Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Punch Taverns LSE:PUB London Ordinary Share GB00BPXRVT80 ORD SHS 0.9572P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  -0.25p -0.23% 107.75p 105.00p 109.00p 109.00p 105.00p 109.00p 7,905 16:35:19
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Travel & Leisure 420.8 -105.2 -41.7 - 239.14

Punch Taverns (PUB) Latest News

More Punch Taverns News
Punch Taverns Takeover Rumours

Punch Taverns (PUB) Share Charts

1 Year Punch Taverns Chart

1 Year Punch Taverns Chart

1 Month Punch Taverns Chart

1 Month Punch Taverns Chart

Intraday Punch Taverns Chart

Intraday Punch Taverns Chart

Punch Taverns (PUB) Discussions and Chat

Punch Taverns Forums and Chat

Date Time Title Posts
16/3/201614:05Punch Taverns - with charts1,605
14/10/200914:17 *** Punch ***1
17/2/200908:27All 7,560 Punch licensees invited to buy pubs1
01/1/200601:14Thread for drunks to pop in at midnight. All welcome!2
06/9/200511:41Punch Taverns - Acquisition target?3

Add a New Thread

Punch Taverns (PUB) Most Recent Trades

No Trades
Trade Time Trade Price Trade Size Trade Value Trade Type
View all Punch Taverns trades in real-time

