We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register for Free to get streaming real-time quotes, interactive charts, live options flow, and more.
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Stock Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bovis Homes Group Plc | BVS | London | Ordinary Share |
| Price Change | Price Change % | Share Price | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.00% | 1,312.00 | 01:00:00 |
| Open Price | Low Price | High Price | Close Price | Previous Close |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1,312.00 |
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 04/1/2020 09:05 by whackford My bonus shares are in Barclays Smart Investor this morning. |
Posted at 05/3/2018 09:04 by yertiz Grahamburn - I just use the filter and deprive the poster of his soapbox. He is an obscene individual who seems filled with bile and malevolence against honest investors - obviously scarred from previous losses and doesn't understand the concept of legitimately making a profit by sound investment in the market. |
Posted at 02/3/2018 15:44 by minerve shaker44"As far as Post 1420 goes, many investors lobbied for the old ceo to be fired, and others bought in when the new ceo was appointed to sort out the problems. it is not correct to suggest all shareholders are disinterested in customer satisfaction. That would be very short sighted" That is good to hear. Yes, you can't paint all with the same brush. But 20 years of watching shareholder behaviour leads me to the comments that I make and apathy/ignorance is endemic everywhere I look. Especially where personal gain is involved. Ignore grahamburn. He is just upset that his Melrose shares are falling because his little cushy gain with the GKN takeover bid is looking less likely! LOL Have a good weekend. |
Posted at 02/3/2018 14:19 by shaker44 Of course it didnt go unnoticed that the ceo proudly claimed 80% of customers satisfied. But 20% dissatisfied-wow!!! Much more work to do. They should target 95% satisfied in my view, as a minimum.As far as Post 1420 goes, many investors lobbied for the old ceo to be fired, and others bought in when the new ceo was appointed to sort out the problems. it is not correct to suggest all shareholders are disinterested in customer satisfaction. That would be very short sighted |
Posted at 12/3/2017 12:39 by brummy_git Indeed, the plot seems to be thickening (see Sunday Tel article below) – expect the stock to be higher at tomorrow’s open.In terms of valuation, I'm guessing Bovis is worth circa 1.4x NTA or £10.50 on a standalone basis (vs 820p today), and possibly as much as £13, if taken-out following a competitive auction process. Only time will tell Bovis in talks with Galliford Try after rejecting Redrow proposal 12 MARCH 2017 • 11:49AM Bovis Homes is in £2.5bn merger talks with rival Galliford Try after rejecting a competing offer from fellow housebuilder Redrow. Shares in Bovis are expected to surge on Monday after it emerged the troubled construction firm has been courted by two suitors. The FTSE 250- listed company, which is currently without a chief executive and is led by chairman Ian Tyler, is holding talks with Galliford Try, which has already made an all-share proposal that Bovis spurned for being too low. At the same time, Bovis has also rejected a cash-and-stock offer from Redrow, the listed housebuilder that is 40pc controlled by founder Steve Morgan. “Redrow subsequently indicated that it was not willing to improve the terms of its proposal and discussions were terminated,” Bovis said. There has been speculation that Bovis could attract a suitor ever since late last year, when the builder shocked investors with a profit warning that was followed by the abrupt departure of chief executive David Ritchie in January. It emerged later that month that Bovis shareholder Andy Brough, an influential fund manager at Schroders, had written to upmarket builder Berkeley to suggest that it should explore a merger with the company. That proposal was rejected by Berkeley. Bovis said today that neither the first offer from Galliford Try nor Redrow’s cash-and-shares bid had “reflected the underlying value of the Bovis business”. It added: “The board also concluded that the Redrow proposal was not in the interests of Bovis shareholders as the cash element of the offer would require shareholders to crystallise value at the current Bovis valuation.” Bovis shares tumbled after its surprise profit alert just after Christmas and stood at 828p at the close of stock market trading on Friday evening, valuing the business at about £1.1bn. Galliford Try, which is also a member of the FTSE 250, is worth approximately £1.3bn. Kent-based Bovis, which is focused on the South of England and traces its roots back to 1885, conceded at last month’s annual results that it had endured “a difficult year” in 2016, which had followed “a period of ambitious growth”. Pre-tax profits slipped 3pc to £154.7m in 2016, despite an 11pc increase in revenues to £1.05bn. Galliford Try, which is helmed by chief executive Peter Truscott, recorded a 19pc surge in profits to £63m last year. |
