Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Finsbury Food Group Plc LSE:FIF London Ordinary Share GB0009186429 ORD 1P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  0.00 0.0% 56.50 132,609 08:00:00
Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price
56.00 57.00 56.50 56.50 56.50
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Food Producers 306.35 2.87 -0.60 74
Last Trade Time Trade Type Trade Size Trade Price Currency
15:57:24 O 8,250 56.025 GBX

Finsbury Food (FIF) Latest News

More Finsbury Food News
Finsbury Food Takeover Rumours

Finsbury Food (FIF) Discussions and Chat

Finsbury Food Forums and Chat

Date Time Title Posts
24/9/202019:20Finsbury Foods - A Sweet Investment?2,149
15/9/201713:40*** Finsbury Foods ***1
01/12/201418:52Negative Aspects about FIF178
23/1/201210:24Finsbury Food-Growing-Acquisition Hungry-Time to Buy?1,738
13/7/201113:48Finsbury Foods - A Sweet Investment?-

Add a New Thread

Finsbury Food (FIF) Most Recent Trades

Trade Time Trade Price Trade Size Trade Value Trade Type
View all Finsbury Food trades in real-time

Finsbury Food (FIF) Top Chat Posts

Finsbury Food Daily Update: Finsbury Food Group Plc is listed in the Food Producers sector of the London Stock Exchange with ticker FIF. The last closing price for Finsbury Food was 56.50p.
Finsbury Food Group Plc has a 4 week average price of 55.40p and a 12 week average price of 55.40p.
The 1 year high share price is 105.50p while the 1 year low share price is currently 53p.
There are currently 130,383,361 shares in issue and the average daily traded volume is 203,298 shares. The market capitalisation of Finsbury Food Group Plc is £73,666,598.97.
essentialinvestor: space, ultimately earnings drive the price. Yes there may be long timeframes where fundamentals may be out of sync with a share price. At £1 a share the rating arguably asked a lot, it looks more reasonably priced atm. That's just on a rudimentary intial look.
remslie: I find it amazing that the remuneration committee allow such large salaries and benefits to be paid to the two senior directors. Surely the senior Directors should receive a market rate salary and options which can be excercised at a share price well north of today’s share price. Their current remuneration is equivalent to a FTSE 250 company. Indeed the Directors hold relatively few shares which is always a concern. I am surprised the major shareholders allow these enormous pay packets whilst delivering such a poor return to shareholders. Miton and Ruffer etc should get involved imo
topvest: The results were indeed pretty good. Obviously pleased that I'm out directly, but still hold indirectly through LONFIN which have a holding. Its difficult to understand why the share price has declined so much as the story hasn't changed. Brexit worries I guess.
topvest: Its difficult to understand the drop in share price today. Results didn't look too bad, but revenue is no doubt below consensus which is about a 5% increase for the full year. Was it a profit warning or not? Difficult to know.
powerhouse: Why the significant drop in share price today?
jakedog2: NT bought in. May give price a boost .... From his lastest blog today. An interesting one that came up at the seminars is Finsbury Food (FIF) which provides high end bakery, cakes and the like. With the success of Bake Off, demand for high quality bakes has risen (gettit?) and the company is certainly making a lot of dough. Profits are rising fast and forecast to rise strongly this year - looks like a share to me that rerates higher, stops for a while then goes up again. Looks like this one is about to get a sudden rerating higher again and I'm looking for a rise of a further 25% to get the share price up to about 125p. Pretty low risk too unless people really stop eating their kind of stuff.
smithie6: not sure whether the acq. of Fletchers is perhaps over priced a bit FIF looks to have a reported EBITDA of 10.7M giving a low ratio to cap. value of 3.7- 4 (with share price at 60p) EBITDA/share looks to have been around 16p (10.7M/66M) (that ratio would reduce even more if one removed the recent large investment in new machinery, phps 6-8M, and the property held and considered a value of EV wrt EBITDA, perhaps reducing the ratio to 3 !) and FIF was roughly debt free or would have been phaps in 1 yr while Fletchers EBITDA was 6M (59M new shares issued) yet Fletchers valued at 56M a ratio of around 9 (and had debt) a valuation ratio MUCH higher than the FIF ratio EBTDA/new share is 8.5....much lower than the 16 for 'old' FIF !!!!!!! (for this value I have deducted 1M as estimated interest cost for the 21M debt used with shares to obtain the 6M EBITDA from Fletchers) The large difference in EBITDA per share ratios between old FIF and Fletchers makes me wonder if FIF has over paid to acquire Fletchers, compared with options choices to benefit shareholders, such as perhaps increasing the divi for the old FIF to drive up the share price (towards 120p for the old FIF)....for a low risk solution to benefit shareholders. (from the summary info looks difficult to me to calculate the expected EPS and debt. in 1 years time...although the cash generation should reduce the debt level and hence the finance costs...I guess some people will have enough data and have calculated some numbers...) I guess part of the idea is to increase the EPS over coming years by reducing the increased debt from cashflow.....