Punch Taverns (PUB) Top Chat Posts

DateSubject
25/9/2016
09:20
Punch Taverns Daily Update: Punch Taverns is listed in the Travel & Leisure sector of the London Stock Exchange with ticker PUB. The last closing price for Punch Taverns was 108p.
Punch Taverns has a 4 week average price of 103.36p and a 12 week average price of 94.56p.
The 1 year high share price is 140p while the 1 year low share price is currently 84p.
There are currently 221,940,087 shares in issue and the average daily traded volume is 68,290 shares. The market capitalisation of Punch Taverns is £239,140,443.74.
07/1/2015
16:47
jeffcranbounre: Punch Taverns is mentioned in today's (07/01/2015) ADVFN podcast. To listen to the podcast click here> http://bit.ly/ADVFN0102 In today's podcast: - Brenda Kelly, Chief Market Strategist at IG.com chats about Tesco, Sainbury's, BP, Tullow Oil and more. Brenda on Twitter is @BrendaKelly_IG - And the micro and macro news including: Quindell #QPP Tesco #TSCO BP #BP. Tullow Oil #TLW Sainsbury's #SBRY Galliford Try #GFRD Aggreko #AGK Persimmon #PSN Easyjet #EZJ Keller Group #KLR Boohoo #BOO Majestic Wine #MJW Royal Dutch Shell #RDSB Escher Group #ESCH Sepura #SEP Anglo American #AAL Shanks Group #SKS Punch Taverns #PUB Enterprise Inns #ETI Imagination Technologies #IMG Every Tuesday is Ten Bagger Tuesday on the podcast. If you know of a stock, whose share price has the potential to increase ten fold, just click the link below. Ten Bagger Tuesday (All it involves is filling out a form that will take you around 5 minutes and you don't personally appear on the podcast). Once a week, on a Friday, I feature a tip from a listener to this podcast, if you'd like to suggest a stock click the link below: Suggest a stock (Again all it involves is filling out a form that will take you around 5 minutes and you don't personally appear on the podcast). You can subscribe to this podcast in iTunes by clicking HERE To follow me on Twitter click HERE As a listener to the ADVFN podcast you can take advantage of some exclusive first year discounts on popular subscriptions: Bronze - £50 (normally £73.82/year) Silver - £145 (normally £173.71/year) Level 2 - £350 (normally £472.94/year) Call 0207 0700 961 and ask for the ADVFN Podcast discount to take advantage of these reduced rates or just CLICK HERE for more information. Please DO NOT buy any stock recommended in this podcast basely solely on what you hear. The opinions in this podcasts are just that, opinions. Please do you own research before investing. Justin
13/10/2014
09:24
timbo003: 1 for 20 share consolidation today as previously announced in the restructuring proposals: http://www.investegate.co.uk/punch-taverns-plc--pub-/rns/punch-taverns-restructuring-announcement/201408180700083353P/ It looks like shareholders have taken a bit of a haircut in the consolidation process (as often happens) Current share price of 138p (mid), corresponds to old share price of 6.9p The shares closed on Friday trading at 7.5p bid, 8.0p offer. Ouch!
17/2/2014
14:05
scburbs: Monomono, No. It is odd that such a price sensitive issue does not seem to require an RNS! The share price has held up remarkably well to the collapse of the negotiations! If I was holding I would be selling, although I am not currently planning to short it. A longer article is in the FT. "Now Punch's bondholders, advised by Rothschild, Lazards and Moelis, have rejected Mr Billingham's proposals in favour of a scheme centred round just such a debt-for-equity swap. Shareholders may not like their stakes being diluted and they can vote against it. But they must know that the road from here leads to insolvency." http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/2a6956f2-94db-11e3-a8ac-00144feab7de.html#axzz2taV21BhW
09/1/2014
10:18
scburbs: Jeffian, Totally agree, currently a bet not an investment subject to the result of the vote. The share price move (along with the high volume) could be due to leaks on the likely result, but then again it may not as there could just be a lot of gamblers out there!
05/4/2013
12:22
scburbs: Selected Numis commentary courtesy of FT Alphaville. "H1 PBT fell 21% to £26.2m, largely due to core estate LFL net income being down 4.5%. Nevertheless, we are upgrading our full year forecast by 6% to reflect debt reduction and an expectation of trading trends continue to improve. More importantly, management remains confident that the debt restructuring will complete by July. ... Punch has £82m of cash at PLC, which will become less relevant if the debt restructuring proposal is approved, reducing debt and financial risk in the process. If the debt restructuring proceeds, we estimate that Punch's share price would be 26p if the company were valued on the same 9.5x EV/EBITDA rating as Enterprise Inns." http://ftalphaville.ft.com/marketslive/2013-04-05/
08/1/2013
17:57
timbo003: CR, the only was these are going back up to 60p in the short to medium term, is with a 1 for 5 share consolidation! Forget the PUB chart, the precipitous fall was when they floated off Spirit (SPRT), so that is the chart you should really be looking at: http://uk.advfn.com/exchanges/LSE/SPRT/share-price?java=1
31/12/2012
08:45
