Member Info for Tony1957

"I will leave you to your nonsense ... and your obvious keyboard warrior belief you know Retail and how to run British companies ....clearly you don’t"

The comments I wrote have very obviously hit a nerve. A practitioner?

Look at the history of UK commercial collapses in recent years. Look at retail, how many names have gone, senior management simply marching off the cliff in blind group-think?

Look around you. Look at the stories newspapers are filled with day after day. NHS trusts that spend more on maternity care liability claim payments than they do on the actual service, the Post Office scandal, the Grenfell tower disaster, what do the senior managers universally say when having to justify the terrible actions of organisation they received a fortune for allegedly managing? Grenfell was awesome in its scope. From sales operations of commercial organisations constructing misleading advertising material, through arm's length regulators, commercial architect practices, to even the fire brigade, across them all, it always boils down to "nobody told me". Remarkably incurious about the affairs of the organisation they are paid to manage, they simply relied on reports from individuals looking for favour with the aim of being promoted. In many cases simply ignoring basic, fundamental knowledge; in the case of Grenfell simply ignoring basic GCSE science, to follow group-think.

I believe Lord Weinstock holds a palmares you would defer to. The 8pm evening call to home...... I am confident he would side the comments I wrote.

I believe Pets at Home is very well positioned strategically, due to wise historic decisions. I sincerely hope the contemporary tactical execution takes advantage of this.

"..you have "mystery shoppers" for that kind of thing.... waste of time and cost getting senior management doing it at that time or even " all the time " ....... ridiculous idea ......."

You clearly express current UK governance, which is exactly why we have so many very badly run companies with boards completely out of touch with the shop floor because their only connection with the people who pay their salary is via reports from flunkies looking to get their bonus confirmed and make the step up to board and join the group think.

What was that fable about some weavers making a fine cloth meant to express?

Great post Oliverthehardy. A common failing, instead of management thinking what is the value of this role to the company so what will we pay to achieve that function, lazy senior management default to minimum wage. A few good staff over-perform and senior management absolve themselves with "if only the middle management selected and managed their staff better all would be good - is is not my fault, I'll just send another email, that's my backside covered". Experience in my local Halfords is that. I had cause to complain about an yet another online order I could not pick up because their stock record did not match store stock and was then given lie, followed by lie, followed by lie, by some girl, weeks into her first job. I ended up with the store manager and he shared that he was actually sent in to turn the store around because its performance was a dire outlier. He sorted it out and it was ok for a few months. Then, back to few customers and surly, resentful, young staff soon after. The place is virtually deserted. In retail, senior management just have to do unannounced store visits- all the time they are in post. Official visits sure, but walking in on a wet Thursday night 20 mins before closing. What greeting does mum and her kid with a sick kitten get? It's not complicated.

Mofwiw is that HR selection functions have prejudiced the recruitment process to senior management to not put forward those candidates with the bottle to take action necessary for the business to prosper, as a result of unannounced store visits, and so such visits are rarely undertaken because senior management are too scared to deal with what they might find.

It's my money, I'm a shareholder I want that mum and kid to be greeted straight away and not roam around the store hunting for someone to speak to whilst the staff hide and debate who is going to take their coat off and go out and tell them, in a totally negative manner, to call back tomorrow and see if they can book a slot with a vet. "This job would be so much better without the customers. Shelf stacking is so much easier." Good front of house and good discipline within the back up staff and you will have a store customers return to.

This business has the profile to be superb. It just needs management with the will to manage.

So a day with the share price being over 3% down in early trading, there were many sales of 1, 3, 5 & 7 shares. The first time a transaction of over £1,000 in value took place was at 8.22 am. The trading patterns on this share are unique in my portfolio.

Even at the maximum downgrade of pbt from 133 to 115£M that is just a reduction of £18M profit ......

......and currently over £109M has been wiped off the market cap this morning.

Skittish or what?