(not going to attract many tech sector investors !) (I wonder if the shareholders would have done better if a larger divi was paid or share buybacks done....instead of using the cashflow to make this acquisition....last big acquisition was over priced and shareholders lost a lot of money as a result....) one can see possible cross selling benefits etc....but perhaps a lot of that was already included in the price paid for Fletchers...and cross selling possibilities is perhaps only in the direction from FIF to Fletchers rather than in the other direction ----- one might argue that FIF was 50% undervalued at its takeover value... issuing a large number of FIF shares as part of the acquisition cost could be argued to be like giving away assets to the sellers of Fletchers, ..and one wonders whether FIF could have done something to have got the share price up before doing the acquisition, such as presentations, higher divi, a bonus divi announcement for X months in future etc. ---- Risk one might argue that FIF could have stayed as it was, and could have increased its divi to say 3p (from 6p EPS, after tax) which would have been a 5% divi wrt 60p share price. Or even higher if the cash was not needed. If all of the 6p EPS was paid out as a divi then one could argue the share price would have gone to 120p to give a yield of 5%. With little risk to FIF shareholders. Whereas the acquisition infers a level of risk, as well as opportunities perhaps. Be interesting to see how the share price and EPS performs over coming years and how it compares to a share price of 120p, if 6p divi had been paid from the old FIF. ------ Last big acquisition that FIF made, 5 or so years later....and with turnover doubled after the acqusition of each part to the merger.... the share price was 2/3rd of the price paid for the acquisition !! (some ppl have had doubts about the legality of that deal, whether to benefit shareholders (ref. the LAW) or the chairman.....who gained by selling X Million shares at arguably a false high make him richer. Using his votes and those of David Marshall (LFI). London mkts are a cesspit (Quindell, Cupid, MOS, Lamprell, Sefton Res. the list is endless !.....with few or no prosecutions) Will this be the same ?!, share price of 2/3rd in 5 years time, 40p ?!
markt: so...some -ve factors about FIF, its sector etc (there are +ve factors as well.....see other threads.....this thread is trying to ensure a more open discussion of pros and cons) - the market seems to think that the acquisition of Lightbody for 52M incl debt and 4M equiv. value of lease for around 46-50M of turnover !!..(very high ratio in low profit food sector)...was a very bad move.....that overpaid big time.... Mr Saatchi, the chairman was very happy....he sold almost all ..and made millions and left in 2008. The CEO left. The FD left a few months before. Virtually at same time as the acquisition the shares stopped at their peak of 110p and then started their down trend to fall for 2 years to around 12p !. The market was not impressed. - the 'new' FD S.Boyd did not buy he did not see them as cheap....till July 2011 at the same time as he was given a massive amount of share options, much larger amount that the shares he one infers that he only bought the shares because of the options. Essentially the same for the CEO J.Duffy. - very low profit margin. PAT is around 2% of turnover. - gross profit % has seen a fall over the last few years and that is despite investing in new machines, reducing staff numbers and saving costs in every aspect of production ..for some years now). This is important for a company producing very low PAT margin. - profit is small compared to the wages bill. that creates a risk of X. - the adjusted EPS for the years 2009, 2010, 2011 is 6.9p, 7.0 and 7.1p. This is despite a 20M increase in turnover between 2010 and 2011 and less staff in 2011 than 2010. And no noticeable staff reductions made in 2011. One would have expected the diluted EPS in 2011 to have increase noticeably versus 2010 but it