Centrica Share Discussion Threads

[wi1l] 24/11/2017 09:23

Let the dust(/panic) settle for a few days. The yield at 9% is my main attraction and reason to buy at these levels. Surely the institutions will fall over themselves to buy CNA offering such a return. So long as the dividend is maintained that is and not cut it can only rise from this level......can't it?? IMHO

[portside1] 24/11/2017 09:16

i will post again CNA should buy back stock stop the div or even cut the div by half and buy back with the other cash . I would if I was the ceo stop divs till share issue of around 4b saving the company on future divs

[mj19] 24/11/2017 09:06

Hard to see it climb up at the moment.. only reason may be it's oversold...so we might get a small rise

[w1ndjammer] 24/11/2017 09:05

There has to be profit in selling gas and electric, or there is not a company
in the world that would not turn and walk away. just watch the lights start to go out.
this is a long game. As long as no divi cut i am happy to hold even if the share price is static for the next 3 years. £27 billion revenue,i am sure £670 million divi is acceptable.

WJ.

[gregpeck7] 24/11/2017 08:53

This is nothing like a Marconi, govt is basically getting energy companies to do their dirty work. If they are not careful there will not be any... They don't want to do it themselves (although they pretend they would)...

I think we will see calmer waters ahead.. The govt will not want to be destroying a British institution like British gas, whatever the public rhetoric.

[minerve] 24/11/2017 08:46

careful

I got hit by Marconi. Real sad affair that was. Cisco was a darling back then but if you had bought into them during the .com boom your return to date would be very poor. I think the same will happen for current tech investors in some of the US stocks.

I don't think this is a Marconi though and I don't see how everyone can blame Conn for the situation.

I am confident that things will turn here.

[hamhamham1] 24/11/2017 08:44

Careful. Its hard to see what will stop this from drifting over the next 3 months I guess? If you got rid of Conn would that be seen as a good thing or bad? (as he has implemented a lot of his plans already). If new person at the helm - what direction would he/she take it? There are good businesses within the group.

[1fox1] 24/11/2017 08:42

I was wondering could the government actually do a Railtrack on Centrica?

[careful] 24/11/2017 08:37

Conn seems to have hopeless judgement.
spookily reminds us of Marconi.
In that case, bungling Simpson and Mayo exited all of the steady boring businesses of the then GEC.
they focussed on the wrong sector, telecommunications equipment.
Disaster, they went into the one sector that they should have been leaving.
Went bust from a £36bn cap.

Conn has made the same mistake.
Hard to see how this will turn out well.

Still, who am I to talk.
I bought into CNA, assuming competent management.

[mj19] 24/11/2017 08:20

This divi would be cut but this guy wants to keep his job. Better to do the right thing for the companies long term future now

[nortic 007] 24/11/2017 07:24

Makes a change for GS. They normally stick the golden boot in after a profits warning. Never been a fan of GS.

[nortic 007] 24/11/2017 06:58

Now we know what Iain Conn was up to. On Monday, the Centrica boss popped up with plans to end his rip-off gas and 'leccy tariffs: news he wanted out of the way before yesterday's trading update in case it completely upstaged it.Well, Mr Conn can relax. The update has arrived in all its naked glory. And guess what? It couldn't have been upstaged by anything. It's just produced Centrica's worst ever day on the stock market, with the shares diving 15 per cent to 138p. Quite a shocker, then. Not least for Kepler Cheuvreux analysts who'd just issued a 263-page buy note.Investors already knew that Mr Conn had a big problem with Theresa May - in his case over her energy price caps, set to wreck the margins of UK arm British Gas. So, credit to Mr Conn for diverting attention elsewhere - to the group's dismal efforts in America. It's the key reason analysts lopped £190 million off their pre-tax profits forecasts, with earnings per share estimates cut from 15.2p to 12.5p. Not only that. The profits howitzer has raised fresh questions over the sustainability of the 12p dividend, costing £650 million a year. And over Mr Conn's strategy, too.When he pitched up in January 2015, the shares topped 280p. Halving them was not in the script when he cut the dividend by 30 per cent and refocused Centrica as an asset-lite "customer-facing business" - a pursuit accompanied by selling UK power stations, exploration assets in Canada and Trinidad & Tobago and getting out of wind power. He's also axed 5,000 jobs.Mr Conn would insist he's picked the right strategy. But, he looks to have underestimated both political and market risk, and compounded that with poor execution. In North America, competition from the likes of Exelon and Just Energy has crushed Centrica's margins for supplying business customers, while a £46 million revenue recognition charge hardly inspires confidence in the accounting or billing systems. Meantime, in Britain, British Gas has lost a stunning 823,000 customer accounts since June.Moreover, as Bernstein analysts pointed out, being "blind-sided" by America is "strike two for management" after a botched 200p-a-share fundraising in May 2016. That took £1.1 billion off Centrica's market value - to raise £700 million. As Bernstein put it: "We believe management credibility with investors is now at an all-time low". A "deeply disappointed" Mr Conn urged analysts not to think "the whole portfolio is unreliable".Yet, the shares now yield 8.7 per cent, with the dividend just once covered. True, dividends are paid from cashflow. But his line that Centrica would be "willing to operate with dividend cover . . . below historic levels" is from a man who knows a second dividend cut would cost him his job. And you expect more from a man paid £4.2 million last year and £3 million in 2015 than 50 per cent off the shares. Mr Conn has much to do to prove he's value for money.

