ADVFN Logo

We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.

Trending Now

Toplists

It looks like you aren't logged in.
Click the button below to log in and view your recent history.

Hot Features

Registration Strip Icon for default Register for Free to get streaming real-time quotes, interactive charts, live options flow, and more.

ACZ Autoclenz

32.50
0.00 (0.00%)
28 Mar 2024 - Closed
Delayed by 15 minutes
Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Autoclenz LSE:ACZ London Ordinary Share GB00B0N59376 ORD 10P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  0.00 0.00% 32.50 - 0.00 00:00:00
Industry Sector Turnover Profit EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap
0 0 N/A 0

Autoclenz Share Discussion Threads

Showing 151 to 172 of 250 messages
Chat Pages: 10  9  8  7  6  5  4  3  2  1
DateSubjectAuthorDiscuss
31/8/2011
07:58
Interims out:

H1 EBITDA = £0.875 mill. Being prudent assume it does £1.6 mill EBITDA for the year.

Net Debt = £0.91 mill and at 40p the Market Cap = £4.16 mill so EV = £5.07 mill.

So I think we're looking at a 2011 EBITDA / EV ratio of circa 31.6% and quite a bit higher if one projects out 18 months or so.

Trading remains tough there's no doubt and echoes what I guess we're all hearing in many sectors - namely that things haven't got any better these last 2 years and maybe even worse. But IMO ACZ are riding it out very well, generating cash and will benefit if the country ever gets out of the mess its in and car sales start to improve. I've little doubt that they are making the operation as lean as possible in anticipation.

IMO, DYOR

Des

deswalker
16/6/2011
16:02
Des,

Am available earlier than expected. Until a couple of months ago I have been close to fully invested for at least a couple of years. That was certainly why I paid little attention to your TMF post of March this year. I don't recall seeing a similar post this time last year but if I did the reaction would have been similar.

My performance has been quite good during the past 12 months but I have little doubt that you did far better than me in 2008, from whence it took me the whole of 2009 and 2010 to retrieve the situation (excludes dividends). Your approach offers far better protection from the downside.

My investing ability is based solely on the numbers and I don't seem able to smell what the retail punter wants at all. IMO CR is the exact opposite to me and is much more successful.

My approach is also very numbers oriented, initially at least, but probably not always the same numbers as yours. Asset values do much less for me than cash flow and growth trends. External factors such as recovery potential and/or sector environment are also be important to me.

I am much more inclined to try to anticipate what an institutional investor would look for rather than a retail punter, as it is the former which will largely determine the share price of most shares. Of course that becomes less true the lower you go in terms of market value.

CR might be a canny investor but out of you and he, I know which one I would prefer to invite to a dinner party.

So, do you avoid market caps below a certain number ? Avoid AIM shares ? Look at PEG ratios ? Look at Bulletin Board chatter ?

I don't avoid low market cap shares but in such cases do need to be much more convinced about the upside, hence I only have a few. Although careful about AIM shares I own several. I think PEG ratios are a dated, simplistic tool, more suited to Investor's Chronicle articles prior to the internet. I detest and skip most bulletin board chatter, especially that on some ADVFN boards but pay a great deal of attention to and have learned much from a selected few contributors.

I'm just bloody curious why my (IMO) ultra cheap but ultra quiet shares refuse to gain any traction whilst all sorts of stuff I wouldn't hold at current levels (such as STAF) have had such great runs. It's driving me mad :o)

Hard for me to comment on your ultra cheapies because apart from ACZ the only one I looked at relatively recently was WORK but got put off by the spread. You make STAF sound expensive. prospective P/E's of 9.2 and 8.4. Yield 2.9% and 3.4%. Habit of analyst upgrades. Debt 28% of historic ebitda. True, you need to have a view on growth potential. You have presumably got your eye some other factor.

I think the thing I don't understand is just how much the market is willing to pay for profit growth whilst also choosing to ignore flat profit but free-cash generative companies almost no-matter how much the valuation discrepancy between the two. It's almost as though the market equates flat profit with a dying business and hence completely discounts the share even though there is no sign of such a death from the company themselves.

You may well be on to something here. Perhaps I'm going to find out with ACZ! I tend to look for companies that are growing AND have good free cash flow characteristics.