did not. This shows imho that the margin has reduced. -diluted EPS around 2007-08 = 10.5p and in 2011 = 7.1p. despite the increase in turnover, reduction in staff numbers and other cost savings such as combining factories etc - turnover over the years 2008-2010 FELL if you take into account inflation ! ...shows that it is a difficult sector...and that total sales in cake sector (big part of turnover for FIF) have probably fallen - the ups and downs in turnover shows that sales and profits are dependant on external factors outside the control of FIF....whether they make a good product or not - they make a physical to sell it a distance from the factory involves costs and makes it harder for them to compete in other countries, and/or reduce the margin after paying transport costs - the interest cost + depreciation cost is the same as the PAT. - the PAT is only approx. 2 X interest cost......if they have to pay higher interest rates at some time in the future then the PAT will be hit hard - high debt relative to PAT. around 32M bank debt and 4.3M deferred payments. paying off around 4M /year on 9 years to pay off approx. Actual debt pay off in the future....will only be known after the future has occurred ! - they do not own most of the brands they produce...and they do not own the outlets....hence a lot of things that affect performance are outside of their own hands. - they do not receive long term orders for most of sales. instead it appears that they receive daily and/or weekly orders. The supermarket does not really care if they sell bread from company 1 or company 2....they are interested in making maximum profits. - the supermarket chains are experts in making suppliers compete on price - it is a bad sector historically. many companies have gone bust or been bought out at low prices - the P/E ratings for shares for companies in the sector are normally low - FIF main turnover comes from cake sector where it is No.1 or No. 2 in the UK it is unlikely that they can get people to eat more cake than they do at present. (the competitors will also be ....competing !) - risk of reduced sales in the sector due to retailing sector having a hard time, due to economic problems - most of FIF sales are cakes and hence are not basic eating items but are an extra. In times of economic problems like now...there is a risk of X for sales.and for margin - to increase sales FIF always has to buy and use more raw materials and gas and wages. In return they get a very small profit, 2% PAT of turnover at FIF level. - to increase sales above a certain point they have to add shift working...and after that to rent another factory and buy expensive machines...and provide staff.....large shifts in turnover can not be switched ON/OFF in 1 day. ...for say a software company it is a different situation. - the board appears to have performed very badly. The FIF board made at acquisition that cost 38M + 4M real value of lease + approx. 10M debt. ie. 52M. That acquisition looks to be the cause of the collapse in the FIF share price ...started immediately after the acquisition. The share price is still only 1/3rd of what it was then the acquisition was made. the same time the CEO left , a few months after the CEO left and the FD left before (he would have been involved in the take over discussions) !! Did the FD and chairman know what was about to happen even though it was them that did the deal ?!! - the CEO keeps changing. Will the current new CEO leave in 1 or 2 years if he manages to exercise his massive options package ? and receive 1 years salary ? and then yet another CEO....and yet another big options package ? - do the option writers know what they are doing ? small options package for previous CEO and he did a good job !! (EPS up, share price to 100p !!) resigned himself, if he sold then he made good profit. Ex-chairman made millions by exercising options and warrants at 20p and 30p and selling at 90p !!...Now massive options package for new directors which they can exercise and then leave if they wish in 2013. Repeated dilution. - a lot of on-going dilution in the EPS by repeatedly providing options to directors. - current amount of options is very big as a % of the number of existing shares - the accounts for recent years are full of words like "challenging", "difficult" - wages bill and cost of materials is very big versus PAT. risk of X. - if increase wages bill by 3% every increases costs by millions ..then it is a big risk to the amount of FIF profit. - sales and profit is dependant in pasrt on cost of raw materials. On 2-7-2008 the co. announced that profit would be down by 1.5M due to material costs (flour, eggs, butter) having increased. The co. needs X years to pay off its debt, could