cestnous: Taken a punt in PUB today as a recovery play, (also because pubs are something I know a lot about, at least at the bar level) A couple of points to note; From IC in October. Punch's share price attributes little value to the pubs or the unrestricted cash which is being siphoned into the securitisations. However, Punch's 50 per cent stake in the Matthew Clarke drinks distribution venture, which is not secured against any debts, has a balance sheet value of 6.7p a share From Telegraph Punch flirted with a six-month high of 8p during intra-day trading Photo: PA By Ben Harrington5:42PM GMT 28 Dec 20121 Comment Punch flirted with a six-month high of 8p during intra-day trading following news Morgan Stanley now owns almost 12pc of the pub company. Morgan Stanley's stakebuilding comes as the business carries out a restructuring of its bonds that may lead to a turnaround of the business. Punch shares eventually gave up some of its morning gains but still managed to close up 0.2 at 7.6p. Simon Gordon (chartist at 'Shares') has a target of 20p. DYOR etc.
08/6/2011
10:34
crosswire: Punch Taverns jumps 6% on upbeat trading news and demerger plans Share Comments (0) Amid continuing weakness in the markets, Punch Taverns is standing out with a near 6% gain. In a trading update the company said managed pubs in its Spirit division had seen like for like sales growth of 7.3% in the third quarter, while its Punch tenanted business is down 3.3%. Its planned demerger into Spirit and Punch is on track to be completed by the end of the summer. Chief executive Ian Dyson said: Our operational initiatives continue to translate into improved performance for both Spirit and Punch. This has been achieved during a period of substantial change as we prepare for the proposed demerger of Spirit. Despite the challenging UK consumer environment we are on track to meet our full year expectations. One surprise was the news that Roddy Murray, announced on 10 May as the finance director designate for Spirit, had decided not to take up the post. But this did little to dampen investors' spirits and Punch shares are up 3.9p at 74.1p, the biggest riser in a FTSE 250 which is down nearly 1%. Analysts have been crunching the numbers on the valuations of the two separate businesses, with some suggesting Spirit as a possible takeover target for the likes of Mitchells & Butlers when the demerger is complete. Nigel Parson at Evolution Securities said: Trading at the more attractive Spirit business is improving strongly (helped by the fine weather) and trading is also improving at Punch. We think that Spirit could be vulnerable to a bid (from M&B?) once demerged, while there is sufficient asset value within Punch to give it a good chance to restructure and de-lever. Punch will be split into core (2,956 pubs) and turnaround (2,182 pubs) with these likely to be sold over the next five years. Our new 100p share price target is based on 80p for Spirit and 20p for Punch. At Panmure Gordon analyst Simon French said: Both [businesses have done] better than we expected and the group remains on track to meet its full year expectations. The only fly in the ointment is that Roddy Murray has decided not to take up the role of finance director designate at Spirit. Post the demerger we value Punch Taverns Plc at 20p per share and Spirit Plc at 65p per share based on peer group ... multiples. We don't expect the shares to outperform ahead of the demerger and as such we reiterate our hold recommendation and 85p price target. http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/marketforceslive/2011/jun/08/punch-jumps-on-upbeat-trading
21/2/2011
16:27
isis: Here's why your Pub shares failed:- http://www.thepublican.com/story.asp?sectioncode=16&storycode=69085&c=1 Pete Robinson: The British Pub - A thesis on it's decline and fall 16 February, 2011 By Pete Robinson 'James Cook is a 3rd year Business Student at Newcastle University, writing a dissertation on pub closures, and the reasons behind them. James was asking for opinions and observations in The Publican's forum. My own response became way too long once I'd slipped into rant mode. So here it is presented as a blog...' For 450 years British pubs and their smoking customers have enjoyed a mutually beneficial relationship that has survived essentially unchanged through wars, periods of extreme poverty and famine, riots, massive social change, the Industrial Revolution, the English Civil War, WW2 rationing, licencing and taxation, opening hour restrictions, many recessions, and a great deal more besides. Throughout that long and stormy history pubs have NEVER closed in the anything like the numbers they have since July 1st 2007, not even 100 or so years ago when magistrates pursued a policy of drastically reducing pub numbers by refusing to renew licences. There are pubs closing today that have been serving their communities for 400 years. Imagine the tales these iconic watering holes could tell but tragically they are lost to our culture forever. Yet we dismiss these closures because "some pubs deserve to close" apparently. I don't believe that. Even the urban community pubs on 'rough' estates and grotty back-street boozers had their place in their respective communities and were trading well enough before 2007. Yes, pubs have occasionally waned in popularity. In recent times