nk1999
02 Jul 2017
Re: Strategic review CS Hired "Published by Premier Foods, the owner of British food brands including Mr Kipling cakes and Oxo stock cubes, is exploring options as part of a regular review into maximizing shareholder value.The review comes amid a flurry of activity in the packaged food sector in which Nestle is being pushed to change by an activist shareholder, Unilever is selling its margarines business and Reckitt Benckiser is selling its mustard business."In line with good corporate governance, the group regularly reviews options to deliver value for all its stakeholders," the company said in a statement on Thursday. "These reviews are carried out in the ordinary course of business as part of the group's standard planning cycle and also on ad hoc bases, and may involve external advisors."A spokesman for Premier Foods declined to elaborate, but the company's statement was in response to a Wall Street Journal report that said Premier had hired Credit Suisse to review options that could include the sale of one or more brands, a merger with another food group or an outright sale.Credit Suisse has been an adviser to the company for several years. A spokeswoman for the bank declined to comment.Premier said last month it was changing its strategy to give equal focus to revenue growth, cost efficiencies and cash generation. It said on Thursday its board had made no changes to the new strategy.Separately, Hong Kong-based shareholder Oasis Management, which has a representative on Premier's board, said it had raised its stake in the company to 8.84 percent. Its plan is to reach 10 percent by June 2018.Last year, Premier rejected a twice-improved 65 pence-per-share takeover bid from U.S. rival McCormick Foods , garnering criticism from major shareholders and leading to a steep drop in its share price.The shares closed on Wednesday at 40 pence apiece.The U.S. suitor's offer valued Premier's equity at $774 million at the time, but given the drop in the British currency since then, the same offer would be worth $698 million now."[link]
tradingup
30 Jun 2017
'delivering value to all stakeholders' line from RNS. that is really sick humour from some warped individual in PFD
item club
30 Jun 2017
I Laugh at .... Yes Norman YOU ARE SO RIGHT! I laugh at tragedy also. so I have had some good ones with McC etc etc ....... ! :--) Cheers
mexicoman
30 Jun 2017
Re: Strategic review CS Hired This company is a joke
Norman Barrington
30 Jun 2017
Re: Strategic review CS Hired Chopper was just joining in the joke I made, item. Have you not heard of irony?You gotta laugh, or else this share could easily make you grumpy 
chopper89x
30 Jun 2017
Re: Strategic review CS Hired the company .... ?
item club
30 Jun 2017
Re: Strategic review CS Hired "They may as well have said - "we do not want the share price to appreciate" " Hi Chopper Can you tell me who " They " are please ? Ta
chopper89x
30 Jun 2017
Re: Strategic review CS Hired They may as well have said - "we do not want the share price to appreciate"
Norman Barrington
29 Jun 2017
Re: Strategic review CS Hired RNS applies the brakes to the SP. Well we can't have the share price going up can we!
chopper89x
29 Jun 2017
Strategic review CS Hired Just flashed citing potential nestle interest
The buzz
25 May 2017
Share Price Support Level - Musings Some musings as to how I perceive things - no doubt not a fair assessment but the best that I can do! I previously bought around 38p and sold out around 43p - partly because I decided that the pension deficit might be a problem. Then PFD announced a reduced rate of pension contributions - so for a while I assumed that I had over-estimated the size of the pension deficit. .....and then the final results came out and my interpretation was that it showed that the pension deficit had shot up and that the company was struggling to pay its way - so they probably twisted the arms of the pension trustees along the lines that they were permitted to take lower payments now if the current payments became too onerous and jeopardized the long term health of the company.So PFD has a bit of breathing space - and has just issued a big bond that will of course take precedence over share holders' funds - and pay a healthy variable interest rate. It is an open question as to whether PFD will use this money wisely - they must not waste it for share holders' and pensioners' sakes! Its ironic that higher interest rates increases the interest bill but would reduce the pension deficit. What I can do though is keep track of the pension liability - which is probably the main driver for PFD's well being.As an exercise I had a look at the assumed discount rate in recent annual reports to see if there are any clues whether PFD will be likely to raise/ lower the assumed discount rate next time round (and reduce/increase the deficit accordingly).PFD 16.5.17... 3.55% to 2.65%RMG 18.5.17... 3.5% to 2.5%UU. 25.5.17 ....3.5% to 2.5%QQ. 25.5.17 ... 3.4% to 2.55% In summary PFD assumed the most optimistic (ie highest value for discount rate) last year, and has again used the highest value for this year as well. I conclude that if final report were written now, then PFD would need to decrease their discount rate by about 0.1% and increase their pension deficit even further.Where does that leave the share price? It has recently been falling back to below 41p. A slowing UK economy - but scope for an increase in interest rates over the next year. A tough retail market. The possibility of a formal take-over (at a price acceptable to shareholders) seems to have receded even further with time - and no doubt the institutions are getting a bit hot under the collar by now! If they had the current CE's scalp and found someone that the market liked it might give a boost to the share price. However, throw in the pension deficit and I conclude that overall I should not buy back above 38p as things are worse than when I previously set 38p as a buy-in price..The B
pyueck
17 May 2017
Re: Results There is no structural decline in the uk grocery market? The company has just not leveraged the brands it has. I have no confidence the management will change that any time soon. They should have taken the bid last year....
