riverside red
01 Feb 2018
Zama Pemex reported to be after a rig to drill another explorationwell.
Hydrogen Economy
31 Jan 2018
Re: Shareholder Spring Mark"I know companies that do lose or even have a significant vote against a remuneration package acknowledge the fact and say they will take it into account; I don't ever remember reading a company actually DID change the package"A rare thing I agree, but it has happenedCEO Bob Dudley's total pay package for 2016 was cut by by an eye watering $8 million to a derisory $11.6 million. Poor Bob, not sure how he got by, but no doubt it will balloon again as oil price rises (for which he deserves all the credit I'm sure). [link] out of builders at present having had several great years holding many. Will watch what happens
aspace
31 Jan 2018
Topped up on Persimmon For better or worse, I topped up on current price weakness, getting in at £25.82 so had already made an immediate loss at the closing price of £25.71. my calcs this puts PSN on a PE of 11.5 with dividend of 4.3% which makes it too modestly valued in my view given that in the Jan 2018 prelim announcement it appears PSN is meeting the nation's demand for new housing, sales are up and they anticipate profits will beat market consensus. So I estimate a profit after tax of approx £700m. Hopefully a little more. Since the 2012 capital efficiency strategy was launched PSN has outperformed strongly year after year. The capital return plan was BOTH accelerated AND increased in 2016. Today we are poised to receive £1.10 in Jul 2018. Last year they kindly gave us an extra interim dividend of 25p. Fingers crossed for this year. Unlike the past behaviour of banks, PSN is a company doing precisely what we want companies to do: make and sell stuff that's needed. With Britain's continuing need for housing I don't see that situation changing in the foreseeable. Unless CEO Jeff Fairburn's super-sized bonus resulting in chairman Nicholas Wrigley's resignation results in further bad publicity.
Mark Y38
15 Jan 2018
Re: Shareholder Spring And in addition to what "Hang..." said, I think the government would have to make the vote on directors remuneration binding instead of advisory. I know companies that do lose or even have a significant vote against a remuneration package acknowledge the fact and say they will take it into account; I don't ever remember reading a company actually DID change the package. I know some sort of fall-back proviso would have to be made in any legislation but at the moment even if we muster enough votes, the board of any company can effectively ignore it.
Hang in to the bitter end
14 Jan 2018
Re: Shareholder Spring I fully agree aspaceI'm puzzled by a lot of things surrounding this crazy bonus scheme that our directors, in their wisdom, voted in (although they are supposed to be working with shareholder interests at heart).1) I know the Chairman and head of remuneration have resigned because of the sheer generosity of the scheme, but surely they must have known how these bonuses have been building up over the past few years. Couldn’t they have acted sooner?2) Why has Jeff Fairburn, & other beneficiaries, not also resigned in embarrassment at taking such a disproportionate reward for their efforts, or why hasn’t he offered to take just a proportion of the bonus, even 25% would still be a “nice little earner.”3) Why has the board of directors not determined that the negative press relating to these payments has caused a downturn in the sp. They could actually rectify the situation by persuading the recipients to forego at least some of the bonus payments in order to, in part at least, counteract the sp drop, so actually doing what they are paid for (& receive bonuses for) and work in the interests of the shareholders!As a shareholder I fear a backlash from the government. There’s nothing they like better than punishing greedy directors, especially when it’s a vote-winning move. Anyhow, as a consequence and even though I’m a very long term holder, I am planning to reduce my holding in PSN by at least 50% over then next few months.Regarding the disenfranchising of private shareholders due to shares being held in nominee accounts, so making voting on remuneration difficult, I think that it makes little difference, since private shareholdings are such a small overall percentage of most companies’ total equity. Even if we were all to vote against a remuneration package it would still be voted through because of institutional holdings (pension funds, investment trusts, unit trusts etc), even though most of the underlying beneficiaries are also private investors. IMO there would need to be more radical change along the lines that the weighting of votes from these institutions would be reduced considerably ... don’t see it happening of course!IMHO...
aspace
10 Jan 2018
Re: Shareholder Spring The considerable negative publicity Jeff Fairburn has attracted also makes Persimmon a target of the politicians who may now choose to use Persimmon or the housebuilding sector generally as a bad example of corporate excess particularly given its connection to 'help to buy'. A positive has been turned into a negative.
charlus
10 Jan 2018
Re: Shareholder Spring Hi Dutchman, (is it OK if I leave out the Mr?)Thanks for that info I shall make it a priority to email Stephen and make views known.Perhaps more investors on this board and others should also follow suit to add a bit more impetus to a Shareholder Spring.It is not exactly Maggie's view of shareholder democracy where a wider pool participate in the capitalist sytem as investors but it might just give us our voice back.It seems we are not alone in wanting to exert a little more control over the companies we ultimately own as this recent article from Moneyweek argues.[link] mad as hell.Cheers,Chozza
The Dutchman
09 Jan 2018
Re: Shareholder Spring I agree with the sentiments re Director's bonus scheme. The scheme was designed and agreed some years ago, maybe 5 maybe 8 I cant remember and was all linked to the large dividends/return of capital we have been receiving, the cost of the bonuses would have been charged against profits over the intervening 5/8 years. Having said that it was stupid not to have included a cap on the level of bonuses. With regard to Nominee accounts and votes and receiving annual accounts etc. it does seem to me that we are effectively being disenfanchised. The organisation to email is The Financial Reporting Council who are responsible for the Corporate Governance Code,the Stewardship Code and many other aspects of corporate reporting. Write to Stephen Haddrill Chief Exec whose email address is; [email protected]'t complain about this particular bonus but just how the nominee shareholding system disenfranchises private investors and means that comapny directors cannot be held to account.You may think this will make no difference, but they get so few comments from real private investors, it will - believe me! Go on it's worth 5 minutes.
