Dewhurst Dividends - DWHA

Dewhurst Dividends - DWHA

Best deals to access real time data!
Level 2 Basic
Monthly Subscription
for only
Monthly Subscription
for only
UK/US Silver
Monthly Subscription
for only
VAT not included
Stock Name Stock Symbol Market Stock Type Stock ISIN Stock Description
Dewhurst Plc DWHA London Ordinary Share GB0002675261 'A'NON.VTG ORD 10P
  Price Change Price Change % Stock Price Low Price High Price Open Price Close Price Last Trade
0.00 0.0% 597.50 597.50 597.50 597.50 597.50 08:00:27
more quote information »
Industry Sector

Dewhurst DWHA Dividends History

Announcement Date Type Currency Dividend Amount Period Start Period End Ex Date Record Date Payment Date Total Dividend Amount

Top Dividend Posts

jaf111: Somewhat underwhelmed by results....was expecting a little more especially after recent run up in share price. Certainly surprised that currency movements had no material impact.
jaf111: very very quietly the share price keeps moving higher...... interims should be out mid June......
cockerhoop: We're currently still nearly 40p below the pre-legal share price after pretty decent interim results. We have Market Cap of approx £31.5m with £10.5m in cash with forecasts for the current year of 38p EPS. Doesn't appear too expensive to me at least. The maximum legal liability appears to be circa $8m (£5m) so they'll probably settle for somewhere between 0 and $8m at some point in the future. Clearly as GP I think stated above is that if it's at the top end the share price will go down, whilst if the case is thrown out the share price will go up assuming efficient markets............. Which clearly isn't the case in Dewhurst otherwise the discount between the A and T shares would be more constant.
cockerhoop: Regards content though I still maintain you were completely incorrect in suggesting that the share price did not move on the release of the RNS regarding the legal case. It's pretty clear it dropped 40p
emmo1210: The share price when the claim was announced was 310p. The share price today is around 300p. The result yesterday had little to no bearing on the share price I believe there is much more downside than upside on the bearing of the claim result. The market has been unable to quantify the possibility of a loss due to NO information been given since announcing the claim. Hopefully they are cleared but its not a risk I will take on until further clarity is given. I certainly don't believe 50p being added to share price anyway but certainly 50p+ could leave it.
gengulphus: If they win I would estimate a negligible to small price rise - they are trying to clear their own name, not win a settlement. They don't need to win a settlement to increase the value of the shares - just getting rid of the threat of losing a settlement will do the job. Look at it this way: When this legal action was announced in January, no money actually left the company - and yet the share price still dropped around 40p (roughly estimated by looking at the chart in the thread header). What had changed was not the company's actual current business operations, assets and liabilities: it was just that the market had become aware that there might be a big legal settlement against the company in the future. I.e. the appearance of that possible big future loss in what investors know about the company was enough to cause a 40p-per-share drop in the share price. That's good reason to believe that if that possible big future loss disappears, it will have roughly the opposite effect. Of course, if it instead becomes a definite big loss, one can expect the share price to drop further. This is a "heads you win, tails you lose" scenario, not "heads you win, tails you draw"! Gengulphus
markrogers88: Pat - I made a conservative estimate of 35p for this year myself funnily enough. Might have to revise that down slightly, but really, attributable profit this year isn't as important to us as what the company will be earning in 7-10 years. To devalue the whole enterprise by 15-20% on a stumble is really a major overreaction by the market, especially when so little growth was factored into the price of A's beforehand. No company's value should be determined by one year's performance afterall, but instead by a multiple of what it will make going forward. A price of £28m for A's puts the company on an earnings multiple of 7-10 if shareholders make roughly £2-4m at the starting point, or 10-14% earnings yield. That's generally a fair price for a company never expected to grow its earnings in the future - but with Dewhurst retaining a large % of earnings, expanding, acquiring etc, they have a long track record of improving the earning power of the business. More important than the share price is how the business is performing - the company certainly isn't worth 15% or 20% less than it was yesterday on this update. Would be reassuring to know "how significant" the slowdown is and importantly too, what "market expectations" were defined as to begin with. The 42.5p broker estimate?
coolen: Re the "A"'s discount to the "Ords", 10-15% used to be the difference when a larger number of companies had dual share capital. Most enfranchishments were done on that basis. A bigger premium used to arise if a take-over bid was in the wind or if there was a family dispute. Bear in mind that after several generations, the interests of some key family members may not be aligned to those of the minority non-voting investors. In the Cakebread situation, a punter forced up the price of the Voters (over a long period) and then persuaded the board (also big holders of the Voters)that dilution caused by enfranchising the non-voters could be minimised by giving the voters 7 times as many shares in the new share capital. Result: Voting share price 350p: Non-voting price 50p.
coolen: I'll just deal with one point at this stage, viz.the reason that an institution may have to buy the Dewhurst voters as opposed to the "A"s. The following quote comes from a company similarly affected, although I confess that I do not know the extent which this incident may affect Dewhurst: "The FTSE recently reviewed the All Share Index and decided that shares which did not have voting rights would not retain a Premium rating. As a result the "A" non-voting Ordinary shares along with those of a number of other companies have been removed from the index. As a consequence index tracker funds have been divesting themselves of the "A" non-voting Ordinary shares which caused the share price to fall. Despite this change, both shares classes continue to share in the same portfolio and are entitled to the same level of dividends."
markrogers88: Hi, I was hoping someone might be able to help about the structure difference between A and Voting shares in this company. Does the share price of the A shares compare directly with the voting shares? In other words, do both types of share correspond to the same % claim in the company as the other, and the only difference is the voting premium? I notice the voting shares are down considerably today after those excellent results.
ADVFN Advertorial
Your Recent History
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:20200530 18:12:21