|I've had the same experience Mooch. Finally got something from e trade on 03.07 to which I responded instantly and the money is coming "on or around 30.07". Another example of second class treatment if you are not a direct shareholder?|
|387p. Get onto E-Trade quickly, you should have got your money yesterday, or just sell them in the market if you still can, but it will be delisted soon.|
|Do I need to fill in any forms and if so where do I get them. What price is being paid per share? Why didn't E-Trade forward me anything about this? - the bastiches.|
From last week's announcement (see http://www.uk-wire.com/cgi-bin/articles/200306181447154862M.html):
"Consideration under the Offer will be despatched by 2 July 2003 to PizzaExpress
Shareholders who have, by today, provided valid acceptances under the Offer.
Consideration in respect of valid acceptances received after today will be
despatched to accepting PizzaExpress Shareholders within 14 days of receipt of
|COuld someone fill me in on what's going on with this company. I hold these in a SIPP so get no information/circulars still less say in what happens. Presumably this is a done deal. If so when does the cash arrive for the shares?|
|So its all over another bites the dust.
Not good for the high holder.
|all quiet then--- whats the sit with the bids
has luke crawled under the bed ? LOL|
|ovens getting hot...who will take away the piz?
|Well now they're going to pay even more break fees if the bid fails :-
What are these people on?
What isn't entirely clear is what happens if both deals fall flat on their face.|
johnson is a typical spiv --- wants it all for nought --- which public school do you think he went to ?|
|NEW bidder pushes up price whats mrn Jonson's response.....he may make a higher bid?
Either he is or he isn't!
|It seems the first extension achieved nothing in terms of additional acceptances so this is obviously a stalling tactic. This whole business just gets muckier. Personally I don't see the price falling below 350 even if the offer lapses. It is now known that most shareholders, including the big players, are not intersted in selling at 367, which wasn't the case when the previous approach collapsed, since it was never put to the shareholders.|
|what do you think the share price will fall to if the offer lapses? £2.80 or £3.00|
|If there is a higher offer than the one recommended by the "independent" directors should it not be possible to sue them for failing to properly advise shareholders
After all they reccommended that shareholders accept the offer and that is surely as bad a piece of financial advise as one can get given the fact that higher offers are likely
Can we force credite suissse to re-imburse pizza express for the advise they gave to the independent directors -- after all they would have not given thier advise for free
Or is it the fact that in the city evevrything and anything comes with the caveat " whats yours will eventually be mine by hook or crook " !|
|LONDON (AFX) - Private equity firms TDR Capital and Capricorn Ventures will
launch a joint bid for PizzaExpress PLC this week, the Mail on Sunday reported
without citing sources.
It said the two firms -- through bid vehicle Gondola Express -- are expected
to pitch their offer at 380-385 pence a share, valuing PizzaExpress at 272-276
mln stg, trumping the 263 mln stg (367 pence a share) offer from the company's
co-founder Luke Johnson.
His offer, under the Venice Bidder name, was recommended by PizzaExpress'
independent directors last month.
PizzaExpress shares closed Friday at 381 pence, capitalising the company at
273.5 mln stg.
|The 367p does not have any commission to pay, there is also an option for loans notes. If you're a small shareholder, like me, it would be beneficial to sell (if you were going to, which I'm not) without commission, because the commission would eat into the effective selling price. If you're a large seller the loan note option allows you to offset Capital Gains Tax, if you have any profits, thereby again making the sale to Venice effectively better.|
|Maybe this is a daft question but why would any shareholder accept an offer of 367 when they can get 373 in the market? The market price is higher in hope of an alternative bid so the options seem to be sell in the market or hold on in hope. Where are the shares going though if the bid fails?|
|Offer update - offer extended for one week - Venice Bidder controls only 14.4%
|Latest Analyst Investor bulletin from www.analystinvestor.com :
Bulletin No. 1
Friday 14th March 2003
The first closing date of Venice Bidder's offer for PizzaExpress plc is Thursday, 20th March. The stockmarket is saying that the bid of 367p per share (equating to a value of approximately £263m for the entire business) is not going to succeed, although the market price has been weakening over the past few days. There has been speculation in the press that Nando's and its backers are planning to make a bid for the company at around 387p per share.
In our view, neither of these approaches remotely reflects the true economic value of the company and they should be rejected by all share-owners out of hand.
We have made our position on value-maximisation crystal clear. We favour a substantial share buy-back, we want the business to continue to be run by the present managers, a new management incentive scheme implemented, the resignation of the non-executive directors and the appointment of a new heavyweight chairman.
We plan to examine aspects of the PizzaExpress story each day now in the run up to the first closing date of Venice Bidder's offer. There are a number of serious misconceptions about the business that are based on unsubstantiated opinion. These need to be corrected by fact. In addition, investors' and press commentators' attention needs to be drawn to a number of what we believe to be totally unacceptable aspects of the PizzaExpress bid saga since this current phase began on 16th December 2002.
Our first task is to refute the frequently used description of PizzaExpress as 'beleaguered' 'struggling' and 'underperforming'. You would think, reading the financial press, that this is a basket case whose only future lies in a rescue bid. This is abject nonsense.
