Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Berkeley Group Holdings LSE:BKG London Ordinary Share GB00B02L3W35 ORD SHS 5P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  +20.00p +0.54% 3,737.00p 554,821 16:35:00
Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price
3,740.00p 3,743.00p 3,743.00p 3,657.00p 3,698.00p
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Household Goods & Home Construction 2,703.70 934.90 562.70 6.6 5,043.8

Berkeley Group Holdings (BKG) Latest News (1)

More Berkeley Group Holdings News
Berkeley Group Holdings Takeover Rumours

Berkeley Group Holdings (BKG) Share Charts

1 Year Berkeley Group Holdings Chart

1 Year Berkeley Group Holdings Chart

1 Month Berkeley Group Holdings Chart

1 Month Berkeley Group Holdings Chart

Intraday Berkeley Group Holdings Chart

Intraday Berkeley Group Holdings Chart

Berkeley Group Holdings (BKG) Discussions and Chat

Berkeley Group Holdings (BKG) Most Recent Trades

Trade Time Trade Price Trade Size Trade Value Trade Type
2018-08-17 15:54:283,738.001003,738.00O
2018-08-17 15:54:093,702.081,55857,678.46O
2018-08-17 15:54:053,715.0150218,649.36O
2018-08-17 15:53:333,691.57351,292.05O
2018-08-17 15:53:243,699.712238,250.35O
View all Berkeley Group Holdings trades in real-time