[nortic 007] 24/11/2017 06:55

Centrica grasps for regulatory certaintyThe group has put forward alternative proposals for improving competition, as an alternative to capping priceshttps://newsstandapp.investorschronicle.co.uk/wp-content/ft_images/38881-pugpig_ic_heroImageURL.jpgTOM DINESThe prospect of an energy price cap has been weighing on the big six energy suppliers for months now. Most recently it reared its head in the form of a draft bill from the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, which proposed a temporary cap on the much-maligned standard variable tariff (SVT). In that context, it is understandable that energy majors Centrica (CNA) and SSE (SSE) would seek to regain control over their fortunes. >On a wider scale, the company – quite self-importantly – put together a series of proposals for the government and industry regulator OfgemCentrica has unveiled a series of plans to reform its retail operations. Its proposals were suitably bold: withdrawing the SVT entirely for new customers in favour of fixed-term tariffs, beefing up product lines and looking to increase engagement and reward loyalty from customers, including reaching out to those who were on a legacy SVT scheme specifically with new offers. It also said it would simplify bills to aid switching and committed to improving customer services and overall efficiency.On a wider scale, the company – quite self-importantly – put together a series of proposals for the government and industry regulator Ofgem. These are consistent with much of what outspoken Centrica chief executive Iain Conn has been saying in interviews in recent months. The group called for the end of the SVT altogether, along with all tariffs without an end date, measures to facilitate smart meter and prepayment meter roll-out and steps to change the "prescriptive nature" of customer bills.The proposals take particular aim at the cost of energy policy, calling for it to either be shared among all suppliers or met from general taxation rather than through consumer energy bills as it is now. At present smaller energy suppliers are exempt from charging customers for various social and environmental policies. Ofgem data as of August 2017 shows environmental and social obligation costs make up 8 per cent of the average dual fuel bill.https://www.ft.com/__origami/service/image/v2/images/raw/https%3A%2F%2Fs3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com%2Fft-ic-prod%2Fez%2Fimages%2F4%2F5%2F7%2F7%2F3177754-1-eng-GB%2FNewsSpotlight_2411.jpg?source=invchronEarlier this month, SSE appeared to have all but given up on the UK's domestic supply market, announcing its intention to spin out its household energy supply division to be combined with big six rival Npower. A spokesperson for Ofgem said a merger "would not be in customers' interests". While SSE shareholders would retain ownership of 65.6 per cent of the merged business, the move hints at a distaste for the household energy market, especially given management's plans to hold on to the business supply division.Implementing these measures would hurt margins at Centrica, according to analysts at RBC Capital Markets, although they add that they "must make a price cap less likely". Given RBC's previous estimates that a price cap could cut as much as 30 per cent from Centrica's 2018 EPS, even self-flagellating action that reduces the likelihood of a cap seems prudent.It seems inconceivable that the big six would take the prospect of a price cap lying down. Expect more attempts to undermine the need or rationale for regulation. Policies to increase competition in the energy market have shown some promise, but the risk of further government intervention remains high. SSE has a higher proportion of its retail supply customers on the standard variable tariff than Centrica, at 91 per cent, compared with the latter's 74 per cent. However, given Centrica's decision to focus on its customer-facing operations, the threat of a price cap arguably looms larger over Centrica's future growth potential.

[philanderer] 24/11/2017 00:10

EI, that FT article has certainly put the boot in and then some ! :-O

[andyj] 24/11/2017 00:07

There is little reason for short term optimism. A loss of 823,000 customers sounds horrific, but is actually only 6%. All the businesses are under pressure, then there is price cap, the threat of Corbyn etc. Plenty of reasons to sell, or at least not to buy. But amidst such fear calm minds, that look to 3 years ahead, see a good opportunity. A guaranteed 8% plus yield, while we wait too.

[losses] 24/11/2017 00:06

Cna 20% of my portfolio.. average 151.Hoping div holds and in a years time could be above 200 as well.

[essentialinvestor] 23/11/2017 22:38

Interesting article in the FT tonight on CNA. Not an optimistic overview.

[diku] 23/11/2017 21:38

That is normal procedure...do any of other board members speak out?...that is what is lacking within Plc...Because it is never the CEO's fault within Plc casino markets...always outside factors...

[dr biotech] 23/11/2017 21:36

Questions are

1) Why did the CEO get a 40% pay rise last year
2) Does anyone have confidence in him or the board to turn things around?

credibility is very hard to get back after its been shot to pieces. I continue to hold..

[minerve] 23/11/2017 21:34

When we choose not to renew our contract with the likes of British Gas we are only robbing ourselves.

Do these tin-pot outfits invest in infrastructure?
Do these tin-pot outfits pay dividends to thousands of shareholders and pensions?
Who will eventually pay for neglect of infrastructure in the future?
Who really benefits if the tin-pot outfit gains your business?

Stick with British Gas. These tin-pot outfits have done nothing to deserve your business.

Why grease a few monkeys and their hoes with your money?

Know the value of something and not the price of everything.

[diku] 23/11/2017 21:28

Guys now we all know why the price was so weak for some time...those in the know knew it...and don't tell me news leaky doesn't happen!!...

[minerve] 23/11/2017 21:25

supermarky

Shame we don't own 50% each, eh?

[warranty] 23/11/2017 21:22

A solid and reliable company and for me a core energy business for the U.K. Which I doubt the government would allow to be taken over by a foreigner. Surely common sense must prevail at some point and the Tories must realise the damage they are doing to businesses they rely on to keep the lights working. Shares generally overshoot at both ends and this may well be the case here. Got to be worth a punt at this level even if They do slip further over the near term.