600 Share Discussion Threads

[bigdazzler] 03/7/2014 12:39

Bullish article in shares magazine today. Generally stating market had failed to recognise positive trends in the company results from June so far which was allowing investors to still get exposure at an attractive valuation.

Article is full page in the mag for anyone interested.

[cjohn] 02/7/2014 11:08

I look forward to that.

[hastings] 02/7/2014 08:39

Hi C John, spoke yesterday, sounds pretty upbeat and will post thoughts at the weekend.

[cjohn] 30/6/2014 09:53

Hi Hastings,

If you do speak to the CEO, it would be great if you could write about the conversation here.

Thanks


CJohn

[hastings] 26/6/2014 11:25

Very good summary's prop joe and cjohn. I should have been speaking with the CEO today but unable to do so from my end. Hopefully catch up next week.Also thought results and forward picture were decent and very comfortable to hold.

[prop_joe] 26/6/2014 10:30

rburtn,

I don't claim to be a great expert on pension accounting but have some knowledge (I am an accountant). As CJohn says there are different ways of calculating future pension fund liabilities and different methods are required to be used for different purposes.

Accounting standards require the current value of the all the future predicted pension payments to be calculated using the interest rate on quality corporate bonds, whereas the actuarial valuation uses the gilt rate. As gilts are considered extremely safe the gilt interest rate is always lower than the corporate bond rate and so an actuarial valuation results in an apparently worse situation than the deficit included in the balance sheet.

Of course, any method is attempting to estimate what will happen between now and a very distant point in the future so the one certainty is that what will actually happen will be different to either calculation! However, I think both figures are useful to bear in mind in deciding whether a share is good value or not.

As CJohn says the scheme's assets have outperformed the modest target set by the actuary and so this has reduced the actuarial deficit when it was recalculated. Likewise if the gilt rate had increased between the calculation dates it would also have led to a reduction in the actuarial valuation deficit as it would have reduced the present value of all the expected future pension payments.

Hope this is of some help!

PS I thought the results were good and also believe SIXH is undervalued.
Regards

[cjohn] 26/6/2014 09:01

Bear in mind that SIXH have very large pension funds. There are different ways of calculating likely future liabilities and as the funds are so large, these can produce significant variations in the calculated surplus and déficit.

The critical point is that the necessary return on scheme assets to cover liablitiies on the most pessimistic basis of calculation is very modest. Gilt yields plus 1%. In the last few months, the scheme assets have outperformed this modest benchmark. So there has been a marked reduction in the assumed liablity under this way of calculating.

No pension payments are required for several years, when there will be another re-consideration. The most likely outcome is that there will be no payment required at that time either.

The results are Ok and if the increased order book translates into increased sales, there could be marked progress here.

[rburtn] 26/6/2014 08:42

What does one make of a pension fund surplus of 20m reduced to a 25m deficit for technical provisions - what the heck are these provisions. Seems like some excuse for paying a very large sum - 50m to have it taken off one's hands. Then we read the figures suddenly become deficit 15 and buyout 35. It seems to me that shareholders are due some rather more detailed explanation for what is a massive sum swinging around at the whim of those men of great integrity(!) - the financial services industry - no matter the time over which it can be amortised.

Nevertheless, this company is well undervalued IMO, it just ain't being made clear. Maybe the next candidate for an MBO?

[paleje] 24/6/2014 11:19

US manufacturing highest in 4 years, bodes well for an optimistic outlook statement on Thursday.

[blondeamon] 27/5/2014 12:27

You're sore you didn't buy before huh? :)

[dan_the_epic] 27/5/2014 12:09

WOW.

THE ONLY REAASON simon THOMPSON has a good track record is BECAUSE

HE KEEPS RETIPPING HIS TIPS OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVEr AGAIN. WHAT A MUG

IDIOT

[manrobert] 07/5/2014 12:03

some large late trades which you would think would be buys?

[hastings] 17/4/2014 14:07

Cheers for that, appreciated, off to WH Smith this pm. I feel it could be a really decent recovery play. Used to be a high yielder and steady performer around 14 yrs ago!Poor management, lack of investment, cheap imports and the subsequent Global recession hammered it. New team, CEO turning it around.

[bleuville] 17/4/2014 13:48

Yes H, it's a full page article entitled "Tooled up for recovery. A small-cap engineer is primed for a profit surge and is also a possible bid target". Simon Thompson has identified 600 as "showing all the traits I look for in a recovery play". Hope he's right! Worth a trip to your local WHS for a crafty read! Cheers B

[hastings] 17/4/2014 13:33

Hi Bleuville, is it a largish write up in the IC ?Cheers H

[bleuville] 17/4/2014 13:00

Thanks for that Hastings, an interesting read. Worth reading Simon Thompson's detailed article in today's IC. Seems like interest in 600 is on the increase which, together with the recent award of options to the directors with an exercise price of 17p, is hopefully pointing to a northbound share price

[hastings] 17/4/2014 11:06

A few words that may interest others taking a look.http://www.privatepunter.co.uk/Behind-the-Scene/more-on-600-group-16-april-2014

[spob] 14/4/2014 13:31

wow this thread has a chart

never seen one of those before

[melodrama] 14/4/2014 12:43

lol IC Tip

[melodrama] 14/4/2014 12:14

sudden buying flurry

[hikmetyzb] 09/4/2014 12:14

just put a buy order at 19p. wish everyone the best of luck

[rp19] 09/4/2014 09:53

Hastings - Any views on the comments above about the level of options awarded to senior staff?