raw material costs be high during one of those years ? - no dividend since has to concentrate on reducing debt. - risks if economic problems get worse, which is expected in Europe and may encroach into the UK since UK sells 40% of exports to they are linked... - if Euro falls then UK economy will suffer due to pound being more expensive - if Euro falls then FIF sales to Europe would be expected to be hit. If Euro falls by say 20% and selling price in Euros increases by 20% then one could envisage that there is a risk of X that european sales could stop....completely (since products made in Eurozone could then be cheaper). -------- FIF has had years of acquisitions....and of moving production from factory 1 to factory 2 to reduce costs...reduce costs by closing site of factory 1. Investing in new machines which produce more for the same costs..... and the result so far seems to be that profitability is the same as it was X years ago. 7.0p diluted EPS in 2010 and 7.1p diluted EPS in 2011 despite 20M more turnover. ADVFN says diluted EPS was 7.4p in 2008 and also 7.4p in 2011. ie. that the acquisition of Lightbody has not increased the EPS !!.... ie. appears that FIF is having to run hard and make many improvements stay still.. ---- The big options issued in July 2011 (6.5M) and the existing large number of options will be a big increase in the number of diluted shares in 2012 accounts and 2013, makes it harder to increase the diluted EPS in 2012 and 2013. ---- The issuing of massive amounts of options would infer for many people that the board perceive that it is not an easy smooth road for FIF in 2012 and 2013 and there are many risks.....and hence that massive incentives are needed for the try to make sure that they stay and to try to provide motivation. ----- The number of options is now a massive %. (I don't think any of the 'longs' realise).
markt: Boffster ....yes, I am a holder..... and I think that the FIF share price has a good chance of moving higher from here, high profit versus cap. value, could break through 25p resistance after failing many times chart looks a bit like a compressing triangle coming to a point possibly overcome resistance at the tip (but FIF shares also have -ve points !!) --- .... I think that one of you big holders should go and voice any questions from msg board users. I dont think any of my points are relevant to ask at the AGM.....mostly extra info about one of the directors of FIF (OK, creator of FIF) and poor track record of that person in other companies they have created unless you want to ask D.M. if any mistake was made in the acquisition of Lightbody and the amount of debt taken on and in hindsight if he would have done it differently. and perhaps ask if there is no option to sell any assett to boost the balance sheet and reduce debt ====== Spaceparallax You doubt the accuser. (but I know that any -ve info is not popular on this message board, probably since some posters have large positions in FIF shares) I repeat below the numbers for LFI, large investor in FIF, 8M shares. The numbers are true and you can cross check. The numbers do not depend on the accuser. Just fact. NAV was higher in the 90s that in recent years. ie. I infer that D.Marshall (FIF director) has a bad track record as an investment manager. (At WSE it is also negative growth, massive share issues at 56p in 1995, and 50p in 2007, price now to sell = 38p 16 years later. Also controlled by D.Marshall) LFI, owns around 8M shares in FIF....D.Marshall in practice controls LFI 1993 LFI NAV = 37p. 1994 NAV = 34p. 2011 LFI NAV = 29p at last interim results, and 26p in February 2011. Negative growth over 18 years. ----- I would like to remove the directors from WSE/LFI or to have a distribution of the shares held (incl. FIF) to WSE/LFI provide many advantages. (D.M. has been a director at LFI since 1971 so wont be in rush to give it up !). But I need more votes in order to be able to call an EGM or add a vote to the AGM. One day it may happen. ----- The recorded bad track record of the person that created FIF initially by backing it into a shell and who was behind the FIF strategy of acquisitions (the big acquisition knocked the FIF share price for 6 I believe, due to resulting high FIF debt) is relevant background information for this message board imo.