the mass arrival of TV in the 1960s caused a temporary drop off, and there was some gradual erosion in trade throughout the 80's and 90's due at least in part to the plod's manic enforcement of the drink-drive laws along with newly introduced jail terms for offenders. However since the new millennium pubs had fought their way back to health and by 2006 were more popular than ever, with The Publican reporting overall turnover at a FIVE-YEAR-PEAK. We'd never had it so good, and things could only get better still. Smokers accounted for over HALF of that income. Then the trade went collectively mad and ushered in the blanket smoking ban with barely a murmur of protest. The majority of front-line publicans were intelligent enough to have grave concerns. But their voice was drowned out by those upper echelons of the industry, men-in-suits, who presume to speak for us. Driven by pure greed we were won over by a barrage of bogus statistics coming from ASH, CRUK and the DoH 'proving' that we'd keep our existing smoking customers who'd simply accept the ban as meekly as we had. The icing on the cake was to be the countless millions of 'new' non-smoking customers who were poised like a coiled spring, awaiting the starting pistol on July 1st 2007 to risk serious injury in the crush to pack our pubs to the rafters as they quaffed pint after pint in such quantities you would need to employ a team of cellarmen to support all the extra bar staff you'd need - and a SecuriCorps van to bank your takings. This better class of customer was termed 'NewBreed' and we were promised he'd set the tills ringing as soon as we'd driven out the riff-raff. The advice was to steam-clean, fumigate and redecorate throughout replacing curtains and fabrics wherever possible. At all costs we must completely eradicate any evidence that society's scum had ever been there. The 'New Breed' of customer wouldn't like that. So we built a few half-open cattle sheds in our pubs' back yards and banished the most loyal, better spending half of our customers out into the cold and rain expecting them to be grateful. After all the stats did say most smokers secretly wanted to quit and really we'd be doing 'em a favour! Of course NewBreed was merely a clever figment of the anti-smoking lobby's imagination, but even savvy pubco bosses bought it hook, line and sinker. Strong objections from organisations such as CAMRA evaporated in a wave of hysteric euphoria as it seemed everyone 'embraced' the new age of endless prosperity to come. From the day of the ban's inception pubs immediately began to shed customers, and haven't yet plugged the leak. We forgot that pubs were built by the pennies of the common man, yet we tried to move upmarket in a vain attempt to satisfy a demand that never existed. So far we've lost 8,000 - 10,000 pubs (the jury's still out on the exact figure) from a 2007 total pub stock of 56,000. Many more are skating on the edge of insolvency, just hanging on. I estimate that sometime in 2013 we'll pass the 25% mark and we'll likely see half of our pubs gone by 2017. Even those pubs that survive often aren't 'pubs' anymore, not as we know them. They've become dining halls no longer catering for the drinking classes. Here in the Midland huge numbers have been snapped up to reopen as Indian restaurants - although technically they are still 'pubs'. Those, like myself, who tried desperately to warn of the carnage to come were dismissed as conspiracy theorists, doomsayers and nicotine addicts - but time has proved us right. You may wonder why this industry remains in denial? Ask yourself, if you were a pubco director and you'd seen your share price plummet from £14 each to around 50p how would you explain your actions to your shareholders? Would you 'fess up and accept your part of the blame? Not likely. The loudest voices on The Publican's forum crying out to keep the blanket ban in it's present form come from obvious smoke haters. They'd have you believe theirs is the majority opinion although recent trade surveys clearly show 4 out of every 5 publicans want the law amending to allow separate, ventilated indoor smoking rooms. But when they genuinely are publicans so firmly opposed to their fellow publicans' CHOICE of introducing an indoor smoking room you will generally find they have well positioned pubs in fairly affluent areas less affected by the ban, or even benefiting from it as less fortunate pubs close down. That's why they're in the minority by four-to-one against. Hence you should ask this simple question. If they truly believe what they say, that this pub holocaust has little or nothing to do with the smoking ban, what possible objection could they have? After all, if they genuinely believe the ban made no difference to trade they must also believe the reinstatement of an indoor smoking room would similarly not advantage their competitors. The truth is they KNOW beyond any shadow of a doubt that their customers would simply migrate overnight to any neighbouring pub that offered a smoking room. They're terrified of choice in case it hits their takings but you can guarantee one thing. If the law actually were to be amended and choice restored they'd be the first ones rushing to put the ashtrays back out. If the ban had been good