Berkeley Group Holdings (BKG) Top Chat Posts

DateSubject
18/8/2018
09:20
Berkeley Group Holdings Daily Update: Berkeley Group Holdings is listed in the Household Goods & Home Construction sector of the London Stock Exchange with ticker BKG. The last closing price for Berkeley Group Holdings was 3,717p.
Berkeley Group Holdings has a 4 week average price of 3,627p and a 12 week average price of 3,528p.
The 1 year high share price is 4,338p while the 1 year low share price is currently 3,462p.
There are currently 134,969,434 shares in issue and the average daily traded volume is 355,825 shares. The market capitalisation of Berkeley Group Holdings is £5,043,807,748.58.
03/6/2018
04:01
r ball: Ok. But the share price is holding up well.
16/3/2018
12:51
this_is_me: The government's attack on buy to let will have the effect of reducing the number of properties available on the rental market and thus push the cost of renting much higher. If those with buy to let properties see no prospect of further capital gains in the foreseeable future that will also see selling out from the sector and the money reinvested elsewhere. Share buy backs at the current share price make no sense when the prospects are not great and the share price is likely to fall over the short/medium term. Share buybacks make sense only when the share price is stupidly low. I may have sold out a little early but I am not tempted to buy back in at present. The old saying that profit warnings come in threes has some validity.
16/3/2018
08:10
fenners66: pj fozzie - I am absolutely with you on share buy backs and this shows that all the shares bought over the last few months can do absolutely nothing for today's share price. Whereas the promise of a higher future yield I believe would.
22/2/2018
17:45
pj fozzie: I just wish they'd stop throwing the money away on buy backs - I'd so much rather have the cash. When the share price was below £30, I had some sympathy to the idea of buybacks (not much mind) - but at the current levels it just doesn't make sense to me - the shares do not look cheap. Cheers, PJ
11/9/2017
15:37
this_is_me: Well f66 did you put the cash from your early sale into CLLN?! I think that most people are not that bothered if our ancient, well healed, big boss is cashing out preparatory to retirement, in favour of making IHT friendly moves, in a way that doesn't cause the share price to tank. I don't begrudge him anything given the amount of profit I am sitting on in BKG shares. I don't think that the shares are fully valued at current levels; that is not to say that I wouldn't sell if I thought that the share price was going to fall.
14/8/2017
19:12
1gw: Yes, but at some point they may push their luck too far. It looked like they were struggling on Thursday to keep the price up, despite ramping up the volume they were prepared to buy. If they are confident that the shares are undervalued by the market and that this will become apparent as they produce trading statements and results, then that's OK (IMO), but as soon as they start moving towards just trying to increase earnings per share or worse trying to get it above a nominal share price target they have in mind, then they are vulnerable to someone trying to take them on. Their original buyback announcement read as though the buyback was going to be value-focused, buying back when the share price materially undervalued the company (in their view). I have sold out because I fear it may have moved beyond this. They may well share an update on the thinking behind their buyback activity when they announce the dividend later this week.
13/7/2017
10:09
jrphoenixw2: Maybe worth recapping how BKG originally framed it in their Interim Results a/o Dec 2016. 'SHAREHOLDER RETURNS PROGRAMME The Board of Berkeley has reviewed the mechanism for making the remaining £10.00 per share payments under the Shareholder Returns Programme that was put in place in 2011, and enhanced this time last year from £13.00 per share to £16.34 per share. The current heightened macro uncertainty has led to significant market volatility and there is a dislocation between this and both underlying market conditions and the strength of Berkeley’s operating model. As a consequence, the Board is proposing to introduce flexibility such that the remaining £10.00 per share payments can be made through a combination of share buy-backs and dividends, as opposed to solely dividends. This recognises that, at certain price points, the Board is of the opinion that the Company is materially undervalued and share buy-backs will be in the best interests of all shareholders. In making this change, the Board is also proposing that the payments should be re-characterised from being a value per share, to be an absolute value per annum. This ensures that the same quantum of cash will be returned as previously anticipated, but on a smaller number of shares, to the extent share buy-backs occur. This absolute value will be increased appropriately for any new shares issued. [page 1] THE BERKELEY GROUP HOLDINGS PLC INTERIM RESULTS FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED 31 OCTOBER 2016 [page2] £ per share £’million Paid to date £6.34 £854.9 By 30 September 2017 £2.00 £277.7 By 30 September 2018 £2.00 £277.7 By 30 September 2019 £2.00 £277.7 By 30 September 2020 £2.00 £277.7 By 30 September 2021 £2.00 £277.7 To come * £10.00 £1,388.5 Total £16.34 £2,243.4 * based on a net 138.8 million shares in issue as at 31 October 2016 The Board believes that this change will ensure that Berkeley’s shareholders fully benefit from the value embedded in the business. The Company will consult with Shareholders on consequential changes to the 2011 LTIP to ensure this reflects these changes, prior to a General Meeting of the Company in the New Year. [page 3 from the ‘Chairman̵7;s statement’] At the same time the Board is proposing to introduce flexibility to the Shareholder Returns programme so that future returns can be made by either dividends or share buy backs, as opposed to solely dividends, to the extent the Board believes the prevailing share price materially undervalues the Company and that such purchases would be in the best interests of all shareholders. It remains the intention of the Board to return £2 per share per annum over