Rhigos
09 Jan 2018
Re: Shareholder Spring charlus "..obscene level of pay that has been granted to CEO and others"I too was horrified by the huge size of bonuses. A large proportion of shares are owned by institutional investors. They should be more diligent about agreeing to over generous bonus schemes.PI who own shares through a nominee account can exercise their voting rights by instructing their broker company how they wish to vote. I have done this on several occasions with my broker Charles Stanley Direct. All shares in ISA's I believe are held in nominee accounts.There is a catch however as at the moment shareholders can vote against a remuneration package but the company is not bound by a vote even if shareholders do vote it down.
charlus
09 Jan 2018
Shareholder Spring I have to say I am very surprised that there has been no comment or discussion on this Board about the obscene level of pay that has been granted to CEO and others.Even the Chairman and head of the renumeration committee were sufficiently embarrassed by their own incompetance to resign from the Board.£800m bonuses to be divied up amongst execs with a staggering £109m going to Fairburn alone.THIS IS OUR MONEY FFS !!Sadly, as most now have nominee accounts we seem to lose our right to exercise our vote at AGMs and veto outrageous bonus plans.This is the unacceptable face of capitalism.I am not a big fan of Government intervention but a simple rule change to allow shareholders with nominee account to retain their right to vote and make their voice heard as owners of the company would surely be a step in the right direction.Mad as hellChozza
II Editor
20 Dec 2017
NEW ARTICLE: 10 stocks from 2017's best performing strategy "2017 has been a strong year for the stockmarket, but not all investment strategies have done well. Given the bullish conditions, it's probably no surprise that "value" investing in the market's cheapest shares has not generally paid off. But good ..."[link]
II Editor
22 Nov 2017
NEW ARTICLE: Autumn Budget 2017: These shares are moving fast after chancellor speaks "This budget was always going to be especially tricky for the chancellor. Hitting fiscal targets amid wide divisions over Brexit, while also spending more on populist policies to distract voters from Conservative party infighting and dysfunctional ..."[link]
PrefInvestor1
16 Nov 2017
Budget Measures ? Hi All,Lots of potentially interesting things going on with house builders right now connected to the budget. These include stamp duty change for first time buyers, potential help to buy changes, changes to planning regulations (use of green belt), government initiatives for more affordable homes etc. Seems to me these could be either really positive for housebuilders or really negative. The sector has been pretty heavily whacked lately despite what I thought were some pretty positive trading statements. Confess I am not optimistic of what’s likely to come out in the budget. Like to hear what other people think.ATBPref
sgd
13 Nov 2017
Re: Sold some in July Thanks Eadwig, interesting and useful thoughts.
Eadwig
09 Nov 2017
Re: Whacked If the government does get rid of help to buy, it'll be for something better for the house buyer. Turkeys don't vote for Xmas.Until the last 12 months, builders were continually whacked when reporting profit margins and returns on capital that most FTSE 100 companies could only dream of. It hasn't happened so much this year, although Bovis were deservedly punished for their performance.Why? Because the market always wants them to not just exceed expectations, but to shoot the lights out with every update. For some reason, they (analysts) set the standards very high in this particular sector. Probably because many of them told their clients to steer clear and were made to look foolish for years.I know lots of investors from these boards and elsewhere that have refused to get involved with the sector during this cycle. They're quite happy to invest in other companies which are much, much harder to actually fully understand. RDSB, ULVR, RIO, HSBA just to name a few examples off the top of my head. All mid-high dividend, FTSE 100 companies, but hugely complex. They don't mind investing in those.Housebuilders are relatively straightforward and simple. When there is demand, they up the number of houses they plan to build, when it falls off, they can easily adjust - that's why they sub-contract much of the building work. This cycle, there has been very little M&A activity in a race to buy growth which saw the last cycle end in disaster as the financial crisis unwound. That still seems to cast a long shadow for many investors, but all they've done is fail to take advantage of the best UK growth story, (cyclical, granted) over the last 40 years. Bar none.Where I think the builders have been particularly clever is in managing the change from exciting high growth to slower growth, high dividend paying boredom without actually slaughtering the stock price. That transition is usually very painful (for shareholders) and is what almost always happens in such a scenario, no matter the sector. PSN, especially, always plan on the assumption that there will be a housing sector crash at some future point and plan accordingly inc. no long term debt.I hope I'm not speaking too soon. It could be that the market slaughters the stock price anyway, despite the underlying businesses being fundamentally better than sound. Look at what happened after the Brexit vote, for example (see chart).That is the problem, I suppose. UK builders (except TW) are wholly exposed to the UK economy, whereas 70% of the FTSE 100 earnings come from abroad. There are only a few companies that are 100% exposed to the UK for their revenue, and the builders certainly fit in that category.the way, PSN increased forward sales forecasts AND the government keeps talking about reforming the planning scheme that makes developments such a longer-term proposition, so I think the markets have over-reacted to the 'flat sales' comment in just a single quarter. Overlooking the highest monthly house price rise news for several months that was released on the same day, I noted.Keep an eye on the P/E is my advice.It has never really got out of hand in the sector this cycle, except perhaps with one or two London specialists. That's what has made them such an obvious buy.FTSE P/E is currently 23, historic average is 15. Builders are UK-based though, so I would say anything over 20 is too high with all the uncertainty ahead. I'm sure qa Labour government would be hostile to builders making in excess of 20% return on our capital, for example.Eadwig
