Northamber Share Discussion Threads

[rainmaker] 22/2/2010 08:43

Moving up nicely, 47p/52p.IMHO plenty more upside from current levels.

regards

[rainmaker] 20/2/2010 18:46

Agreed Des, they're running a tight ship-they've ruthlessly controlled costs.

regards

[deswalker] 20/2/2010 12:57

RM - after the turnaround in the second half of last year and the first half of this they should be back up trading much closer to TBV of 89p per share. The company seems to be much leaner and meaner now and would be much more profitable on any upturn in sales. Gross Margin is improving and Operating Expenses have been slashed. Good work by management IMO.

[rainmaker] 20/2/2010 08:48

At the current offer of 50p,there's an historic 3.2% dividend yield but due to a very strong balance sheet,a large hike in the dividend is perfectly possible with the next set of results, if they report any sign of an upturn. They've just announced a 0.6p interim dividend payable on 31 March and they go ex dividend on 6 March.

regards

[rainmaker] 20/2/2010 08:36

Hi Des,edging higher now 45p bid- I make cash 46p a share and despite no reported change in outlook, like Titon Holdings(TON),I expect this share to continue to make steady progress from current levels.It's just too cheap.

regards

[deswalker] 18/2/2010 08:10

Interims out. Much improved on last year, especially the cash generation.

[rainmaker] 06/1/2010 16:28

That's more like it, 40p/45p

regards

[rainmaker] 04/1/2010 19:06

Still v cheap after todays rise

regards

[cwa1] 10/12/2009 16:19

25,000 at 33p. Small beer but excellent bit of business getting them at that price IMHO.

[liarspoker] 10/12/2009 16:02

25,000 share buy back and cancellation.

[cwa1] 10/12/2009 10:17

Hmmmm. That 35,000 dump at 30p might well have had something to do with it.....

[cwa1] 10/12/2009 10:00

Looking unhappy this morning. Anyone heard anything?

[rainmaker] 03/12/2009 20:16

Interesting MM drop the offer and bang someone's in for 8k

regards

[liarspoker] 17/11/2009 16:16

Increase in stock should mean increase in sales.

[cwa1] 17/11/2009 16:05

Not giving TOO much away are they? But sounds about as good as it gets under the circumstances.

[liarspoker] 17/11/2009 15:59

Yep, I agree. :O)

[deswalker] 17/11/2009 15:52

Looks like a decent IMS to me.

[cwa1] 10/11/2009 11:14

Nice to see a little tick up so far today. Possibly AGM related? If so, maybe more to come? Fingers crossed.

[cwa1] 09/11/2009 08:08

AGM tomorrow. Anyone expecting fireworks ;-)

Seriously though, anyone going?

[liarspoker] 26/10/2009 17:22

10 year net working cap study vs high - low share price for the year.

1) Year 2) N.W.C p/ diluted share 3 ) High share price for year 4) Low share price for the year

2009 78.78p 45p 26p
2008 77.86p 68p 41p
2007 88.47p 69p 63p
2006 76.77p 98p 63.5p
2005 76.71p 118p 75p
2004 74.70p 100p 55p
2003 72.11p 82p 49p
2002 72.48p 88p 55p
2001 73.85p 140p 73p
2000 84.01p 183p 76p

Net working cap seems to be fairly constant ( between 74p & 84p p/s ) here as opposed to increasing ( such as the HDT study I did earlier today ( see HDT thread ).

[liarspoker] 21/10/2009 19:45

Here's an interesting subject - first read the following ( from Ben Graham ):

Those of you who are familiar with our textbook know that we recommend "the comparative balance sheet approach" for various reasons, one of which is to obtain a check on the reported earnings. In the war period just finished that is particularly important because the reported earnings have been affected by a number of abnormal influences, the true nature of which can be understood only by a study of balance sheet developments.