the next five years under this new mechanism and, for the avoidance of doubt therefore, this is not a reduction in the overall returns allocated to shareholders. [Chief Exec Statement – page 5] The Board of Berkeley has now reviewed the mechanism for making the remaining £10.00 per share payments in light of its assessment that the current short-term macro volatility is preventing the long-term value of Berkeley being recognised by the market. As a consequence, the Board is proposing to introduce flexibility such that the remaining £10.00 per share payments can be made through a combination of share buy-backs and dividends, as opposed to solely dividends. This recognises that, at certain price points, the Board is of the opinion that the Company is materially undervalued and share buy-backs will be in the best interests of all shareholders. In making this change, the Board is also proposing that the payments should be re-characterised from being a value per share, to be an absolute value per annum. This ensures that the same amount of cash will be returned as previously anticipated, but on a smaller number of shares, to the extent share buy-backs occur. This absolute value will be increased appropriately for any new shares issued. [same time-table as laid out above in Chairman’s Statement] The Board believes that this change will ensure that Berkeley’s shareholders fully benefit from the value embedded in the business. In February and August each year, the Company will announce the dividend to be paid at the end of March and September, respectively. This will be calculated as the absolute value amount to be delivered in the six months (£138.8 million based on the current shares in issue), less the cost of any share buy-backs undertaken in the relevant period. Going forward each subsequent relevant period begins on the date of announcement of the dividend for the previous relevant period.' hxxps://www.berkeleygroup.co.uk/media/pdf/d/q/Berkeley_Interim_Announcement_Dec_2016_-_FINAL.pdf
05/4/2017
19:55
1gw: I really don't understand this debate about Tony Pidgley selling some shares. From looking through the FY16 annual report and subsequent directors holdings rns's it seems to me: 1. At end-FY16 (30th April 2016) Obligation (on Tony Pidgley) to hold shares: 113,522 shares (4 x base salary / £29.95 share price) Shares actually held: 6,463,855 Or as the annual report puts it: Obligation to hold 400%, actual holding 22,776% 2. During FY17 27th June 2016 - bought 35,061 shares at £22.69 each 30th September 2016 - option exercised on 545,368 shares vested from 2011 LTIP, shares transferred to wife 4th April 2017 - sold 1,000,000 shares at £31.10 each. 3. Current position Shares actually held: 5,498,916 beneficial in his name + 545,368 (presumably) still in wife's name. So in summary: He has skin in the game (about 6m shares between him and his wife not forgetting remaining 2011 LTIP options); He still holds way, way more than the obligatory 400% base salary in shares; He made a purchase when the share price was struggling in the low 20's post-referendum, making a public display of confidence. I wish the executive directors of all the companies I invest in were as publicly aligned with shareholders as he is. What is there to complain about? Oh yes, selling after introducing a buyback! Here again, I do not really understand the criticism. Assuming he believed that (1) the share price in the mid-high £20's was materially undervaluing the company and (2) he was likely to want to sell a relatively small proportion of his shares some months later, what should he have done? It seems to me that delaying the share buyback until after he had sold would not have been an optimal solution for shareholders, and neither would accelerating his sale so that he was seen to sell at a relatively low price just before he introduced a share buyback - how would the market have interpreted his comments on the share price undervaluing the company if he had just sold before the program started? I can understand shareholder displeasure at the very high level of his total remuneration because of the LTIP payouts (although presumably shareholders were happy enough to think about the targets being met when they were put in place), but I really don't think criticism of this share sale is justified.
05/4/2017
17:16
fenners66: And who is responsible for the value of the company? As you say "Directors selling material chunks of their holdings is a sensitive matter [usually/IME]. In the PLC where I spent my later career it was taboo". So he is NOT allowed to take advantage of the share price like you or I ? Perhaps you could enshrine it in his contract of employment - as long as you work for us you are only ever allowed to buy. Also you must do your utmost to create wealth for the rest of us to buy and sell on a whim. After all we will need to sell from time to time. Maybe he wants to buy a new house, maybe a yacht who knows? He's sold a whole days volume worth of shares, shock ! But what about last week , last month every days shares sold , is that not taboo that anyone should sell? The difference is that if I sell my shares no one notices or cares even if its £m's. If I sell those shares it sends a signal to the market that some idiot who has no idea this is going higher has foolishly sold. But we read into it that if Pidgely sells he knows so much more - thats why the price has gone down - but Directors can be stupid as well. There is a director at GVC - whenever he sells large chunks the share price goes up! Every one takes it as a contrary signal. Thus no one cares any more. So he gets credit for hard work and timing a sale. I would have given far more support to the idea that they should be paying dividends and not doing buy backs. I was a buyer here for yield - BUT the tone of this board for the past 6 months has been the buybacks have been a good idea and have supported the share price - no one complained at that.
09/9/2016
15:19
henrylightningbolt: BKG share price has fallen a little over a 100 points since I sold. Should I consider buying back today or wait?
Berkeley Group Holdings share price data is direct from the London Stock Exchange
add chat code
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:41 V: D:20180818 12:22:26