I think the other thing I ignore from my invesment decisions is illiquidity. I tend to deal in very illiquid stuff which has no institutional or broker support. Better investors than me are able to see that they need to pay a bit or even quite a lot more on the metrics in order to get into a share with better liquidity and market visibility and hence see a moving share price instead of a horizontal line. Meanwhile I just sit and wait for corporate actions as the apparent only way my shares can reach their true worth and as these come so rarely there is a lot of opportunity cost lost.

I can't comment constructively on this either because it is not what I do but will say that it has the smell of a very honest and accurate assessment, which must be the first step toward even a small step in the direction of changing one's strategy in search of improvement.

I can't see me changing my strategy any time soon as I'm fully invested in shares that I regard to be equally cheap as ACZ, and my success or failure will be judged by what I own now not by any new investments.

It's probably important not to change anything too much or too soon. We are all in the process of developing skills that suit our own personalities and capabilities. It will also be true that what you have and will work out for yourself will be far more important that my waffling!

wilmdav
15/6/2011
22:37
Des,

Interesting comments. I suspect SteMiS is chuckling in the background because he knows of some of the clangers I have dropped in the not too distant past! I would like to devote a little time my reply because these are important questions to me as well as you. Tomorrow I have to deal with a sticky legal situation of my own, so you might not hear from me until Friday.

Wilmdav

wilmdav
15/6/2011
16:36
Wilmdav,

Good links. Thanks.

I agree with you that they are likely to lose, that the settlement will not be too severe and that the share price appears to reflect a lot worse than that. Reading between the lines I believe this to be Mr Leek's view too.

In an attempt to help me as an investor can you say why you weren't interested in this share when it was flagged this time last year ?

I have no doubt that your performance has been much better than mine this past 12 months enjoying nice GARP type rallies whilst I sit on what I regard as ultra-cheap "special situation" type shares like this which have flatlined and hence effectively got cheaper and cheaper as the cash position has increased.

My investing ability is based solely on the numbers and I don't seem able to smell what the retail punter wants at all. IMO CR is the exact opposite to me and is much more successful.

So, do you avoid market caps below a certain number ? Avoid AIM shares ? Look at PEG ratios ? Look at Bulletin Board chatter ?

I'm just bloody curious why my (IMO) ultra cheap but ultra quiet shares refuse to gain any traction whilst all sorts of stuff I wouldn't hold at current levels (such as STAF) have had such great runs. It's driving me mad :o)

I think the thing I don't understand is just how much the market is willing to pay for profit growth whilst also choosing to ignore flat profit but free-cash generative companies almost no-matter how much the valuation discrepancy between the two. It's almost as though the market equates flat profit with a dying business and hence completely discounts the share even though there is no sign of such a death from the company themselves.

I think the other thing I ignore from my invesment decisions is illiquidity. I tend to deal in very illiquid stuff which has no institutional or broker support. Better investors than me are able to see that they need to pay a bit or even quite a lot more on the metrics in order to get into a share with better liquidity and market visibility and hence see a moving share price instead of a horizontal line. Meanwhile I just sit and wait for corporate actions as the apparent only way my shares can reach their true worth and as these come so rarely there is a lot of opportunity cost lost.

I can't see me changing my strategy any time soon as I'm fully invested in shares that I regard to be equally cheap as ACZ, and my success or failure will be judged by what I own now not by any new investments.

Frustrated rant over. Any thoughts appreciated.

Des

deswalker
15/6/2011
15:24
Des

You may well have looked at the following already but just in case not, here are a few google links to the case. The most informative and latest is the last one.














As you say, a fine does not look likely, only payment of benefits to employees (if that is how the Supreme Court classifies them). My amateur guess is that ACZ will lose but the share price appears to reflect a lot worse than that.

wilmdav
15/6/2011
11:41
Wilmdav,

The series was on a couple of months ago so don't know it it is still available on i-player. It was good tv though, looking at the workings of the top court in the land.

Don't mention STAF to me. As usual I sold it way too soon making a good profit but not perceiving just how much value the market would give to its growth profile (IMV wrongly). I also just missed it on the recent dip too. A GARP share at anything much above 160p IMO and I prefer deeper value. I don't know how the ACZ verdict would affect STAF as it is more to do with the difference between full employment and self employment but I'll leave that for you.

Finally, on the court case. From what I can gather nobody is suggesting that ACZ acted improperly in any way. They just interpreted the law one way and drew up contracts in accordance with this interpretation and the Unite union disagreed. Consequently to me it doesn't seem too likely that any negative verdict would involve a fine or penalty above the required compensation to the individuals concerned, as it is simply a grey area of the law that needs clarifying. I might be wrong but that is my understanding.