markt: The facts completely disagree with what you have written in your post. (most info is slightly off-thread.....but relates to 2 non-execs at FIF (David Marshall and Edward Beale) some people may find some info of interest) Finsbury. Massive acquistion around 85p, under Mr Marshall's impulse imo. Share price now 25p. Approx. 1/3rd. Not been a success. Creston. started in 2000 at around 100p...11 years later and share price is 90p, with negligible or low dividends. Not been a success. Western selection. biggest share issues in 1995 at 56p. 2M new shares at 64p in 2006. And 6M new shares issued in 2007 effectively at 50p (from 12M shares to 18M). Share price now if want to recoup your cash = 38p !. Not been a success. Pay 56p in 1995 and only get 38p if sell now in 2011 !!. Terrible !. Dividends around 3%, not kept up with inflation. In no way can it be viewed as "reasonably solid overall". LFI has performed worse than WSE. Average price in last 3 years is lower than average price in the 90s, 20 years ago. Not been a success. MWB. Share price has collapsed from its peak of around 3 pounds I think it was, now 24p, at risk of going bust. Sufferred from too much debt and gearing, also hit FIF share price. Northbridge, big success but not enough to provide good performance from WSE. One problem with WSE:LFI is that over 10 years they consume 30% of the assetts due to running costs. 2 periods of 10 years is 2 blocks of 30%, it adds up. And Mr D.Marshall receives around 107k/year from being a director at companies where LFI/WSE invests.....paid to "an overseas company". Over 10 years that is over 1M pounds. (D.M. is resident in South Africa....while has close knowledge of benefits of registering in Luxembourg, Channel Islands, Virgin Islands etc, so perhaps paid to tax haven to avoid taxes). In response to the bad performance the board under Mr David Marshall's control introduced a benefits scheme at WSE and LFI.....with a son as one of the 2 main beneficiaries while intentionally not mentioning that fact in the paperwork to vote on the scheme and intentionally not informing shareholders of the conditions that need to be achieved. So shareholders may continue to get poorer while a son of the main director may get richer. And D.Marshall may receive some shares as well. Shares at no cost I understand. --- ...use of LFI apartment (2.1M pounds) by employees of Monteagle Marshall (3 sons work there, some subsidiaries are registered at same offices in London, also used by FIF), so it could be used by David Marshall, the CEO....or a son or son+ family ..and there was a high cost car in old accounts..but you only see this info if you obtain the subsidiary accounts, so PIs will never find out listed company level Edward Beale (non-exec. at FIF and the CEO at City Group, which runs LFI and WSE) intentionally imo never gives a break down of the costs in LFI/WSE accounts seen by the market. Stops any shareholder complaining about misuse of company funds if no info is given !! ==== Monteagle S.A. by the way.... a very strange beast... import export....and runs a sizeable portfolio of listed shares as well ..very strange imo I know of no other listed company that is a normal business and also runs a portfolio of shares; outside of the finance. (maybe the real interest for Mr Marshall and related parties is personal gain from investments, resulting from knowledge from operating in the investment sector....or buying/selling in companies where WSE/LFI has inside information, but complying with the regulations rather than from growing the LFI/WSE share price). noting that related party of Mr D.Marshall (operating from the same offices in London as WSE/LFI and FIF) invested in loan notes of MWB which have proved a good investment imo, paying approx. 9.75% over X years that adds up.... various private investing companies operating from the same offices in London as WSE/LFI and FIF. D.Marshall has his own investment company registered there ---- WSE/LFI do not own controlling holdings in these companies......and the WSE/LFI stakes are not the cause of these investee companies being lowly valued (the low FIF share price results partly from the debt, tough sector, "challenging conditions", etc not because LFI own X %, approx 15% I think, +/-....if someone wanted to buy FIF they could even if LFI voted against it) ---- PIs have complained (and are still not happy) about share options for directors at companies where David Marshall is a director and where he or people he controls sit on the renumeration committee that decides on those options. Creston, FIF, WSE, LFI ...... Some of these D.M. related companies do not comply with the disclosure regulations for selling shares (Lord Saatchi sales at FIF, 5% sale on 4th October at NBI, Suffolk Life 4.8% at WSE itself.... no RNS notice have reported) a common factor is perhaps the cause, that the secretarial services are all provided by a D.Marshall company, City Group PLC.
Finsbury Food share price data is direct from the London Stock Exchange
ADVFN Advertorial
Your Recent History
Finsbury F..
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:20200925 18:03:30