Buy
Sell
Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Comptoir Group Plc LSE:COM London Ordinary Share GB00BYT1L205 ORD 1P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  0.00 0.0% 2.95 33,290 08:00:00
Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price
2.80 3.10 2.95 2.95 2.95
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Travel & Leisure 33.40 -0.52 -0.54 3
Last Trade Time Trade Type Trade Size Trade Price Currency
15:54:42 O 16,612 2.95 GBX

Comptoir (COM) Latest News

More Comptoir News
Comptoir Investors    Comptoir Takeover Rumours

Comptoir (COM) Discussions and Chat

Comptoir (COM) Most Recent Trades

Trade Time Trade Price Trade Size Trade Value Trade Type
15:54:442.9516,612490.05O
10:52:182.9516,678492.00O
View all Comptoir trades in real-time

Comptoir (COM) Top Chat Posts

DateSubject
04/12/2020
08:20
Comptoir Daily Update: Comptoir Group Plc is listed in the Travel & Leisure sector of the London Stock Exchange with ticker COM. The last closing price for Comptoir was 2.95p.
Comptoir Group Plc has a 4 week average price of 2.45p and a 12 week average price of 2.45p.
The 1 year high share price is 8.85p while the 1 year low share price is currently 2.45p.
There are currently 96,000,000 shares in issue and the average daily traded volume is 69,093 shares. The market capitalisation of Comptoir Group Plc is £2,832,000.
24/6/2020
09:05
iamgreat1: Just like ark and erisGood strategy buy into a share then ramp it lnowing people will follow blindly then dump and onto the next
12/9/2019
06:30
pugugly: Smoke and mirrors- Adjusted EBITDA* before highlighted items of £2.0m up by 11.1% (H1 2018: £1.8m). Claims profitable after the accountants have massaged/ sorry mean adjusted/ but on basic accounting horribly loss making - IFSR16 makes accounts (imo) very foggy and too much subject to judgement rather than fact. https://www.investegate.co.uk/comptoir-group-plc--com-/rns/interim-results/201909120700100464M/ Could this be another restaurant group possibly likely to go the way to money heaven?
06/6/2017
12:07
tiredoldbroker: I know the business and they are not in the same price bracket as Wild Honey, Ottolenghi etc, nor are they the same business model. The point of Comptoir is that it's an affordable, modern, scaleable business with an offering at a keen price-point, capable of being expanded into a decent-sized chain. Taking the Wigmore St branch as the example, the 'starter' type mezze are priced generally at £4.50-£6, the mains mostly under £10 (and quite substantial servings), soft drinks from £2, 175ml glass of wine from £4.50. And 23-25 branches so far. Wild Honey is by contrast a Mayfair restaurant. À la carte menu starters from £11 to £16. Mains mostly £28-30, wine (only 125ml!!!) by the glass at up to £13. Honey & Co, which the last poster might have meant, is starters at £7.50, mains at £15.50 (bit much for some roasted aubergine with rice), 125ml wine from £6 to £9.50. Still a fair bit dearer than COM. Ottolenghi also: hot main course £21.75, etc etc. So maybe like isn't being compared to like (and none of these others are chain-builders, for example). The problems for COM, as I see it, are: probably expanded too fast last year, when landlords were falling over themselves to offer sites, and they had cash coming (or banked) from going public. But this is with hindsight, having seen consumer expenditure weaken since, due to Brexit, continued economic pressure, general election uncertainty and (let's be quite blunt) possibly an unspoken effect from them serving modern mid-East style food in a time of mid-east inspired violence. What do I think will happen? First of all, the COM team are quite talented and have shown in the past that they can adapt and evolve. They "banked" the freehold of their nth London production facility when they had the chance, and are cashing it in now, to keep the finances straight. They've let go of sites in the past which don't pay back, or switched the branding, and they have more than the core Comptoir brand to play with. I'm sure it does take longer to build up a customer base for a new branch, because what they are selling lacks the familiarity of pizza, chicken, burgers... but they also have the advantage after that of being in a less over-subscribed part of the market. So many businesses reliant on consumer leisure expenditure are having a tougher time right now, I don't get the feeling that the COM team have lost their way, and I think they are more likely to get it right than fail.
08/5/2017
08:41
hybrasil: Even at the current share price this is way overvalued. Each restaurant is value at £1.57m. Gaga
22/4/2017
07:12
hybrasil: Compare the share price on either a turnover basis or number of stores to tast. On that basis this could fall significantly
14/12/2016
12:22
keifer derrin: http://uk.advfn.com/stock-market/london/comptoir-grp-COM/share-news/Comptoir-Group-PLC-Acquisition/73137519 seems alot of pay for when the net value was half the price paid. but if Com can provide the food from their Core Processing Unit this should save money and with a turn over o 2.4m should hopefully make a decent profit....