Des

deswalker
14/6/2011
16:42
Hi Des,

Presumably the BBC4 series might be available on i-Player. Do you have a key-word that might find it?

From what you say I suspect the case is even more important to STAF, an employment agency I hold (not your sort of share I think). They specialise in temporary blue collar workers.

wilmdav
14/6/2011
14:33
Thanks, Des.

I was fully invested when you first wrote this up elsewhere, so didn't pay much attention. If my recollection of what you look out for is correct the financials must tick all your boxes.

To tell the truth, I refrained from posting elsewhere to avoid too much publicity (a)to allow more time to have a closer look (b) take advantage of a pull back if Rathbone sell any more, and (c) see what happens at the court case (supposed to be in May).

ACZ is on my web site but that only gets 2 or 3 hits a day unless I post a link to it.

wilmdav
14/6/2011
08:06
Ste,

Fair enough on the publicity front.

Also having met Mr Leek I'm not quite so sure as you that he will have looked at that angle. He struck me as a bit too content with the status-quo until at least after the court case but also beyond. I would like him to be a bit more proactive right now, although he may well be right to wait for the verdict first. Beyond that however, it is time to start enriching shareholders by one way or another IMO - whether that be divis, buybacks, promoting the share or even starting the search for a possible suitor. I wonder whether an operation such as NARS might be interested ? They are making a big deal of their mobile repair business which is not so unrelated to ACZ.

Re buybacks, I don't think it's lack of authority as we addressed that at the AGM IIRC. Better uses for the cash ? Perhaps but I suspect they are throwing off more than enough to afford the shares too. Uncertainty over the court case is almost certainly the reason IMO. Fingers crossed it will not drag on too long.

Good to see you and now Wilmdav involved anyway :o)

Des

deswalker
14/6/2011
07:48
Des,

In true Buffet style [:-/] I'm not sure I want to publicise ACZ. If they are going to buy back shares at some point I'd rather the shares were lowly, unloved and cheap, lol.

Knowing him to some extent, I'd be surprised if Leek hasn't considered buying back Rathbone's shares. So if they aren't doing it I imagine there is some reason (lack of authority, better uses for the cash, uncertainty over the court case).

Ste

stemis
13/6/2011
14:47
Des, SteMiS

Thanks for flagging this up. I have dipped a toe today.

wilmdav
10/6/2011
16:21
Hi SteMiS,

Nice to see that you've finally pulled the trigger. Hopefully you can use your reputation to publicise it a bit elsewhere :o)

Yesterday's RNS revealed where the shares are coming from, namely Rathbone. It has been a puzzle this past year as there has been a ready supply to go at (with me, the Helium fund and now you being virutally the only buyers).

I do hope Mr Leek is considering approaching Rathbone to take them out as that would seem to be his style, but maybe he is waiting for the Court verdict first. Why not give him a call to chew over ACZ, TDC and casually mention that a phone call to Rathbone might be an idea as big instis like them either want in or out and so are presumably happy to sell 5% at 40p ? I might make such a call myself next week. I doubt it would be the sort of thing the CEO or FD would be alert to as they felt very much like "day-to-day" men rather than corporate strategy guys as their shareholdings show.

The CEO Mr Rummery said that they had now paid off the debt but Mr Leek interjected that this wasn't strictly true quite yet, as I guess debt and other liabilities get mixed up more clearly when one is defining "debt-free". I know I calculate a debt number which includes some of the other liabilities (and assets) too.

Even so I'm sure they've got the headroom to make the purchase which would only be a couple of hundred thousand. It would be great to see Rathbone taken out by the company.

Just to echo my previous post. They gave the impression of being very happy and almost excited about the future. The court case is the only fly and the sooner that is resolved the better.

Des

deswalker
10/6/2011
10:44
I've just picked up a few (25,000 in 2 lots) at 41p. The spread is pretty painful but that's small cap investing for you.

The car valet service looks a good cash cow and the specialist cleaning is a potential area of growth. The debt should be pretty much paid off this year and then they have the cash to develop the business/shareholder value. I wonder if there are acquisitions that could bolt on in Specialist cleaning. I'm not sure ACZ will find it easy to buy back many of their shares as there probably aren't many available.

I think this will be a slow burner but if they keep on top of it then 75p in 2 years should be possible.

stemis
20/5/2011
16:18
Just a quick post cos my computer's playing up.

I was the only outside shareholder there, not just for this AGM but for quite a few years if ever as a plc ! They were all chuffed to see me.

