The buzz
26 Feb 2017
Re: Maybe There is another twist to the story and that is the Brexit vote came after the McCormick approach. Two issues here - PFD have recently stated that the post Brexit fall in the value of the £ has put up costs that so far have not been fully recovered. Secondly, pre-Brexit the UK gave ready access to the EE market - this may not be the case post Brexit.The B
pyueck
26 Feb 2017
Re: Maybe Wong that was a hard read please learn to use full stops!So I 'obviously don't get it' because I hadn't written your 'conspiracy theory'? I actually said i doubt we will ever find out what really went on, so I have no idea why Darby was so keen to reject the deal and so pro Nissin. I suggest you don't either, despite your very hard to read exegesis.My question to you about your theory is what is in it for Mr Darby? What is his motivation for rejecting good bids from Mccormicks, releasing trading statements to drive down the SP and then eventually do a low ball deal with Nissin? Surely he would be motivated to accept the best price possible so that his share options pay out for the best price possible?
SumTingsWong
25 Feb 2017
Meanwhile amongst the various conspiracy theories, I have just noticed that in the last 2 months 4 institutions have increased their holdings..Could all four of them have timed their purchases wrongly?You decide.Mr Wong
SumTingsWong
25 Feb 2017
Re: Maybe Err your theory sort of falls apart at the stage where Nissin failed to make a bid for the company========== ========== ====Err, not really pyucek, you obviously don't get it do you? Nissin must have already conjured up a deal with PFD that was below that of what McCormick had first offered i.e. under 52p, McCormick somehow got wind of Nissins bid and went in higher and bid 52p (presumably Nissin had bid 50p or less for example) the bid from McCormicks took Nissin and PFD by surprise stopping Nissin buying out PFD on the cheap in its tracks, they then decided to go the "strategic" JV route to cop out of a bidding war with McCormicks and so as to not pay more than they had originally bid, then the PFD paymaster general suggested that 60p undervalued the company and to try to keep the main institution onside, plus put a spanner in the works for McCormicks revised 60p bid, they then plotted the "negotiated" 17% sale for 63p to Nissin to make us all think if Nissin were prepared to pay 63p then a 60p bid undervalued us, when all the time it was done because that institutions holding would have sold out to McCormicks, however, McCormicks kept raising the bar and calling PFDs bluff which was why the reluctance to engage with McCormicks and when they did finally get a meeting on Mr Darby probably asked some ridiculous figure he would agree on that McCormicks did not, full well knowing that when McCormicks walked the SP would plummet, which it did, he then has gone on to issue 3 dire trading statements, which IMO were designed to trash the SP even more (which they did), so that when Nissin come back with their low ball bid it will look substantial in comparison and all Darby needs to say is how he didn't anticipate the downturn bla bla bla. i know its a conspiracy theory until proven fact but I doubt it is far from the truth, as in normal circumstances no CEO would cower away from an all cash bidder who was prepared to pay over a 100% premium for its shares, it just does not make sense.My only concern is, that if McCormick doesn't come back then all Nissin have to do is wait the 1 year which will is this coming April and then they don't even have to offer above their initial 63p purchase, as I am sure in the interim Darby will do his best to issue another dud trading statement and when Nissin offer say 50p (their original offer) it will all of a sudden seem fair value for Darby, our only hope then will be (if they don't do so before) is that McCormicks the White Knight comes charging in full force and once again scuppers their plan! IMHO and as far as I can see Darby should have been ousted long ago and no doubt if they had not of bought the 17% stake off the institution for 63p that institution would have ousted him shortly after him rejecting McCormicks, he knew this and that is why they hatched a plan with Nissin to do so.I am surprised that Paulson has not tried to oust him, as he is considered an activist but perhaps he feels with only a small stake its not worth the hassle.Mr Wong hopes he Right and if anyone is going to make a move it will be in the next 4 weeks I reckon.Mr Wong
pyueck
24 Feb 2017
Re: Maybe Err your theory sort of falls apart at the stage where Nissin failed to make a bid for the company. Yes it's baffling why the board were so pro Nissin? Maybe they genuinely thought that a tie up with them would deliver value, so far I can't see anything to suggest that but early days.There was clearly something that made the deal come unstuck. I don't know if we will ever know what really went on, why the directors were so strongly opposed to any bid and pro Nissin. Clearly the market thinks they just got it wrong turning it down, results since have been awful, the company is mired in debt and pension deficits and no bids on the horizon. A bid from somebody looking for cheap brands that can be revived is possible, but so is total failure. Really is nobody else panicked that with the downturn in results the refinance of debt is looking shaky?
