sage in the hills
20 Oct 2017
Re: Interesting times excellent points, i am sure many of us had forgotten about, or, didnt know ...vnb...SAGE
valuemanbuyer
19 Oct 2017
Interesting times Analysts and scribblers seem to be predicting the split into two divisions is a precursor to the acquisition of Pfizer’s consumer health business . RB clearly think they have lots of value to add by massively improving margins. I note that when they bought SSL I heard , from someone close to management of SSL, that RB put all their own people in and changed the business radically much to the sneers of the SSL team ( who made a fortune by the way ). It worked rather well for us shareholders so what can they do to Mead and Pfizer who are a multiple size of SSL with ,no doubt ,masses of fat to cut and improved business processes & focus ?
sage in the hills
18 Oct 2017
Targets £84 to £87 Reckitt shares currently trade on a forward earnings multiple of 19 times, a big discount (15%) to peers, according to Waldschmidt, who keeps his 'buy' rating and bullish £87 target price, implying potential upside of a quarter. Bank of America Merrill Lynch also remains positive, targeting £84.iiiSAGE
gamesinvestor
18 Oct 2017
2nd warning and restructuring [link] divisions -- Health and HygieneHealth - 60% of Revenue - Hygiene 40%I think I've been a bit early buying into this as it looks like it'll drift lower (total guess) given the large incorporation of Mead Johnson.So many things seem to have hit it at once - data, Scholl, South Korea; Indian Tax Laws --- wthat the... has Rakesh been doing apart from drawing a huge salary?It does however, never cease to amaze me how much moolar this company makes on relatively low barrier to entry stuff (apart from the branding argument of course).I mean how hard (see what I did there) is it to make a rubber whxtsit?, they could sub it all out to Devro who are experts at stretching clxng film made out of collagen over sausage shaped objxcts.Bleach; cough sweets; Strepsils; headache tablets; Vanish; fabric conditioner (nasty stuff that cloggs up your machine).Still everyone else seems to love em; so it deserves to be just under 1% of my wad -- not sure I can muster up the enthusiasm to increase it with the money I just made from dumping Domino Pizza.Games -- I mean at least the Pizza tastes nice if not a tad expensive.
II Editor
18 Oct 2017
NEW ARTICLE: Reckitt Benckiser: Buy or sell? "LSE:RB.:Reckitt Benckiser is laying down the foundations for another big portfolio shake-up, as it attempts to draw a line under the cyber-attack in June and India's implementation of a goods and service tax that continues to impact on sales.The ..."[link]
sage in the hills
18 Oct 2017
New support The old resistance has become the new support at 6900pSAGE
sage in the hills
18 Oct 2017
The uncertainty has been removed..... British consumer goods company Reckitt Benckiser Group PLC (RB.LN) on Wednesday lowered its full-year guidance for comparable revenue, after reporting a 1% fall in the metric for the third quarter of 2017.The consumer health and household company, whose brands include Dettol, Airwick, Durex and Scholl, said like-for-like revenue--excluding the impact of foreign exchange rates, acquisitions and disposals--was hit by a continued challenging market environment.The company said it is now targeting flat performance for its base operations, excluding the recently acquired U.S. baby-food maker Mead Johnson. In July, the company lowered its full-year comparable revenue growth target to 2% and said it expected like-for-like revenue to rise again over the second half after declining in the first six months of the year.In the third quarter, Reckitt Benckiser generated net revenue of GBP3.21 billion ($4.24 billion), up 30% year on year. The company added that its revenue benefited from positive foreign exchange movements.The British consumer giant is currently integrating Mead Johnson which it bought for $16.6 billion in June. Following the acquisition it sold its food division to U.S. spice maker McCormick & Co. (MKC) for $4.2 billion in July.Reckitt Benckiser said Mead Johnson's like-for-like revenue increased by 1% in the third quarter, helped by strong market growth in China and lifted its target for that business to a "minus 2% to flat" performance for full 2017.Reckitt is dealing with challenges posed by changing consumer tastes that are affecting larger peers like Procter & Gamble Co. (PG) and Unilever PLC (ULVR.LN).SAGE
Hydrogen Economy
18 Oct 2017
Trading Update Market seemed initially unimpressed with the TU with LFL -1% on Net Revenue (+30% Actual)"Q3 was a soft quarter as we experienced both the tail end of known issues, and the impact of a continuing challenging market environment. Our underlying performance was in line with current market growth of around 2%. MJN had a better quarter, in particular in Greater China. Given these moving parts, we are now targeting flat full year LFL net revenue for the RB base business. MJN is progressing well against our reiterated H2 target of "-2% to flat". The negatives were as stated, well known, the most significant point here looks to be that the decline in MJ revenue seen over last few years looks to have been arrested, that looks like a good indicator that RB can restore growth, essential to for the success of that acquisition. Maybe that was why the SP turned around, at least for now. Following the earlier posts kicked off by LKH on the "Portfolio Products", laundry products etc I had to smile to see that these were the star performers in the quarter with 8% growth LFL!The MJ news gave me confidence to add some into the dip. H2
valuemanbuyer
18 Oct 2017
Re: Why one should buy RB Thx 16th October
sage in the hills
17 Oct 2017
Re: Why one should buy RB valuemanbuyer...... nice report !What is the date of it please ?SAGE
valuemanbuyer
17 Oct 2017
Why one should buy RB I think this research explains the rationale for buying RB - their vast margin gap with competitors means they should be able to add massive value .‘Since June 2015 Reckitt Benckiser acquired Mead Johnson for £13bn. However, its market cap is now £10bn larger. In addition, the company disposed of its food operations for £3bn. We assume that Phizer consumer health has a 2% share of the sub-segment with implied sales around £2½bn. If successful in acquiring the Phizer business – which would bring Nurofen and Advil into the same fold – Reckitt’s global consumer health share would closely match GSK’s 5%, putting the company in joint second place behind J&J. We continue to recommend Reckitt Benckiser as a BUY and highlight the potential to consolidate global consumer health as a key attraction. Reckitt’s estimated 30% margins in the category compare with about 15% for the nonspecialists (i.e. drugs companies). It is in pole position to acquire these businesses and create value simultaneously. We base our 9000p price target on a 21x 2018 P/E ratio. BUY.’