Posted at 24/2/2017 11:58 by source Deutche are shiysters for Bovis. They had a £15+ target for them before last weeks profit warning. Their views (& indeed any paid for brokers) are to be taken with a heavy pinch of salt by any normal investor in my view. Regards,Source. |
Posted at 20/2/2017 09:57 by source On the call at the moment. Terrible profit warning today. Really bad management execution for an extended period and now coming home to roost (they should really all be thrown out given their markets!). Next year will be worse than this one and ROCE has dropped again from what was already an unacceptably poor level. CEO search only began 2 weeks ago! Chairman not even on the call. There doesn't seem any white knight in the wings given the mess so more bad news seems wholly possible ahead as their review gets to the bottom of why they've for years underperformed. Big margins drops. Actual customers don't seem happy either (defects and delays etc). Management bonuses still seem to be continuing (surprise surprise). For me (imo) it's clear these clowns can't deliver value or volume build properly. The divi is clearly their only trick in the bag to keep investors on the hook. This year is already a write off and seems to me that drops toward its yearly low shareprice seems sensible. Probably a safe drop below its NAV seems likely to both account for low value delivery this year and to maybe start to attract a proper volume housebuilder to consider taking them out of their misery. Regards,Source. |
Posted at 11/1/2017 17:57 by philanderer 'Why Bovis needed a breath of fresh air' |
Posted at 27/10/2016 08:48 by leading This certainly is an unloved share in an unloved sector.I see a housing market that is structurally undersupplied. The builders by their own admission all seem to be saying that the government has become much more supportive on the planning front recently. There is a risk that the government might withdraw "Help to Buy" which is propping the market up, but they have confirmed this will continue until 2021. On top of that, the new Prime Minister wants to get the aspirational classes on side and I suspect she sees a property owning democracy as a good thing, much as a predecessor of hers, so I expect government support for the sector to continue. The company itself is based primarily in the South East which is the most affluent region, but is also represented in the midlands and North West, so exposed to HS2 (shovels in the ground next year apparently), Midlands Engine, Northern Powerhouse etc. The company seems very conservatively run, with virtually no debt. At the same time, it has put in place the administrative structure to take annual volumes from 3635 in 2014 to an eventual target of 5,000-6,000pa. The current year should deliver 4,300 and capacity growth is about 400pa. The share yields about 6% and is on a prospective PE of about 7. In addition, housebuilders are resilient. If there's a crash they just stop building, sell from stock and wait for the market to stabilise and start all over again. The share price looks like a falling knife, but as a long term investor, its cheap enough for me and I have bought at 750p. Where else should I put my money? In a bank deposit paying 0.8%pa or should I buy a fancy internet marketing stock on a PE of 25 and wait for the inevitable profit warning carnage? |
Posted at 03/10/2016 18:48 by jockthescot Interesting and true IMO article....hxxp://www.spectator Interest rates rocketing back to 1990s levels. Foreign investment funds fleeing for Frankfurt and Paris. The pound in free-fall, and the government slashing spending as a consequence of a collapsing economy. Foreign-born construction workers returning home in horror. Amid all this chaos, estate agents would be about as popular as Donald Trump in Mexico City, building sites would be closing down, and house sales would be less frequent than Southern Rail trains. Yes, if you rewind to the beginning of summer, that was the consensus on what would happen to the building industry if the electorate was crazy enough to vote to leave the EU on 23 June. And yet, like so many of the cataclysmic Brexit warnings, events have not unfolded that way. In fact, it is now becoming clear that bricks and mortar will be one of the sectors that does best from the Brexit boom. Why? Because house prices will keep rising, planning restrictions should be eased, the government will boost spending, and on the labour supply aside, the industry will be one of the least affected by exclusion from the EU single market. In the immediate aftermath of the referendum result, the view in the market was that construction, and housebuilding in particular, was doomed. Companies in the sector lost up to 40 per cent of their value, wiping £8 billion off businesses that included well-known names such as Taylor Wimpey, Persimmon, Barratt and Berkeley. It was always a bit hard to work out the logic of that sell-off: it looked more as if the market had just decided to trash someone, and builders happened to be the most convenient target. Insofar as anyone could make sense of it, investors seemed worried about the warning from former chancellor George Osborne, dark overlord of Project Fear, that house prices would fall by 10 to 20 per cent in the event of