21/6/2016
07:05
dice1950: Comptoir owns and/or operates Lebanese and Eastern Mediterranean restaurants. The core restaurant brand of the Company is Comptoir Libanais. The Company operates 11 Comptoir Libanais restaurants and also generates franchise revenue by franchising the Comptoir Libanais brand to other restaurant operators. The Company also operates two smaller Lebanese and Eastern Mediterranean outlets under the Shawa brand and a further two standalone high end restaurants, called Levant and Kenza. Summary of the placing · The placing raised £16.0 million (gross), of which £8.0 million was raised by the Company to expand the number of restaurants operated by the Company and £8.0 million was raised for selling shareholders. · The number of ordinary shares in issue immediately after admission will be 96,000,000, giving the Company a market capitalisation of £48.0 million at the placing price of 50 pence per ordinary share. http://www.comptoirlibanais.com/
02/2/2012
15:58
tara7: Good luck, the old [COM] did 14p to £9.50p.!
13/8/2006
14:14
tiredoldbroker: I'm not convinced it is reasonable to make a blanket claim that commercial property yields are in the 4-6% bracket now. If you register at propex.co.uk for example, you can view details of all sorts of commercial property in the SE of England, many with yields over 7%. The lower yields usually apply to larger buildings in prime locations, whereas the smaller developments in fringe towns which COM goes in for usually have rather higher yields. Note that their St Johns Court building in High Wycombe was sold on a 7.47% yield. Also I might suggest you look at the IPD website http://www.ipdindex.co.uk/results/indices/uk_annual/index_uk_annual.asp - their annual index survey of UK property returns has been going 20+ years and they reckon at end-2005, the "all commercial property" yield was 6% and that the outlook for 2006 was for this to rise, reflecting higher interest rates. Again, the 6% average is made up of lower yields on large prime properties and higher yields on smaller properties outside prime locations. The last set of figures didn't give an entirely clear picture, though they did say that "other operating income" of £6.3m was primarily rental income, but this could easily represent a capital value under £100m gross - for example, on a 7.1% average yield, the capital value would be £89.15m. They stated net debt at 31.3.06 as £51m, so I think it may be fairer to state NAV at about £38m. That still makes the shares cheap on asset grounds but not by the amount suggested above. COM isn't the only quoted property company tightly controlled by its directors and this accounts in part for the general lack of interest in the shares, the wide spread between bid and offer prices, and the general lack of a liquid market. Nor is it the only such company to deliberately obscure NAV by classing most property as Current Assets in the balance sheet - and this can go on for donkeys years, so that the real NAV per share is never revealed. SO while I think COM is probably quite cheap, it could carry on being so for a long time.
23/1/2006
01:07
maestro.: Business Focus The dotcom boom is back. Will it last this time? Less bubble less squeak. The web is now in the hands of big players less likely to get caught in the mouse trap By : Tony Glover - Technology Editor January 22, 2006 THE GROWING NUMBERS OF investors convinced the dotcom boom had returned got the fright of their lives last week. Their nightmare started when a little- known Japanese internet company, Livedoor, was raided by Japanese investigators last Monday. So overwhelming was the panic caused by the news, which added to worries about oil prices, that the selling of Japanese technology stocks forced the Tokyo Stock Exchange to close its doors for trading – for the first time in a generation. The Nikei 225 Index fell nearly 6% on Tuesday and Wednesday. Fears that the good run in technology stocks over the past year might be about to come to a painful end quickly spread to Wall Street and other markets. The Dow fell 213.32 points or 1.96% to 10667.39 on Friday erasing all gains for 2006. It was the worst session since March 2003. The S&P's 500 shed 1.83% to 1261.49. The Nasdaq slumped 2.35% to 2247.70, its biggest decline since August 2004 as the markets succumbed to mounting fears about earnings. By Monday, it is likely that traders will have relaxed and reverted to their previous belief that a new tech boom has just started. But for all investors, the events of last week raise a fundamental question which demands an answer: will the new dot.com era last or will it turn into a bust like the previous one, wiping out hard-earned savings and dashing the hopes of millions? This is an especially important question in Japan where share prices in Tokyo surged by 40% last year. Livedoor had been a favourite stock among small investors in Japan. Investors