Meanbugger
04 Apr 2018
Re: Matthew Clark Yes C&C are the most logical buyer of the Matthew Clark and Bibendum businesses. The deal is conditional on the intermediate holding company Conviviality Brands Ltd being put into administration thus avoiding any inter-company debt problems.PwC are desperate to avoid the nightmare of putting the operating businesses into administration given the number of customers and suppliers. Hopefully deals can also be done for the retail businesses allowing CVR to be quietly put to sleep.
TX2
04 Apr 2018
Matthew Clark Irish firm C&C,in which I am a shareholder, with support from Inbev are in talks to buy the wholesale division- Matthhew Clak & Bibendum.
Meanbugger
02 Apr 2018
Re: The vultures are picking the business I'm expecting an update at 7.00 am on Tuesday regarding any success in selling some of the businesses before the appointment of PwC as administrators. I'm not sure much value can be preserved but everything helps. I understand Bestway/Batleys are considered one of the possible buyers of Bargain Booze/Matthew Clark but there has been a fair bit of interest in some of the smaller Conviviality operations.A sad end and sickening for CVR shareholders. Hopefully lessons will be learned.
peddlar
01 Apr 2018
The vultures are picking the business Sounds like some private investors are picking this company up cheap now.
pyueck
01 Apr 2018
Re: what now Up the creek without a paddle is where you stand.
gwm121
31 Mar 2018
what now Aim shares are bought on the back of information given out by the company.if the information from the company (f/dir) is incorrect where do p.is stand after this is discovered.
Bill1703
30 Mar 2018
Broker Only really of contextual relevance now... there will be no triumphant return from suspension here (there rarely is). Over to the administrators (most likely) to see if they can pull any kind of rabbit out the hat...The advisers will have questions to answer, and I'd imagine these are already being asked... not least about the 'keystone cops' debacle of the latter staccato series of announcements and revelations. Perhaps the auditors too, though less so... unless big problems with historic accounts are unearthed. But it is the directors who face the lion's share of scrutiny - and (quite likely) retributive action, one way or another. You can absolve them (I think) of the charge of knowingly trading while insolvent, given the CEO and CFO share purchases following the first warning - the latter being particularly painful, he must be hopping mad - but not that of being nowhere near on top of what the **** was going on inside their business. And while that might be the lesser charge in the eyes of the law, you can rest assured it is not in the eyes of the shareholders... SINGER"Conviviality through its Matthew Clark and Bibbendum subsidiaries is the dominant on-trade supplier to the UK hospitality sector, serving around 23,000 outlets out of a market size of c.45,000. It was thus in the hospitality and drink manufacturers interest that Conviviality secured the necessary funding, both from a supply and competitive pricing perspective. The fact that it has not will have clear short term supply issues for both sectors. Given wider consumer and cost related challenges currently facing the sector and the significance of Easter trading this is clearly a negative of varying degrees for the quoted pubs & restaurant sector. Our understanding is that the majority, if not all, of the pubs and restaurant stocks have exposure to Conviviality in terms of drinks supplies."SHORE CAPITAL"Given the retail and wholesale nature of the Group, the franchise business, Bargain Booze and the major drinks distributor that Matthew Clark is in the UK, there is clearly need for pace so that the business does not simply fall apart through a lack of product on the shelves and in the bar, with all of the consequent personal and corporate damage.We note the group continues to trade at present post a number of inbound enquires regarding a sale of all or part of the business. We also point out that customers of the group business can chose to use other suppliers to stock their shelves and suppliers toConviviality are likely to have stopped supplying product now for fear to not being paid. All this puts intense pressure on the business hence the need for some sort of resolution sooner rather than later.Who would be interested in acquiring the group? As to potential suitors for Conviviality, today’s announcement confirms there is interest and we believe the interested parties are likely to be from different market segments. The complication for us is likely to be how many would be interested in the group in its current structure to enable a quick sale. Depending on due diligence, we believe private equity could be an acquirer of the entire group assuming it sees Conviviality’s issues as operational ones that are fixable and confidence could be rebuilt in its customer and supplier base. The acquisition could be done with a view for follow selective disposals to help fund any such deal in due course."