for pubs then I'd have backed it from the beginning. My one aim is to help save as many pubs as possible, it's the only reason I campaign for more fairness. OTOH they are only interested in the future of one pub - their own. There never was any demand for non-smoking pubs so the industry will never find it possible to replace it's dwindling customer base. Nor is there sufficient demand to support 40-odd thousand food-led pubs. It's market forces, plain as. So with the trade not even campaigning for any amendment to the law we'll see our once-great pub culture wither and die over the next 10 years. At best we'll be left with a few chains of managed, town-centre food pubs-come-coffee-houses, basically Wetherspoon-clones, totaling around 12,000 in all. Sure we'll attempt to rebuild and one day in the distant future new pubs will again be built and old one's converted back from flats, shops and Indian restaurants. But they'll just be bars and food halls, a mere parody of what once was, like those 'English Pubs' that litter the streets of Benedorm. We'll never recapture that quintessential time-honoured character that made British pubs unique - the envy of the world. Much of that's already gone, ever since we threw open our doors to the forces of political correctness. We lost something very special the day when we allowed the State behind the bar. It's one reason why the customers have been drifting away. Countless previous generations have cherished this trade before handing it safely down to the next. To our shame we may be the last generation to remember what a real pub was like. In years to come your own son may be writing a dissertation on how the Great British pub disappeared into the pages of history.
23/12/2009
16:37
jeffian: lagosboy, Don't get me wrong; I'm not arguing this company is in anything other than difficulties nor that it is a great investment, I'm just saying it ain't going to go bust. Re: the points in your 1078 * I don't "wish to re-check your figure" of 260p/share NAV because that is the figure in the published accounts. If you don't like intangibles etc (fair enough) it may be something else. You say £1.67. Either way, both figures are well north of the current share price (67p) not "it must be south of the current share price" as you previously said. * Whichever way you look at it, it is not "haemoraging cash", it is generating it. The £2m/month support it gives struggling tenants is neither here nor there out of EBITDA over £500m and (fixed) interest takes £300m. You may argue about what they do with the net cash (investment or repayment of debt) but you can't argue that it is there to give them the choice! *As you know, there has been much questioning recently of pub valuations - both rental and capital. Yes, the formula for valuing pubs does apply a multiple to income and, yes, both incomes and multiples have been falling, but in the end property is worth what someone will pay for it and the wonderful thing about it is that it usually has some residual value. A closed pub is not worth £0, which is what you would get if you blindly applied any multiple to £0 income! (I say this as a former brewery Property Director - we used to reckon that the fallback position for an unviable country pub was 3 plots - pub, beer garden, car park - and that didn't work out far wrong in most cases). You are not alone in believing that the pubco's should be writing down the value of their estates harder, but the truth is that both PUB and ETI have sold literally hundreds of their pubs recently at or near to Book Value and the valuers and auditors will be having regard to those sales in agreeing a value for the retained estate. * Response to your last point about "banking covenants" the same as to Lord C. A breach of covenants in the securitised bonds not the same - it does not lead to harsher terms but to cash being locked into the vehicle for the benefit of bondholders rather than passed up to PUB. A Rights Issue would make no difference - they've been using the proceeds to buy back discounted bonds and cancel them thereby reducing overall debt but unless they repaid the whole troublesome bond the problem would still remain - so why do it? The reason they did it with the Convertible bonds was that at current share price, conversion would have had a hugely dilutive effect. Look, I'm not saying this is anything other than a dog, but there is a lot of money to be made on dogs as the past few months has shown. I leave you with this thought; if Quantitive Easing is simply another phrase for 'printing money' and, whatever they say, the Govt are trying to inflate their way out of repaying their humungous debts, highly geared companies with real assets (e.g. property) do very well in inflationary times. Ummmmmm, now can we think of such a company............? 8-)
Punch Taverns share price data is direct from the London Stock Exchange
Your Recent History
LSE
GKP
Gulf Keyst..
LSE
QPP
Quindell
FTSE
UKX
FTSE 100
LSE
IOF
Iofina
FX
GBPUSD
UK Sterlin..
Stocks you've viewed will appear in this box, letting you easily return to quotes you've seen previously.

Register now to create your own custom streaming stock watchlist.

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

P:33 V: D:20160925 12:20:25