Ashley House Share Chat (ASH)

Find Your Broker

Share Name	Share Symbol	Market	Type	Share ISIN	Share Description
Ashley House	LSE:ASH	London	Ordinary Share	GB00B1KKCZ55	ORD 1P

	Price Change	% Change	Share Price	Bid Price	Offer Price	High Price	Low Price	Open Price	Shares Traded	Last Trade
	+0.15p	+1.67%	9.15p	9.00p	9.30p	9.15p	9.15p	9.15p	359,722	08:00:00

Industry Sector	Turnover (m)	Profit (m)	EPS - Basic	PE Ratio	Market Cap (m)
Construction & Materials	18.5	1.8	2.9	3.1	5.47

Ashley House Share Discussion Threads

Showing 2701 to 2724 of 2725 messages

Chat Pages: 109 108 107 106 105 104 103 102 101 100 99 98 Older

Date	Subject	Author	Discuss
15/2/2019 15:21	Although the fall looks overdone to me, nevertheless if Admenta (is that the old Lloyds Pharmacy?) have still over 7% of potential overhang, it could take a fair time to clear. Encouraging though that Lawshare have added. Last position I can see was that they had 8.65 million, so if that's right they've added to their position. I still think the most likely outcome at some stage is that MS will take the company over, and with schemes awaiting closure as well as the growth in the other parts of the business, this looks to me a really good entry point. It might be that Admenta will continue to unwind though and if so, then it might get slightly cheaper first.	microscope	Read Full Thread Reply
15/2/2019 14:57	even more interesting rns	dave4545	Read Full Thread Reply
15/2/2019 14:40	Interesting trades today 100k at 9.5p premium surprised they let others get cheaper after that.	dave4545	Read Full Thread Reply
15/2/2019 09:04	This has fallen a lot further than I was expecting. Having got out on the late 2017 spike after holding for many many years, I am back in. The potential has always been there, sadly it has always remained just out of reach. Jam tomorrow anyone? I should definitely know better, but can afford one like this in my portfolio.	scburbs	Read Full Thread Reply
05/2/2019 16:32	True. Back to the old-fashioned buy a share and just check it at each results time, as we used to do before the internet.	yump	Read Full Thread Reply
05/2/2019 13:53	Yump, It's not going to get any easier as Morgan Ashley will almost be a black box providing a profit or loss rather than a full set of accounts - until they eventually appear at Companies House.	cockerhoop	Read Full Thread Reply
05/2/2019 12:42	Thanks for your posts guys, its good to have some ideas of when/where revenue flows, although I suppose in the end, the forecasts are the best guide unless can get some more information from ASH themselves. At least the forecasts can halve and ASH will still be cheap. I think a bit more clarity on the flows of fees and revenues might help with new investors - shouldn't have to be digging this much really.	yump	Read Full Thread Reply
05/2/2019 12:26	Ashley House discussed on the Cube podcast, 28 minutes in: hTTps://cube.investments/cube-podcast-9-simons-research-driven-investment-strategy/	rndm355	Read Full Thread Reply
04/2/2019 22:00	They state they expense all prior expenditure for a project(except land) at financial close. Just had a look through prior accounts to try to isolate projects and found the Harwich & Walton on the Naze Extra Care Projects which reached financial close in the period end April 16 and were the only extra care schemes on site. Their combined GDV was £21m and they had £12.2m left to book suggesting £8.8mm was perhaps booked at financial close. So 42% on those projects.	cockerhoop	Read Full Thread Reply
04/2/2019 20:53	Recognising over 50% GDV at financial close before they start on site would be very punchy! Around 30-35% might be more realistic if you are reflecting the land value with planning.	scburbs	Read Full Thread Reply
04/2/2019 18:55	My understanding is prior to the Morgan Ashley joint venture all GDV flowed through the revenue line of Ashley House accounts.	cockerhoop	Read Full Thread Reply
04/2/2019 18:00	It will also depend on how/if they report the construction costs. If the main construction cost is just being invoiced directly from a third party to the end purchaser then the ASH initial portion might be well over 50% (of their total not of GDV) as they will just be charging project management type fees at the construction stage. However, that would just tell you that the GDV was never directly relevant to what they were going to invoice and you would need to know what percentage of GDV is typically their share (or the JV’s going forward).	scburbs	Read Full Thread Reply
04/2/2019 17:08	Yes, I thought I'd seen it somewhere and now I can't find it ! If it doesn't turn up, I'll just contact them I think.	yump	Read Full Thread Reply
04/2/2019 16:27	Not sure of the exact figure but believe it to be greater than 50% recognised on financial close. I'll try to dig a reference out but sure it's been described as the majority or large proportion in the past by Antony.	cockerhoop	Read Full Thread Reply