sage in the hills
16 Oct 2017
Up and back Up 200p , and back 200p ...in the week gone....?SAGE
tomhawbuck
15 Oct 2017
Re: Remarkably expensive I think the only things I would like to contribute to this most interesting debate are firstly that I have more often regretted selling a share only to see it rise subsequently than I have regretted hanging onto dogs in the hope they will rise eventually (that's just my subjective experience and it doesn't chime with Kaneman's views on loss aversion. He would say I should be more concerned about avoiding losses than missing out on profits, I think) Second, there seems to be some idea (see John Authers in yesterday's FT inter alia) that the increased prominence of index trackers in the market means that successful shares will continue to rise because as money flows into the index trackers, they will need to buy more of the shares which are rising to maintain the balance of their portfolio. There is an equally persuasive argument that this is not so. I guess you need to weigh things up and decide for yourself and, in particular, not to focus too much on the ratios but to see how companies are doing in the real world. Which is one of the strengths of these boards.
Bill1703
15 Oct 2017
Re: Remarkably expensive "... if you're comparing good and bad investments here surely you have to allow comparison over the same time period?..."Dogberto - yes, for a proper like-for-like comparative analysis - my point was merely by way of illustration, to address the specific debate in question, ie. is it ever at all relevant how well a stock has done for you in the past, when you assess the (always crucial) question of what you think it will do in the future. "... so therefore the £81 buy trade could also be considered good in 10 years time... Unless you are looking at a short term trade (<1 year) then timing becomes more irrelevant in my view. Obviously taking on board all your points, assuming you still think RB is a good investment today with another good 10 years ahead."I agree, precise timing is less relevant the more long term your horizon... but not totally irrelevant, given the rules of compounding returns. Any old stock can return 10%+ in any one year, and virtually all of them do, at one time or another... but it's a much smaller group that can sustain 10%+ CAGR over 10 years, as RB has now done, as we speak. And out of these, it's a significantly smaller group again that has done it over, say, 25 years (answers on a postcard? RB has not quite managed it, by my calculation - but very close!)No reason at all why the £81 trade cannot look like a very good investment, one day... but equally, there can be no guarantees it ever will and, IMHO, there are good reasons why this day may well be a long way away, if it ever does.From £72 today, it's a wild guess as to how it does over the next 10 years - my best guess is it will do okay over this period, but maybe no better - hence my HOLD rather than BUY opinion, as per earlier posts. I think I can get better returns (annualised) elsewhere, with at least some of a number of stocks I am looking at currently... but of course, I could easily be wrong!
Dogberto
15 Oct 2017
Re: Remarkably expensive 'But, you are an excitable new investor and buy into RB - and the "only going one way" hype - at £81, then you are looking at a negative return of 17% in just four months (FWIW a CAGR of more than minus 50%!) No two ways about it... that is a BAD investment. Albeit only a snapshot in time, and the stock has recovered somewhat since... although it's still well down.'I think if you're comparing good and bad investments here surely you have to allow comparison over the same time period? The original hypothetical investment made 10 years ago would have had some dips along the way, probably close to -17% and this ultimately was considered a good investment, so therefore the £81 buy trade could also be considered good in 10 years time. I think the key here is length of investment and future prospects of the company. Unless you are looking at a short term trade (<1 year) then timing becomes more irrelevant in my view. Obviously taking on board all your points, assuming you still think RB is a good investment today with another good 10 years ahead.