panicked on hearing that the company was being investigated by Japan's Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission. Its offices in Tokyo's Roppongi Hills were raided after allegations that it had mis-stated losses from its 2004 results and spread false information to boost its share price. Television pictures of the raid were flashed around the world, spooking investors. Frightened Tokyo brokers stopped accepting Livedoor shares as collateral and demanded that investors cover their trading positions with cash. As clients were forced to sell in a falling market, other technology stocks were dragged down. Japan's dotcom flu soon started to mutate into a global pandemic. Lower-than-expected profits from Yahoo and Intel last week were seized upon as evidence that tech stocks were in deep trouble. News of good earnings from two other technology darlings, Apple and eBay, were also viewed with suspicion by investors; even Google, the world's favourite dotcom stock, suffered. The Wall Street Journal, although noting that Google's profits are still climbing and that analysts are generally upbeat about its prospects, added this warning to its report last week: "But few investors are focusing on the growing number of restricted shares and options that Google is handing out to employees which will emerge as a sizeable expense in the next few years." By the end of the week calm had partly returned in Japan. The panic was over and the consensus among analysts was that investors had over-reacted to the Tokyo crisis. By Thursday, the market was even able to keep its poise even after absorbing disturbing news that 38-year-old Hideaki Noguchi, a senior adviser to Livedoor, had been found dead in a Tokyo hotel. The Nikkei Index recovered around 2% with internet and technology stocks leading the way. But there were plenty of scars left -- and in the US at least the worst was yet to come. The first signs of trouble ahead was when Yahoo's share price fell by a hefty 12% on news that fourth-quarter earnings had missed analysts' average estimate by 1 cent a share. Earnings had come in at 16 cents a share against the 17 cents expected, hardly a disaster. Far from being a dotcom promise that was not delivered, Yahoo had managed to grow annual revenues by an impressive 47% from $3.6bn (£2.1bn, E3bn) to $5.26bn over the year and its profits had risen by 126% from $840m to $1.9bn. Figures like these would normally be a cue for celebration and for sending the stock flying to new highs, rather than provoking a sell-off. To some sellers Yahoo's latest figures were interpreted as an indication that the stock may have reached, or be nearing, "maturity", another way of saying that growth rates on this scale cannot last. Growth is certainly slowing: Yahoo doubled sales between 2002 and 2003 before tripling them in 2004. But Yahoo's decline was only a taste of things to come. On Friday, Google's share fell 8%, leading a severe decline in the US markets on fears about earnings, energy prices and just about everything else. With a bit of luck, the markets will recover this week but questions will continue to be asked about the durability of the current boom. The most bullish analysts argue that the recent resurgence of the technology sector has several features that distinguish it from the late 1990s boom and subsequent bust. At that time the internet, e-commerce and web publishing sectors were untested concepts. Young dotcom entrepreneurs convinced venture capitalists to back their business plans. Because few investors understood what they were up to, a brash culture arose that declared it was creating "new economy" stocks. The Nasdaq, which lits shares of technology stocks, has doubled since October 2003, but is still only half way to the heights (5132.52) of October 2000. US interest rates have been rising steadily but there is lots of cash in the US parked in real estate that has not yet migrated into shares. Higher employment has returned to Silicon Valley (mostly in software), though there are still a quarter million fewer tech jobs from the 2000 peak. Attitudes have changed. A survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation showed Silicon Valley residents now prefer salaried jobs with established companies, rather than huge stock options with risky start-ups. Another indication Silicon Valley is more mature is the increase in spending by American venture capitalists, 25% of which ends up in Valley firms. A total of $4.21bn in venture capital was invested in the Valley in the third quarter of 2005, compared with $6.09bn for all of 2004. In 2000, in a blind frenzy, investors poured $30bn into thousands of dotcom start-ups. Virtually none of them made a profit. By the end of 2001, an estimated 80% were out of business. Tens of thousand jobs were lost and $2trillion in share value wiped out. The tech sector has revived since those dark days and the current boom has a different look, the most notable being that mergers and acquisitions have become the way