Ripley94
30 Mar 2018
Re: It's bust HI schwee Nice to know that about AIM index but i wonder if that's due to the recent sell off i have noticed on big falls in indices my AIM ones do not fall as much.Guess it because they are less liquid .Whats the compassion over 3,5 and 10 years ?
schwee
30 Mar 2018
Re: It's bust Megaloss,Never ever invest for IHT or any other tax advantages. Only invest in a company because you believe in it, and never invest more than you can afford to lose.As an aside I note that the AIM index has outperformed (i.e. the least worst) all the other main FTSE indexes this year so far.
Ripley94
30 Mar 2018
Re: Administration? Lucky I'm not in this one .I see in news below Alistair Strang "chart guy " wrote on 15 march ( two weeks ago ) " a pick from bargain bin ".Sorry to see a few of my favorites posting here i hope you did not lose to much .
megaloss
29 Mar 2018
Re: It's bust old punter, it was HM Government that wanted AIM promoted as an IHT shelter, which puts AIM firmly in the “widows and orphans” category. I find it hard to disagree with your logic on regulation or the lack of it, but this really does mean it’s not fit for purpose as an investment vehicle for widows and orphans. So why give the tax break in the first place?Points made by oer posters on heeding profit warnings are well taken..I sold as soon as I could after the first profit warning so at least salvaged something and haven’t been left with a useless shareholding. I think this is a sound practice to follow, even if the stock comes good later it’s usually a few years later so your money is SO much better invested elsewhere meanwhile.The assets of this company meanwhile are going to be available at a rock-bottom price and a few guys will no doubt make loads and loads of dosh out of turning this around. I wonder if someone out there is assembling the dream team as we speak?
frusset
29 Mar 2018
Re: It's bust old_punter, well done for a gain on Accrol. Your mention of Accrol is my excuse to go on about the company. I had little interest in a tissue converter because I saw little chance of it having a competitive advantage. When the results were good and the stock rose, I wondered what I'd missed, but didn't bother looking into it. Then came bad news, with the higher price of "parent rolls" (if that's the term) featuring. It looked like it was just a commodity business all along, with no serious competitive advantage. Someone else could probably say if they did well for a while because of favorable prices, lucky hedging, 'exaggeration', or whatever.My first comment about CVR was to ask if the business had any competitive advantage. It got no direct reply, but someone said something about the drinks business being very old, and if there was any great advantage in consolidation, it would probably have been done successfully a long time ago. I couldn't see anything positive CVR were doing apart from consolidating the industry. Sometimes I risk buying stocks where growth is founded on serial acquisition, but (when I'm not being stupid) I need to see some kind of competitive advantage, or a quite low build up of debt with low or no rise in the share count, as evidence that the acquisitions were really building value for shareholders. BTW I often find it hard to judge how long a competitive advantage will last.I had a narrow escape with CVR. I bought on the strength of the CFO buying £120k's worth. I was lucky to have the weekend to rethink, and sold (and commented that I'd "bottled out"
. I can sympathise with CVR shareholders because I have my own failures, though I know my sympathy isn't any use. An old mistake was holding shares in the bankruptcy specialist RSM Tenon when they went bankrupt (at least PwC were fined £5.1m for their audit).
relaxtwotribes
29 Mar 2018
Re: Administration? I hope that all PIs that have been stung here have diversified portfolios.Aside from the lesson that it is not profits that keeps a company solvent, but cash, another lesson is that bad news announcements nearly always come in threes. Admittedly the period covering those three announcements is more usually months, compared with days with CVR. It is nearly always the best investment decision to sell at the time of the first announcement. Take your loss and walk away with something at least. This is something I have learned in several decades of investing.
CASTLEFORD TIGER
29 Mar 2018
The news flow here Was seriously at fault. Read them we start small and then after directors buy more bad news and thenWe forgot about 30mThen we need125 m to keep afloat a profit making co!!Serious wrongdoings. Needs to be explained. The directors should be banned and finedTiger
old_punter
29 Mar 2018
Re: It's bust Megaloss,In the same boat as you on this one, but over the years have made far more than lost on AIM stocks so not unhappy to see it continue as is. Regulation is often counter productive in practice, and an additional cost for the rest of us. One of the main problems investing in AIM stocks is one is up against insider dealing, which is mostly impossible to control. I think with AIM one has to accept insider trading as a cost, take Accrol as a current example, the price doubles from a low of 7p a few days ago before an RNS today showing a 4.5% stake by a Moroccan company in the same line of business. Threshold was crossed on 22nd but apparently company not informed till today. Price now 17p. However, I made money on this having bought as a punt the week before so do I care?