Meanbugger
17 May 2017
Re: Results alfa, you are of course absolutely right about how PFD got into this mess. As an observer, I find it interesting that they are now placing equal emphasis on revenue growth, cost reduction and cash generation. It is unlikely that they will get any volume growth this year but they might recover some of the input price inflation. Some of the cost savings are likely to come from reducing investment in new product development and reducing the ranges to focus on the best selling products. This only gets you so far and with the need to generate cash for the forthcoming debt repayments, this year's results are not going to excite anyone.Apart from the pension fund turning round, in theory the optimum corporate strategy would be to make targeted bolt-on acquisitions which would bring rationalisation benefits and synergies. The brewers were masters at doing this as UK beer consumption declined over the last 30 years. If PFD could become a consolidator rather than facing the problems of structural decline in isolation then it could become a much more interesting investment for shareholders.
The buzz
17 May 2017
Re: Results More musings on the pension scheme. I may have gone wrong somewhere, but I think that it worth exploring what is essentially key to PF's health. The sums for last year re PFD pension scheme would have been reduced by the pension contributions and yet the PFD pension scheme deficit still grew by 7.2p a share.The previous year the discount rate increased by 0.2% to 3.55% - I thought that was a bit on the high side - and now it has come down with a thump to 2.65%. The previous year it was stated that a decrease in discount rate by 0.1% increased liabilities by £71m, now it is said to be £86.4m. So a decrease from 3.55% to 2.65% is 0.9%, so 9*£86.4m=£778m. The stated increase in scheme liabilities is £4760-4212=£548m. Not sure why there is a big difference - unless mortality and scheme leavers have caused this. Fortunately there was a big increase in scheme assets from £4342.9m to £4864.6m - an increase of £521.7m and presumably including the pension contribution of £51.7m (It seems to get lost with these large numbers!!).Aha just spotted a tweek to mortality rates and associated liability. An increase in the assumed life expectancy of a 60 year old by 1 year previously increased liabilities by £171, but now it is £204.8m. .. but if you are a 45 year old female in the PFD scheme - you are now expected to reach 'only' 90.8 years, whereas last year it had been 91.5years. (This reduction in expected age was flagged by one of my earlier posts).The BIG question is where are discount rates going - I suspect that it won't be going down very much, and may rise - as I always have been saying - best to see what other major companies state in their pension liabilities statements. It they start to increase them, then PFD's liabilities will rapidly reduce - and give some hope for a dividend at some point!!The B
alfa-spider
17 May 2017
Re: Results Hi MByour comment " PFD to acquire other mature grocery brands in the same way ............" is where Premier's downfall began. Robert Schofield and his charge to buy up old British Brands and make them great again. Paid too much, borrowed too much and RHM crippled them. If they can't grow the brands they have then buying more may just dilute there attention on what they already have. If the BOD was dynamic and showing promise to grow now I would agree with you BUT.........