for start-ups to cash out, rather than initial public offerings (IPOs). VCs are looking for fundamentals not visionaries, cashflow more so than hype. Harry Dent, an economist who predicted the last tech boom and bust in his 1992 book The Great Boom Ahead predicts a bigger boom growing over the next five years. But there is a sting in his tail. Dent sees the Nasdaq rising to 13,000 (it is now at 2,258) by 2010. "We see a broader tech boom, including biotech, resuming now that we're over this crash," he told an interviewer at Wired.com, another survivor from the last crash. "Businesses have cut costs and expanded their ability to grow with past investments. Now, businesses are going to have to catch up and reinvest to keep up with consumers, who never stop spending. Businesses will come back big-time, and that money largely flows into information technology." Dent, however, predicts a crash at the end of 2010 worse even than the previous one in 2001. He says this is largely because there is no large Baby Boom generation coming up to pick up consumer demand, which he attributes to the tech revival. "You've got a smaller generation following the largest generation in history," Dent said. Rather than thousands of start-ups, the current rebound is confined to established online advertisers such as Google, Yahoo and AOL, electronics firms such as Apple, as well as biotech, telecoms and software developers. "It is more isolated than last time," says a leading analyst. "[The rebound] is not insignificant, but it is in smaller pockets." The market still sees Yahoo's big rival, market leader Google, as the leading internet growth stock. Most analysts believe Google is firmly in a growth phase, while conceding that its shares are highly valued. Google trades at roughly 90 times current earnings. By contrast, Yahoo's shares trade at around 60 times earnings. But analysts believe internet stocks like Google have room for faster growth than non-tech companies. According to Cyrus Mewawalla, analyst at Westhall Capital, internet companies have substantial growth potential while traditional telecoms stocks are overvalued. "There will not be overall growth across the sector. Already, clear winners and losers are emerging. Telefónica, for example, probably bought O2 at the top of the market. "The bottom line is that telecoms operators like Vodafone derive about 80% of their voice while internet players such as Google [and now Tesco] are starting to offer voice [telecom] services on the web that are virtually free," said Mewawalla. "Internet stocks are set to benefit from customer losses that will severely impact traditional telecoms operators." France Telecom's profit warning earlier this month was attributable to loss of business to internet-based services and evidence of a shifting power base from old communications suppliers such as the former national telecoms operators to the internet-based economy. According to a survey, 592,000 France Telecom customers ended their fixed-line contracts with the phone operator during 2005 – six times as many as the year before. The survey also revealed that 2005 saw a spread of alternative phone operators, with a further 2.23m customers switching to other operators for the internet and other services, but retained a fixed-line contract with France Telecom. Ian Lobley, a senior partner in 3i's venture capital business, said he believes the balance between old and new communications players will shift dramatically during 2006. "Investors will start to find companies' roles increasingly confusing during the course of the year," predicts Lobley. "We are already seeing TV companies selling phone services and phone companies becoming TV companies." Overall, the view is that today's technology sector is different from the dotcom bubble seven years ago and that the boom has barely begun. JP Rangaswami, global chief information officer of Dresdner Kleinwort Benson, says the internet is entering the second stage of its evolution and that the medium, like the early days in Hollywood, is "only just at the Keystone Cops stage of its development". Speaking to entrepreneurs in London recently, Julie Meyer, founder and chief executive of Ariadne Capital, an early business development adviser of internet voice specialist Skype, was bullish about prospects for 2006. She likened the recent evolution of the internet as comparable to other periods in history that brought about sweeping social change. One venture fund manager attending the event said: "The buzz is just like it was at the start of the last dotcom boom. We are only at the start of the next cycle – 2006 is going to be an incredible year."
Comptoir share price data is direct from the London Stock Exchange
ADVFN Advertorial
Your Recent History
LSE
COM
Comptoir
Register now to watch these stocks streaming on the ADVFN Monitor.

Monitor lets you view up to 110 of your favourite stocks at once and is completely free to use.

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

P: V: D:20201204 17:41:15