a Leave vote. If that had happened, it would indeed have spread carnage throughout the sector. Building a house takes a long time, and if its value is going down with every day the bricklayers and roofers are working on it, and if buyers are holding off because they think prices will be cheaper next month, then the economics of the industry are grim. Fortunately, however, that proved no more accurate than all the other predictions of imminent disaster. House prices have sailed on upwards much as they were doing before the vote — that is to say, up a bit, but not dangerously fast. After the dust has settled, the outlook for housebuilders, and the construction industry more -generally, now looks a lot brighter. There are five reasons why. First, while there may yet be damaging long-term consequences from leaving the EU, in the short term it has given the economy a boost. The Bank of -England has cut interest rates and relaunched quantitative easing, while the market’s sharp devaluation of the pound has helped exporters. Lower interest rates and a faster-growing economy should feed through quickly into healthier house prices — and those are the most critical factor in keeping the sector -buoyant. Even if the economy does flag next year, which is what most pundits still expect, it would be no surprise if the Bank and the government pumped money directly into the building industry, as they did with the Help to Buy scheme in the last recession. Second, expect to see more infrastructure projects launched. In the wake of Brexit, the government has abandoned its target of balancing the books by the end of this parliament. We’ll see what chancellor Philip Hammond comes up with in his Autumn Statement, but it looks likely that he will ramp up spending, especially if it counts as investment. Expect the go-ahead for some headline-grabbing new projects, from a decision at last on London’s new airport runway to an upgrading of our creaking power network. Again, that will be a huge boost for the big construction firms. Third, the labour supply will keep flowing. As we all know, Eastern Europeans have come over to Britain in their hundreds of thousands to work in the -building trade. Overall, 12 per cent of workers in the UK -industry are foreign-born. If that was suddenly cut off, the industry really would suffer. No one, including the government, has any clear idea what Brexit will look like yet , but even if free movement of European workers is ended, it now looks likely to be replaced by a work-permit system. So it’s highly unlikely that the supply of skilled construction workers will -suddenly dry up. Fourth, the Leave vote has persuaded the political establishment that a huge segment of the electorate is fundamentally unhappy with the status quo. A big part of that is the slow-motion housing crisis. Homes have become increasingly unaffordable, while near-zero interest rates and the QE boost to asset prices are making the problem worse. Right now, demand massively outstrips supply: we build about 150,000 houses a year, but need at least 220,000 to keep pace with a rising population and new household formation. If net immigration comes down as a result of Brexit — a big if — then it still won’t mean we have an excess of housing supply. The main bottleneck is a thicket of planning laws and regulations that hinder new building. Most of it has nothing to do with the EU, but leaving could still be the -catalyst for ripping up the red tape. If so, building would be a fast-growing industry again. Finally, it will soon be clear that the construction industry is one of the most detached from the EU. Building, which accounts for almost 8 per cent of Britain’s GDP, is the second least internationally traded sector— the only one with less international involvement, rather obviously, being government. Nobody exports houses or roads. Nor are its supply chains bound up with the EU: most building materials are manufactured in the country where they are used, because cross-border transport costs are too high. Many manufacturers will certainly notice the -difference if we leave the Single Market, but few builders will. They don’t sell anything in Europe, and they don’t buy much from Europe either. Indeed, since the referendum, the sector’s results have all been positive. Barratt chief executive David Thomas said, on releasing results in September, that simply ending uncertainty has helped improve its performance. Its pre-tax profits were up 21 per cent year-on-year. Redrow reported profits up 23 per cent. Berkeley said sales of some new homes had been deferred ahead of the vote but had caught up since, and that the impact had been minimal. That confidence is reflected in share prices. -Redrow has recovered from its post-referendum low of 294p to slightly more than 400p. Barratt has bounced from 388p to 488p. The same is true across the sector. But they are mostly still significantly down on where they were on 22 June. That looks crazy. There is no logical reason why the builders should be worse off once we are out of the EU — and plenty of reasons for thinking they might well do considerably better. |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions
Hot Features
Premium