SumTingsWong
24 Feb 2017
Maybe the notion that McCormick will come back for seconds is a red herring, how about it has really been Nissin all along that wanted to snap up PFD originally..this would make sense as to why our beloved (sic) Mr Darby was so keen to fight off McCormicks bid at the first instance, could it have been that Nissin were in the throws of putting together their offer and corporate word got out hence McCormick took the initiative to make the first move? Could that be the reason Nissin decided to stump up 63p per share for a 17.3% stake, to scupper McCormicks chance of snapping up PFD for more that what Nissin had intended to bid? I note in a document at the time that stated "Nissin had agreed to not bid to buy its English partner for at least six months". Why would they state that?That would explain Mr Darbys seemingly lack of co operation with McCormick and his sudden uber bullishness about the company prospects and how the McCormick bid fundamentally undervalued its prospects and was not in shareholders interests, only to dish out three dismal consecutive trading statements since. Something stinks here and it isn't the smell of rotting mince pies, or minced lies as they are now known. I am sure McCormicks were well aware of what Mr Darby was up to as they even stated "McCormick is disappointed that the board of Premier Foods is conducting itself in a way that denies Premier Foods' shareholders the opportunity to consider McCormick's highly attractive cash offer," Even the instis smelt a rat as one fund manager quoted "The board has created an environment where they appear to be favoring Nissin Foods, which paid a significant premium to one shareholder, to the detriment of all other shareholders who were not offered any premium". So, if it really was Nissins intention to swoop on PFD last year, we at least know they will need to bid over 63p should they still want to acquire PFD before someone else does.If the above is correct, I hope that McCormick do come back with an offer circa 65p because this time around I think nobody will refuse it and a 17.3% stake will not be enough to block such a bid.We can all but hope.Mr Wong
pyueck
23 Feb 2017
Re: Baffled I think a lot has to do with the results and confidence in the company. Unilever consistently meets or outperforms their promises. Premier Foods consistently doesn't deliver on it's promises. Look at Premier Foods promises when they had the rights issue or the document made to fend of McCormicks. Compare what they said then with the latest trading numbers.Add into that PFD has a huge debt with no clear strategy to reduce it, more chance of another rights issue than a dividend and a large pension deficit. Then it's easy to see why the market loves Unilever and hates Premier Foods.
SumTingsWong
23 Feb 2017
Baffled not only is Unilever trading near all time highs, after its rejection of Krafts approach, it only dropped around 9% and has now gone back to its near all time high.How bizarre is that, yet good ole PFD dropped about 40% after its rejection and is not far from its all time low, the "Market" does work in mysterious ways doesnt it?Mr Wong
The buzz
22 Feb 2017
Yo Yo Share Bouncing around again. Just added a total of 27.3k at 39.14p and 39.18p as there is scope for a short term gain here. Why it moves about so much I do not know, but a few bob here and there is useful!The B
pyueck
21 Feb 2017
Re: Product name changes Maybe they didn't offer him a good enough payoff? Did the interest of staff, shareholders or pensioners even cross his mind.He will probably muddle through until another profits warning, leave with a huge payoff and with the chairman saying how much he has contributed. Meanwhile back to gruel for us poor shareholders, dreaming of the 70p that is no more. That's why I was so grumpy on Sunday, we used to have roast beef on a Sunday, for the last year it's been potato peelings. Does Mr Darby know the suffering he has caused? PFD is like a long drawn out session on the rack.People talk about takeovers, but what about the debt! Maybe at some stage it will catch up with us. Not sure I would lend to them... maybe in a years time we will be dreaming of 40p. That's how torture works, you think you have it bad and then they bring out the pliars.
SumTingsWong
21 Feb 2017
Product name changes I have heard that Mr Darby has decided to revamp the names a little on some of the confectionary lines, the traditional Jammy Dodger will now be called the Jammy Tomorrow, the Mince Pies will now be known as Mince Lies.I must say, I am some what confused by the current shoe price, did Mr Darby state that an offer of around 70p undervalued the company? If so, why is the share price 30p under that undervalue?Mr Wong
Disorder
21 Feb 2017
Re: Rejected offer oooo, oooo, oooooForgot the Strong Buy tag...Silly me.
Disorder
21 Feb 2017
Re: Rejected offer "my 7 year old has told me to say "whatever pyueck".....That made me laugh. Also Fair play Pyueck... we all have bad days. I understood your points.. Glad the spat isn't continuing.We on this thread tend to miss out or don't bother with "mundane" news that doesn't have an immediate impact on the sp.Therefore we tend to deal only with results and takeover bids/rumours.Past couple of weeks we have seen Premier move up in the animal welfare rankings, the Cadbury cake range unveiled, and what about the new pot noodles? 
pyueck
21 Feb 2017
Re: Rejected offer I apologise I was having a bad day.
AllGonWong
19 Feb 2017
Re: Rejected offer my 7 year old has told me to say "whatever pyueck".....AGW