04/2/2019 16:14	I think once they recover the design/advisory fees on financial close it is then a percentage of completion recognition for the rest (assuming in line with budget). Not sure on percentage on financial close probably quite variable depending how hard it has been and how much value they have added.	scburbs	Read Full Thread Reply
04/2/2019 13:17	It would be nice to know what sort of proportion of payments happen on financial close and what appear afterwards. I find the revenue recognition policy quite hazy ie. after the fees on close, how and when is the rest recognised ? Perhaps you have a grip on it ?	yump	Read Full Thread Reply
02/2/2019 09:35	They have to build/sell them to achieve the equivalent of £30m via the JV. On financial close they can invoice various design/advisory fees. It is the design/advisory fees that they may not fully achieve to 30 June if the schemes don’t reach financial close. There is no prospect of the JV having £60m revenue by 30 June.	scburbs	Read Full Thread Reply
01/2/2019 22:55	and you're just going back over the past again - I don't see the point. £20mln revenue has always produced a mixture of profits and losses. Now it looks as if ASH will have the equivalent of £30mln from the JV and a bit more from modular. That's what investors are here for I presume and they were here for that before the one-off payment from MS, probably because at this level, they only need to do a couple of pence in earnings for it to be on a p/e of 5. I admit they could have been a bit clearer about the accounting of the MS payment for shareholders (probably not for accounting purposes unless for some reason you just don't trust them), but you could easily argue that it counted as a proper sale, because it was selling half their pipeline. Without that one-off, we don't know what the results would have been. It might in fact have been better to post 1p earnings and then 2p this year. Then it would look like the genuine beginning of something special with a 100% increase !! So a rational view of the business is difficult if people get hung up on 3p down to 2p. The good thing is, its not on a forward racy multiple and that's an understatement. Perhaps it would have been if it had gone 1p-2p, or even 0.5p-2p. That always gets the sentiment going.	yump	Read Full Thread Reply
01/2/2019 22:08	Tom, sorry Top..vest. ;) if it's a choice between your view, and the company's accountants... Not the hardest choice ever :))	microscope	Read Full Thread Reply
01/2/2019 20:47	Just my view and I know a bit about annual reports. A one-off disposal of a business shouldn't be mixed with the underlying trading position which it was in the prior year annual report. It was either 1. not transparent or 2. deliberately misleading. Form your own view. As you can see the business made a thumping loss in H1. If you back-out the one-off profit from the sale of the business in H2 last year what was the underlying trading position? Probably break-even or loss making I suspect. Wouldn't have looked as nice would it!	topvest	Read Full Thread Reply
01/2/2019 18:39	Serious accusation there tv. Hope your case is as watertight as your recent sympathetic posts for Luke Johnson ?	microscope	Read Full Thread Reply
01/2/2019 18:23	They only made a profit last year because they sold 50% of the main business. This should have been disclosed separately. Not sure their auditors are doing their job properly. I don’t consider last years accounts to represent a true and fair view of the business as they were misleading on the most important transaction in the year.	topvest	Read Full Thread Reply
01/2/2019 12:27	In addition to the 4 schemes on currently on site they're 12 further schemes with possible financial close in calendar year 2019. Grimsby - Financial Close Nov 18 Leicester x 2 Romsey Freshwater IoW Burnholme Oak - Work commencing in Feb New Milton (People for Places) Gosport Leeds x 4 (Home Group) Work Start Late 2019. That's approximately £120m of GDV (so £60m to ASH), the key is the operating margin but in the past 15% was achievable. It certainly looks like some of the new MA schemes have leapfrogged some stale Ashley House projects in the pipeline.	cockerhoop	Read Full Thread Reply
01/2/2019 09:46	Probably doesn't want to hear it. If you look into the past, you can see that 20mln appears to be around the critical level of revenue needed to start decent profits. Assuming the profitability of the JV is the same as ASH's was, then £60mln of revenue for the full year should be easily capable of generating that 2.6p of earnings and even if it ends up being 2p, then the rating is still miserly. ie. in effect ASH will have got £30mln of the £60mln.	yump	Read Full Thread Reply

Chat Pages: 109 108 107 106 105 104 103 102 101 100 99 98 Older