I met many of the senior team and they were all very helpful, chatty and enthusiastic. I was impressed with some of the young blood they've got coming through.

They seem very happy with things and see lots of opportunities for growth which can be tried locally and rolled out nationally quite quickly if they work. They said their big skill is in managaing a lot of people across a large area and having the infrastruture to do it. IMO this is a huge strength of the company.

They are keen to get the court case resolved and then start thinking about promoting the company a bit more to improve the share price.

Mr Leek was very pleasant and seemed relaxed about things. He certainly didn't seem in any rush to start shouting about the company and was adamant that they are not going to start forecasting results for brokers etc. He mentioned buybacks as one possibility (as happened at TDC) but didn't seem quite so keen on big divi payments (although I think some divi growth is likely) preferring to be cautious. Generally caution in raising any market expectation seemed to be his byword and that suits me. I do wonder if he is thinking of enhancing value via buybacks over the medium term.

Operationally they have lots of new ideas and lots of new business to tender for. Their performance is more sensitive to used car sales than new cars as their margins are slimmer on the latter anyway. There are all sorts of cross-selling initiatives around combining valeting, small on-site repairs, medium on-site repairs and delivery movements that they are exploring. The property management business is developing well too and they made the point that their area of expertise (cleaning) is non-discretionary whereas it's areas such as the painting and decorating of these social houses etc that are feeling more of the pinch because they are deemed less necessary by the landlords.

I'm sure there's loads more but that'll do for now. As far as I'm concerned the only fly in the ointment with this share is the court case. The rest looks like a complete cashflow bargain to me with all sorts of possible avenues for growth going forward.

As for the court case, they stressed it was 20 employees who had exceptional and unusual work practices at one sight. They have already made provisions for at least some costs and possibly even some compensation too.

In sum, I was very impressed by the whole set-up and it felt like one of those old-fashioned well run businesses that knows how to deliver in good times and bad. I see no outer other than cashflow, divis and I have a sneeky feeling buybacks too if Mr Leek gets to work in due course.

Rgds to all I met at the meeting if you happen to check out this thread :o)

Des

deswalker
19/5/2011
07:57
Let us know how you get on. The statement looked pretty good overall. I wonder what sort of costs they are charging to the P&L for the Belcher case.
stemis
19/5/2011
06:28
Pleased with that AGM statement. I'm off to the meeting today.
deswalker
06/5/2011
11:46
Can't disagree that it is unclear who would buy the company at fair value as it's hardly in a growth sweet spot. But then fair value is a long way above here IMO.

The Helium fund clearly has an investment strategy as they have been adding over the last few years. That might just be based on cashflow metrics and dividends or perhaps they'll find a mutually attractive level for them and management. The explicit announcement of 75p in this morning's announcement could be interpreted as a "come and get me" ...

deswalker
06/5/2011
11:01
The concern here for me has always been exit strategy. Leek will want his money out at some point but I can't see who would be interested in buying the business unless they can diversify away from car valeting.
stemis
06/5/2011
07:35
Whilst I don't usually like to see options torn up and re-awarded, the RNS this morning looks pretty good to me. There is now a clear incentive for management and senior employees to meet the new eps, total return and also crucially share price targets.

Through the phantom option setup the CEO and FD each have a minimum of approx £80k in cold hard cash bonus riding on them getting the share price up to a minimum of 75p at some point in the next three years. That ought to see the CEO to retirement so he's going to do what he can to achieve as great a payout as possible and then call it a day IMO.

It may also set a "come and get me level" for any suitors, indicating that a management recommendation would be achieved should someone bid over that level. Such a suitor would almost certainly have to be the Helium Special Sits fund with 20.34% - if indeed they go for such public-to-private buyout investing.

On balance this RNS is pretty good news IMO.

deswalker
15/4/2011
15:55
Thanks rhubarbe

Des

I've had another look and I just don't like the business. It appears to have very, very low barriers to entry and requires virtually no skill and no capital.

I'll give this one a miss but keep an eye on it just to see how you get on. I reckon you've made a better bet on Gleesons myself.

My most recent purchase is BVM which I reckon could double or maybe even treble from 5p.

All the best,

arthur_lame_stocks
29/3/2011
21:06
Nice handle. ;)
rhubarbe
29/3/2011
21:04
I'll have another look!
arthur_lame_stocks
Chat Pages: 10  9  8  7  6  5  4  3  2  1

Your Recent History

Delayed Upgrade Clock