Tclarke Share Discussion Threads

[cc2014] 27/1/2017 09:07

Imho I see no reason why on an immediate basis it should run back to within 10-15% of the pre-referendum highs which is were most of the builders are. This is based on charts alone.

If you consider the improvement in underlying position this should warrant a price higher than the pre-referendum high of around 90.

I suggest it may take a couple of months to get there as quite a lot of volume has gone through lower down and some will want to take profits along the way.

I am happy to be patient

[effortless cool] 27/1/2017 08:58

You're posting.

I'm still down on this, but feeling pleased that I hung on now.

[cc2014] 27/1/2017 08:57

Stock up 20% and no-one posting?

[cc2014] 23/1/2017 19:06

£250m turnover company and a market cap of £25m.

Rofl. That's why this is my biggest holding. It's not enough even on the existing margins. It will get a re-rating when the market sees sense.

It's hard to say where the pension fund deficit will be now. Annuity rates are still dire albeit tiny improvement but stocks are at an all time high. At least it can only get better and CTO could fund some additional contributions if required.

For interest I've attached a chart from NMD which was unloved for a long time (for good reason). As the issues got resolved, the shares continued to fall and fall for no reason and retrospectively it has been an easy trade. I hope CTO will go the same way in due course

[sspurt] 23/1/2017 15:15

Given the level of turnover these guys really need to be making greater margins than they are doing. Management went all radio silent on this point 9m ago having indulged us with hints of better profitability to come before that. Am wondering if they have had to rein things in on account of the pension deficit - I am guessing without a lot of conviction.
The fraud end result is likely to be minimal so not going to move any dials.This story is only about margin improvement.£250m turnover company and a market cap of £25m. Jeez!!

[cc2014] 23/1/2017 13:35

Well someone is buying and they want stock and are happy to keep taking them off the offer. More interestingly no-one is selling despite the rise which and it's been 65 to sell for a good three hours now.

My predictions for the interim statement are:
1. Forward order book up to highest level ever(which won't be difficult as they've landed the order for Bishopgate)
2. Profit to be at the upper end of management expectations
3. Improved cash
4. Update on the fraud which won't say very much

As for improved margins that should be happening - it's busy as I walk round London, but whether it's material or not remains to be seen.

[sspurt] 23/1/2017 11:45

CC2014 - looks like it. Maybe some better news re margins but won't hold by breath.

[cc2014] 23/1/2017 11:18

Looks like trading update leaked late last week?

[flagon] 23/1/2017 10:59

Trading update is due on Friday 27th Jan.

[effortless cool] 20/11/2016 22:07

My modelling tentatively places a value of 66.3p per share on CTO. There is a lot of uncertainty in those projections, however, principally due to its high operational gearing but also due to the pension deficit.

A HOLD for me at present, but I will be looking for more certainty over improving margins before I consider averaging down here.

[tuscan4] 18/11/2016 11:22

These Directors look to me to be of the old school type who act more like managers, and are rewarded(fairly well) via salaries and bonuses(which in recent years have been thin) and via options which also have not provided much recently. They are very long term players (not surprisingly with a company that has been around for well over 100 years) and want to pass on a business well placed to cope with the next few decades. These are admirable qualities but frustrating for even patient shareholders such as myself who would like to see Directors viewing Shareholders with a little more focus at the expense perhaps of Employees/Customers.
On balance their conservative approach to running this business, may well stand us in good stead when the next Recession/Depression arrives, assuming that is that I have failed as usual to spot its appearance.

[ivancampo] 18/11/2016 09:14

And still no Director buying, would've thought more pertinent than ever now. Speaks volumes.

[kneecaps2] 18/11/2016 00:47

Yes what a disgrace the company invited UKSA for a visit without inviting long suffering shareholders. Surely the company has a case against their Auditors for not noticing the fraud?

[sspurt] 17/11/2016 12:52

Good in parts I guess. margin trends still opaque. They come across as though they are expecting a Brexit inspired air pocket to appear anytime.
I would be surprised if they get much back from the fraud recovery and certainly would not factor it in to share price expectations. Pity only just got to hear about the company visit arranged by UKSA.

[cc2014] 17/11/2016 12:34

I'm of the view the £2.8m is the total extent of the fraud I'm guessing the payments have all been routed to one supplier account and therefore the account history shows the total value defrauded.

I found the trading statement the usual T. Clarke cautious optimism, a summary of which is "things are going in the right direction and we'll keep managing expectations so we can continue to show a smooth trajectory"

Today's trades seem to indicate cautious optimism by investors too. It would be nice to think it is upwards from here

[this_is_me] 17/11/2016 09:35

If the £2.8 million was no longer a reasonable estimate they would have said so.

[shanklin] 17/11/2016 07:22

You'd think CTO would have provided an update on the potential maximum amount associated with the fraud?? Perhaps they don't yet know what that is?

[sspurt] 15/11/2016 12:48

Trading statement on Thurs. V interested to hear any comments on margin trends, particularly as such comment was so noticeably muted in the August int report.

[coolen] 04/11/2016 00:18

Possible scenario (?):
Fake invoice written by Matey 1 on legitimate Creditor Company notepaper.
Matey 2 produces it to the Finance Director at Debtor Company T.Clarke who agrees it.
Matey 2 re-directs the payment to bank account shared by the two mateys ?

Creditor Company doesn't miss the dosh, because it did not expect to receive anything;
Debtor Company doesn't miss the dosh because it settled an apparently legitimate invoice ?

[cc2014] 03/11/2016 22:13

I suspect that this issue is that this is invoice fraud as that's the only way the costs can be in the books.

So, company receives invoice from legitimate company with legitimate bank account (owned by the fraudster), but no work is done for the invoice provided.

But, it's hard to understand how such large amounts could have been taken out. The turnover of DG Robson was £8m 6 years ago. I don't know how much it would be now but taking out £500k a year from a company with that small a turnover should be noticed by the FD or one of his staff.

I think the FD may be under pressure here.

[coolen] 03/11/2016 21:45

During those 7 years did the auditors rubber-stamp the accounting records 7 times, with not a single question ?

[bazzer1000] 01/11/2016 19:41

Sorry ask not bid!!!

[bazzer1000] 01/11/2016 19:40

CC2014They weren't all sells. Many were buys. Although top of the bid was 61p this afternoon you could buy for 59.3pRegardsBaz