AGA Rangemaster Share Discussion Threads

[cockneyrebel] 17/5/2012 12:46

very ugly chart - but then there aren't maany beauty queens about in this mkt

CR.

[wad collector] 17/5/2012 12:43

Ugly chart - is this about the Benelux and France exposure?

[harry hedge funds] 17/5/2012 12:40

Bet you wish you waited now,..world slipping into the abyss, 46p target!

[she-ra] 05/5/2012 16:03

CR - What is the actual pension deficit for this company?And the fact that they are mainly in bonds a good thing?

Ive seen different figures for the pd and could it get better if the bond market picks up?

[v11slr] 03/5/2012 11:04

"we continue to look to 2012 optimistically"

Nice way to end the IMS.

[thelongandtheshortandthetall] 25/4/2012 11:38

minor amount of selling
i bet its pi stops being hit.

i could be wrong though and this is the start of a major sell off.

if it is i'll get some more.

good luck all long term holders

[cockneyrebel] 25/4/2012 11:32

Well glad I only had a small few - this chart has gone rogue and looking rather ugly now - as the trading update approaches.

CR

[roddyb] 24/4/2012 17:10

Well, looks like it will be time to get in now at 76p

I remember back at:-

Roddyb - 7 Mar'12 - 10:39 - 551 of 567

thinking this is looking over-cooked after it was recommended in one of those expensive investment magasines that focuses on out of date theories. How bad can this 3 May update be?

[cockneyrebel] 16/4/2012 15:16

Trading update May 3rd with the AGM, directors loading up a few weeks ago.

Decent trading outlook at the year end results and on a recent low - so I bought some today.

imo/dyor

CR

[paul_butcher1999] 24/3/2012 11:19

Budget cut to 45% next year on the 50% top rate should help alleviate slightly the crippling taxes on a key aga demographic. Should spur rebound in shares to sensible levels.

[naked trader] 20/3/2012 23:05

Holding plenty of cash this looks cheap at these prices. Product range looks good (pardon the pun). Results were not bad all things being considered. I can see more upside than down.

[smicker] 15/3/2012 09:27

Re pension payments, I see Trinity Mirror have come to a similar agreement to what i expect here and amended the payment schedule to 10m per year from 33m. Quite a significant alteration. One issue i would like to clear up if anyone knows. Is there a legal obligation on the trustees to use the deficit at the triennial valuation or can they use the deficit at time of negotiation as the basis for future pasyments.

[paul_butcher1999] 10/3/2012 08:07

smicker you are right. essentially the way these triennial pensions reviews works (for all companies with defined benefit schemes) is a negotiation based on i) the over/ underfunding of the fund and ii) the health and prospects of the company. The pension side are always well aware that the key asset in a deficit situation is the continued existence of the company. they will negotiate with the company with this shared understanding and if cannot agree on amounts etc it can go to the pensions regulator (but very very rare as people tend to reach reasonable agreement). So if/when company cannot afford payments the pension trustees etc will simply agree less to be paid. they will absolutely not risk the companies' future.

Biggest director buys for a while. Company continues to be absurdly undervalued. Investors find it hard to see further than their nose sometimes, but even in very bad economic situation this company continues to make a healthy profit ... wait till we get even a little recovery - and when the punitive levels of taxation begin abating a bit ...

[smicker] 09/3/2012 16:55

beangrinder,
you are correct that this was the original intention but, from the results

"Using preliminary data already available for the 2011 valuation, the parties are now working to modify existing arrangements and agree a medium-term funding strategy which ensures that there is a clear, stable framework for both the scheme and the Group, taking account of the interests of the members of the scheme and other stakeholders in the Group."

I assume that modifying existing arrangements means they cant afford to pay 10m at the moment so there will be another set of staggered payments.

I dont know any more than you do about this so i may well be misinterpreting their intentions.

[beangrinder] 09/3/2012 16:14

Smicker. Is the point not that they will possibly start to have to pay real money out of the company and into the pension scheme? This is the £10m pa that concerned me. Have I misunderstood?

[techno20] 09/3/2012 14:27

Just bought in!

These have been on my watch list for ages, love the product!

Results look very solid and the fact that the directors have bought in decent amounts this afternoon gives confidence.

Three broker updates today as far as I can see, two adds and one neutral.

Good luck all.

[smicker] 09/3/2012 14:00

beangrinder,
I dont really think that the pension situation has changed to any extent. Anyone buying into the company should be aware that this has been ongoing for a number of years now. If you look back through various results you will see that the deficit fluctuates wildly and, even if you wait for a valuation, it will be out of date by the time it is reported to you.

[beangrinder] 09/3/2012 13:49

I sold out after my initial comments. The pension statement is too uncertain. What if the company starts the £10m pa payments in 2012...3 years later the cash pile is gone. Until the full valuation is released I will watch again. Trading does look solid enough but the prospect of real contributions, not just actuarial deficits is very worrying.

[paulypilot] 09/3/2012 13:10

Thanks smicker, good comments.

I'll watch with interest. Love the company, hate the pension fund is probably my current view!

Cheers, PP./

[smicker] 09/3/2012 11:50

Paul,
If you are talking purely in terms of share price i dont agree. The company has traded as high as 1.40 in the recent past with this type of deficit so its the company prospects rather than the pension which seem to determine the price. I do agree that the company is not in a position to pay 10m per year into the pension and i expect a new arrangement similar to the 2008 one where the larger payments are again deferred. Underlying the pension issue is the fact that this is fundamentally a sound company in a poor environment which will change. While the pension deficit is large it is not an immediate liability and the Trustees have shown once already they are prepared to work with the company to safeguard its future

Edit

I should also have added that the current state of the deficit should be a lot better now than at the year end due to the rise in stock prices. The rate at which this reduces the deficit is considerable

[paulypilot] 09/3/2012 09:49

Good morning,

The results look OK - underlying EPS was slightly lower than I expected, but useful increase in divi.

However, I've sold most of my shares this morning (it was only a small position anyway) because the pension fund comments worry me. They talk about having a surplus in accounting terms, but an actuarial deficit that has risen from the previous £60m-ish, due to Gilt yields falling.

Since they had already agreed to pay in an additional £10m p.a. from 2012, and there is a risk that figure could go up, then it's a massive consideration for an approx £60m mkt cap company. So whilst I love the company & the potential upside from operational gearing, that pension fund is such a huge problem that I'll probably sit on the sidelines for the time being & await developments. Difficult to see how the share price can go much higher until the pension fund position becomes clearer - as the deficit payments look as if they're going to swallow up all the company's profits for the next few years possibly?

Any other views on the pension fund, that's the big issue here surely?

Regards, Paul.

[cwa1] 09/3/2012 07:59

Certainly heard a lot worse from AGA before, steady to slightly positive statement IMHO.

[nw99] 09/3/2012 07:59

Good numbers agreed

[beangrinder] 09/3/2012 07:35

Underlying eps ahead of forecasts. Trading looks good to me.