I have put on the blackboard a simple comparative example to illustrate this point. It is not particularly spectacular. It occurred to me because I observed that early this year Transue Williams and Buda Company both sold at the same high price, namely $33 1/2 a share; and in studying the companies' record I could see that buyers could easily have been misled by the ordinary procedure of looking at the reported earnings per share as they appear, let us say, in Standard Statistics reports.

Now, as to procedure: First, the balance sheet comparison is a relatively simple idea. You take the equity for the stock at the end of the period, you subtract the equity at the beginning of the period, and the difference is the gain. That gain should be adjusted for items that do not relate to earnings, and there should be added back the dividends paid. Then you get the earnings for the period as shown by the balance sheet.

. In the case of Transue Williams the final stock equity was $2,979,000, of which $60,000 had come from the sale of stock, so that the adjusted equity would be $2,919,000. The indicated earnings were $430,000, or $3.17 a share. The transfer to a per share basis can be made at any convenient time that you wish. Dividends added back of $9.15 give you earnings per balance sheet of $12.32. But if you look at the figures that I have in the Standard Statistics reports, you would see that they add up to $14.73 for the ten years, so that the company actually lost $2.41 somewhere along the line.

The Buda situation is the opposite. We can take either the July 31, 1945 date or the July 31, 1946 date. It happens that only yesterday the July 31, 1946 figures came in, but it's a little simpler to consider July, 1945 for this purpose. We find there that the equity increased $4,962,000 or $25.54 per share, the dividends were much less liberal -- $4.20; indicated earnings per balance sheet, $29.74, but in the income account only $24.57. So this company did $5.17 better than it showed, if you assume that the reserves as given in the balance sheet are part of the stockholder's equity and do not constitute a liability of the company.



Then try to work it out using the last financial year for NAR. I must admit it has me baffled a little. I can't get them to balance.

[davius] 11/10/2009 22:40

Indeed. Well over a thousand over the years, let me know what spec you're looking for.

:0)

[alcatraz10] 11/10/2009 17:04

Davius

do you build pc's?

im interested in a price if u do.

[davius] 11/10/2009 13:56

I don't have the numbers for Northamber MS OEM sales so can't comment accurately on how it will affect them, but I have to say that I've never bought MS OEM from Northamber as they've not been particularly well priced when compared to Ingram Micro. I doubt they'll be losing any sleep over this loss from their product list, though it will no doubt have a minor effect on the bottom line. They do however, have good pricing on MOLP and this year (in August) I put a £10K order their way that last year went to Ingram Micro, and the year before to Computer 2000.

I doubt Northamber will drop MS generally, in fact when you log into their trade web site the front page offers all of the Windows 7 variants as the first purchase option (release date 22nd October). It's also worth noting that Office OEM product can only be sold with new PCs. The larger manufacturers such as Dell have their own agreements in place so this only affects the smaller builders (such as myself) and then only those supplied to home users and businesses (educational customer get cheaper pricing via MOLP) and only for MS Office.

[rainmaker] 10/10/2009 22:29

Thanks LP,I really enjoyed the Walter Schloss interview-sometimes a bit hard to figure out where the next line started but well worth the effort!

I have already seen the Video and have enormous respect for Walter Schloss. He doesn't own a Computer and looks up all the numbers himself in publications like S&P and Value Line. He has a great track record. We know from the Video that 1)He doesn't like losing money and 2)He doesn't like Companies with too much debt.

But the thing that really impresses me about him and left a lasting impression is that his good character, decency and integrity which really shone through. Walter Schloss is a multi multi millionaire who could have retired decades ago. Yet here he was, sitting politely and thoughtfully listening to questions then respectfully giving carefully considered replies.He warns about getting involved with the wrong types of People and the importance of being truthful and quotes Mark Twain "If I tell the truth, I don't need to remember".

My theory is that all great Value Investors are deeply moral People with a strong ethical code.I've also noticed they appear to be dogmatic- either something is right or wrong-there is no middle ground and I think they apply the same standards to buying shares-either a share is deeply undervalued with a significant margin of safety and should be bought or it isn't.They also seem to possess a unshakeable faith in the "right" numbers.

regards