A good update, % profit expected to rise to 10.8% from 9.5%, absolute profit expected to rise to £31.5 which is a good increase. All in all a good report. Next date, accounts for the year on 7th March. So we should see an uptick in dividend. Metrics all look very good.

"So just for you ladies to keep tabs - my first short position was at 277, added to this at 233 and 210. Profit at the moment stands as 59k after interest / charges " well good for you but if your maths is as accurate as that I corrected for you the other day, on a thread that magically disappeared (?) you may just want to check out those "gainz" again.

Did not add to my holding on Wednesday, as the algorithms at the traders still seemed to be feeding each other with all that intelligence written into the coding, so correctly. Added yesterday and, in an unusual event for myself, bought at the low, until, in the close to trading it went lower again. Anyway under 209 was my point and happy with that. If the whole market succumbs to the effects of Labour "boosting the economy" this will drop further but otherwise the algorithms appear to have run their course in one direction. As another poster said, I have far riskier investments than buying this on the fundamentals it now presents.

The biggest threat is political management of the economy. I think we may see Reeves blow the dust off the volume "What I did in 1972" by one A Barber and so this may be a hold through to 2026 before retail sees warm daylight again.

Another day with no stimulii & down 2.7%, whilst 100 is -0.8% and 250 -1.3%.

Last page of trades for the day and the highest trade was under £3k; most ridiculous. Well the algorithms are written and all those buys and sells of 2 shares feed yet more algorithms and so it will all continue to work in one direction until it does not. Meanwhile Mrs T's comment when asked, the car park was jammed this evening. Didn't buy any today but probably tomorrow, again.

All those trades of less than 15 shares today, most amusing. Down 2.5% on a day with no new news, or actions impending, the last input being some poorly chosen words at the half year results by the CEO, weeks ago. With the 100 down 0.46% and 250 down 0.36%, that sure is being moved by a group with intent. Quite happy to observe and join in the purchase this week because sure as hell none of all this buying or selling of £30 of shares is a measure of the worth of the business. Car park was full yesterday when I drove by.

Sales up, profits up, dividend up and share price down.

I thank all those who over-reacted and those with automatic sell orders which then executed. I added to my holding beyond that I intended to with my holding at a price lower than I was content to pay. But then again I just base my view on simple metrics like frequently passing my local store and viewing the car park being very busy and infrequently calling in and seeing the shop busy and staff behaving well.

Https://www.business-live.co.uk/enterprise/stelrad-increases-profits-despite-falling-29721384

Hope Mitch is still holding his shares. All that snake oil he was trying to sell us in June 2022 Jan 2023. "The offer price does not reflect the underlying value of the business."

"Never mind all that useless jabber, I have never heard of any platforms doing a runner in 40 years of investing. however the RIO sp is nearly down to buying time."

Vouchers are just electronic chits, easily issued and easily authenticated.

Just wait until you find out about the daily reconciliation software some of these intermediaries use.

Of course, though, you are right, none of that matters a jot .................until the one day it does matter , as various people in Lehman brothers found out.

The USA and UK platfom system I have investigated. The summary, if you fear a modest or major system collapse, get your money out of shares being held via platforms. Iinstead use a broker that will make the share purchase on your behalf and advise you of the share certificate details. Brokers who do this have significantly higher charges than the various platforms.

The chain of custody for platforms is deliberately long and obtuse, with simple vouchers being held, once away from the first, or sometimes seconds step. Legal liability to elements of this chain is limited not to absolute loss but loss as a result of a failure to safeguard or improper behaviour.

To understand how this will not transmit your loss to the source of liability, one needs to understand the nature of the chain. Major original holders of shares have independent subsidiaries, with carefully constructed legal frameworks, that offer very limited liability. These are not in place in the custody chain adjacent to themselves but at a 4th position or a point distant from themselves.

