillespie who put a stop to all technology in the field in his first month, including VR, and it was only reinstated at the behest of the FCA. it would be no surprise that HC sees more redundancies as the dwindling customer number, rumoured to be sub-500k, plus the poor performance of collections alongside a blanket refusal by ex agents now CEMs to work Saturdays does not meet a customer demand who are used to service providers meeting their needs, not the other way round. Which leaves, as you say, Vanquis and Moneybarn. Despite protestations from others, I do believe that confidence in the share price is hugely influenced by the leaders of an organisation, and the fanfare that surrounded Snowball’s arrival shows PFG agree with this theory. But, the respective MDs are still there, and so what has changed? Once there is a clean sweep of the leadership in these areas, and the cancer of complacency as you point out is eradicated across the Baord, then this is a dog of an investment. Oh, and Binlid.... just to be clear - I am now, given my lack of investment, a fully signed up member of the PFG Critics Club, but don’t forget I have a number of intel lines direct into PFG who will keep me posting. Just think of it as if I start posting positives, maybe you should increase your investment......?
As with all my previous posts, and with today marking the anniversary of Crook’s departure, I will focus on the one true data source that determines confidence in leadership and operating model - the Share Price. In the 52 weeks of Woltenholme/LeMay’s tenure as CEO; - the share price has not got above 1100; - is currently only 98p higher than the price at the 2nd PW; - they lowered the price even further in Feb of this year to 565 Binlid (renamed due to the amount of garbage he contains) believes I am a bitter ex-employee who only spouts negativity and points to my previous posts as evidence. Are they critical? Yes, but show me where I have posted anything that hasn’t been supported by evidence? Velo, Arsenal17 and Mick-B seem to share my scepticism as they are looking at the numbers and they speak for themselves. Interestingly Binlid didn’t challenge their well informed posts and Romaron read my post as providing intel for healthy debate whilst having different views. And no, I am, nor ever have been, an employee, but I know quite a few who have fed me intel that has informed my posts, as I have referenced many times in my previous posts Binlid asks you to re-read. My opinion has changed to strong sell for one reason only - I’ve sold mine this morning. I’ve done this as I don’t believe the leadership of all three divisions are capable of delivering the turnaround that will drive the SP and engage the regulator to get authorised. Sweeney remains despite overseeing nearly 200m redress and fines, Hodgeson is still in place despite the FCA bringing into question basic responsible lending techniques and Gillespie, by his own admission as seen in the leaked memo, has said collections are poor, with H1 results commentary conveniently omitting falling customer numbers. I agree the Board does look more impressive, but only from an NED perspective. They will impress me if they force through the investigation that, despite both Wolstenholme and LeMay both promising was ongoing, has yet to materialise any detail. I will still opine on ths page as I believe those with inteligence welcome all information and are mature enough to use/ignore as they see fit without throwing their toys out of the Brabantia...
Firstly, thank you Romaron for your compliments. I aim to keep my posts based on fact and my question focussed on what we’re all here for - to make money. I’m also not In the habit of arguing emotional viewpoints as I’ve yet to see a share price go up or down on the back of a squabble. I too have experience of tribunals and my concern is what is in the other 100 or so pages of Parkinson’s statement. The size alone of his statement lends itself to also believe there is/was a very large court bundle, which will then become public information once the judgement is put up onto Gov.uk. The risk this information poses to the SP is, in my view, huge, and it is why I created the title of this post. Nobody investing in The two Cs really cared about ‘snouts in troths’ behaviour as you say but it was the exposure of execs circumnavigating governance, audit teams shirking their duties or, worse still, providing inaccurate assurances and Boards misleading shareholders and investors that caused them both to nosedive. I was surprised and disappointed that LeMay did not have new or better news on authorisation. Clearly if, as you say the level of complaints are the lowest in the industry, then this intimates its the ROP stench of Vanquis and Moenybarns questionable lending habits at the heart of this, and the Board seem very happy to throw the Home Credit side of PFG under every bus that comes along. Have have they already decided it’s not worth saving perhaps....? If you don’t mind Romaron, I do have a couple of questions for you. Firstly, you use the word we when referring to PFG. Do you work there? Secondly, are you suggesting the criticism from the press re Amigo and Gillespie’s tenure are linked? If so how and is his not another reason to be concerned? Thirdly, I did visit Tarttelin’s LinkedIn page but didn't find much to make me laugh - have I missed something, as wasn’t it during the first four years of Parkinson’s tenure the Home Credit performance was being lauded by the PF Board? Hope you don’t mind the questions but, if my fears come to fruition, the Q3 trading statement is due soon and the tribunal judgement can’t be that far off, so timing will be critical over the next few weeks.
Surpassing = surprising
Today’s Times makes worrying reading on many levels - not just the behaviour of those still in the business but also that, nearly a year later, this I s still being discussed in the public domain. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/life-of-luxury-for-directors-as-firm-crashed-fz5jfgw70 Explains also as to why, despite all the positive talk from Le May, investors are still avoiding PFG. As a (small) investor, I am still waiting for the outcomes of the investigation promised since September of last year. Given the extraordinary, and, if the second article relating to jokes about disabled people is to believe, scandalous behaviour of the Board, it is hardly surpassing this investigation has yet to see the light of day.