Let's look at the reality:
· In the year ended 30th June 2002, the UK and Ireland pizza restaurant chain generated revenue of £195.2m and operating profits of £40.1m. That represents an operating margin of 20.5% - down from the 24% of 2001, but still a well-above-average performance. Of the 300 restaurants open at the 2002 year-end, 27 were opened during the year and would, inevitably, have generated a below average turnover and operating profit.
· Reported profits after tax in 2002 were £25.6m. This still represents a 16% return on average shareholders funds adjusted for historic goodwill written off.
· At the 2002 balance sheet date, the company had cash of £20.8m and no debt. Free cash generation was over £6m, even after capital expenditure of £32.7m.
· In 2002, the Sunday Times named PizzaExpress as one of the top 100 companies in the country to work for, the only restaurant operator to make it onto the list.
· In the 6 months to 31st December 2002, the UK and Ireland pizza restaurant chain generated revenue of £100.2m and operating profits of £17.1m, reflecting an operating margin of 17.1%. The adjusted return on equity in a poor half was 13.4%.
· At 31st December 2002, the company had cash of £17.8m and no debt.
· The interim dividend was increased by 20%.
Does this sound like a struggling or beleaguered business to you?
We run a very detailed operating model of the UK pizza restaurant business. Our model splits the chain into restaurants by age: (a) those over 15 years, (b) those aged between 10-15 years, (c) those aged between 2-10 years, and (d) those under 2 years. The older restaurants - those over 10 years old - are under income and margin pressure, but they are neither struggling nor losing money.
The 37 UK pizza restaurants that are more than 15-years old are located mainly in and around London. The first PizzaExpress was opened in Wardour Street in 1965 and until Kingston opened in 1976 some 11 years later, all openings were in London with the exception of St. Helier in Jersey, which was opened in 1970. As a group, these are the most prolific restaurants in the chain. On our model, the average revenue of these mature restaurants was around £1.02m in 2002 and their average operating profits were around £290,000, reflecting a very high operating margin of 28.2%. We are projecting the like-for-like revenue of these units will decline by 10% in 2003 to some £930,000 with average operating profits at £250,000. So, a £93,000 reduction in sales causes a £40,000 drop in profits – or a fall of 13.8%. Put another way, 43p of operating profit is lost for every £1 drop in sales. The refurbishment programme, which is underway in 140 out of 311 restaurants, aims to restore those lost sales. Once those revenues are restored, profits will be restored disproportionately.
(The ages of the UK restaurants are difficult for an outsider to pinpoint precisely. Only 16 restaurants originally opened by the company were more that 15-years old as at 30th June 2002. However, 32 franchised restaurants were bought in by the company on 11th November 1996, many of which had opened their doors before June 1987. We do not have precise opening dates for these.)
These 15-year old plus restaurants are a very material part of the overall group revenue and profit totals. On our estimates, these 37 restaurants (12% by number at that time) contributed £38m of revenue (19%) and £10.7m of operating profit (25%) before central overheads in 2002.
There have been calls from uninformed investors and some press commentators to 'close the under-performing Central London restaurants', or sell them. But, as you can see from the above, this is crazy advice.
The second group of restaurants, those between 10-15 years old, are also important contributors to group turnover and profit. On our estimates, there were 29 of these trading in 2002. Our model shows an average restaurant in this category generated around £865,000 in revenue and £225,000 in operating profit. We have, again, projected a like-for-like decrease in sales in 2003 of 10%, so average sales would fall to £785,000 and operating profits to £193,000. An £80,000 fall in sales here causes a £32,000 drop in operating profits – once again, some 40p of operating profit is lost for every £1 of sales foregone.
This group of restaurants will be the powerhouse of group results in future years. In 2002, it contributed 15% of the pizza restaurant chain's operating profit. By 2010, on our estimates, it will contribute over 50%.
The negative effect on the group results is clear if you look at the combined impact of these two pizza restaurant groups. In 2002, we estimate they jointly contributed £62.9m of revenue and £17.2m of operating profit. In 2003, we estimate they will contribute £58.2m of revenue and £15.1m of operating profit, £2.1m less than in 2002.
The following management actions have been taken to restore these units to their former levels of profitability:
1. The introduction of a new menu and larger pizzas;
2. Holding prices: there has been no menu price increase since June 2001;
3. Dropping the advertising campaign that ran in 2002 and cost £1.2m;
4. Re-organising the operational management structure of the pizza restaurant chain;
5. Accelerating the capital investment programme in the 140 restaurants that are over 5-years old. Most of these will attract some refurbishment over the next two years at an average cost of £75,000.
This Bulletin shows clearly the impact of falling like-for-like sales on group operating profits in the older restaurants, and the action management has taken to restore profits to previous levels. A restoration of profits in these restaurants would lead to an improvement in the company's economic value and ultimately a higher stockmarket price.
Do not allow the benefits from this action to be stolen away from you by Venice Bidder or by any other opportunistic third party. Reject Venice Bidder's approach.
We will look at the projected performance of the newer restaurants in Monday's Bulletin.
Analyst Investment Management plc
14th March 2003|
|lots of rhetoric, but no concrete offer
I doubt if management can raise the money
or be seen as a credible alternative
would you give them your hard earned cash?
Didn't think so|
|City spivs look after their own
twill be difficult to get rid of the directors|