Say you have "purchased" shares in company A and the chain of custody is short, say only 6 different exchange houses. Say there is a collapse in the market and many share prices drop. This results in the opaque entity which is in position 3 in the chain becoming insolvent.

You feel content, although there has been a general market collapse, company A shares have been less seriously affected and have lost only 20% of their value.

Your platform then advise that your holding is lost and of no value. They are No 6 in the chain and they have been advised by Nos 4 & 5 that you holding is lost because 3 became insolvent.

Your claim for liability is with the platform you dealt with, No 6. To defend their liability for the loss you have suffered they simply have to prove that they have acted properly in all matters. Did they do due diligence according to accepted industry standards, did they hold all the correct certificates and recent tests of authenticity and verification? Oh yes, No 6 will have all that with No 5 and No 5 will have all that with No 4.

So who is going to pursue your loss, because certainly Nos, 6, 5 & 4 have suffered no loss as a result of the collapse of No 3, they have simply written off their liability for their holdings against yourself? Yes, look in the mirror, there is the only individual interested in holding anyone to account for this state of affairs, and to do that you will be seeking details and records from opaque entities for whom your loss is irrelevant to them and assisting you with details of records and transactions is in fact a financial burden. They will not co-operate voluntarily. You may well be able to legally enforce co-operation but that requires that only a single element in a long chain has become insolvent and has lost its records & will be prohibitively costly to yourself.

My car is currently worth £10,000. If I have pay for this "upgrade" which costs (7÷24 x£10,000=)£3,000 it will add so much more to the value; trust me.

OK, here's the £3,000.

Market - what is the car worth now?

Exactly the same as it was 5 weeks ago, £10,000.

Cash - are you guys joking? This is a company with £55B of debt on its books. "Cash" of £7B is going to do what? Stop 55 being 62 and meaning the Execs missed their bonuses.

There is only one priority for the Execs and Board - shareholder value.

So a few weeks in and now ex divi and the capitation is unmoved as a result of the cash raised by the rights issue. 1120 x (24÷(24+7)) = 867. So we shareholders have stumped up our cash and it has had zero effect on the net worth of the company. That, very definitely, was not the intended outcome.

Well done that BoD!

I hope they give plenty of our money to pay all the fees to those who gave them that so expensive advice.

Adding shareholder value - NOT!

Pockerchips wrote

"You also have a lot more debt out there ,a lot more, so you have more lenders to keep sweet"

In that sentence you have the whole problem. Boards have borrowed to buy sweets today and payback tomorrow - only they don't. They are then beholden to every Tom, Dick or Harry who wants to shove them around.

Nobody said they had to borrow money whilst the clowns dropped interest rates down to historic lows. Leave the Fed and BoE to stew in the mess they have made for themselves. Look after the money your shareholders have asked you to look after.

Pockerchips

"I would disagree that the Priority is shareholders .... shareholders just being one part of the balancing act "

This is a widely held belief, particularly popular in the types of people "like us" who "we" promote to the boards and executive positions in UK corporate governance. Our duty is to the customers, employees, the regulator, our neighbours down the street, that nice Mrs Jones who has nothing to do with our business but who always smiles when she walks by; we can't let her down can we? The shareholders? Just another stakeholder (like "our" new term?) exactly like Mrs Jones, only a little more difficult to please."

And it is exactly why, post war, UK commercial competitivity has waned; with rare exceptions.

Look after the shareholders capital and as a consequence you must keep your workforce diligent, trained and motivated and providing your customers with a service/product they come back for.

One priority and for the Board, one duty; look after shareholder interests. I would have a giant sign in the boardroom and in the CEOs office stating exactly this.

Abuse the shareholders as a cash cow and it will permeate the rest of the business, customers and employees there to be abused as well.

No effective return for the shareholders =no business.

When I started work, 50 years ago, the induction included half a day making sure we understood exactly this.

Longtime investor

"An opinion from a keyboard warrior about the people in charge at National Grid .

"FFS"

That kool-aid must sure taste good.