We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register to chat with like-minded investors on our interactive forums.
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Stock Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| First Property Group Plc | FPO | London | Ordinary Share |
| Price Change | Price Change % | Share Price | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.00% | 14.75 | 00:00:00 |
| Open Price | Low Price | High Price | Close Price | Previous Close |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 14.75 | 14.75 | 14.75 | 14.75 |
| Industry Sector |
|---|
| REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT & SERVICES |
| Announcement Date | Type | Currency | Dividend Amount | Ex Date | Record Date | Payment Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 09/03/2023 | Interim | GBP | 0.0025 | 16/03/2023 | 17/03/2023 | 05/04/2023 |
| 29/11/2022 | Interim | GBP | 0.0025 | 08/12/2022 | 09/12/2022 | 30/12/2022 |
| 23/06/2022 | Final | GBP | 0.0025 | 25/08/2022 | 26/08/2022 | 29/09/2022 |
| 24/11/2021 | Interim | GBP | 0.0025 | 02/12/2021 | 03/12/2021 | 07/01/2022 |
| 26/11/2020 | Interim | GBP | 0.0045 | 03/12/2020 | 04/12/2020 | 08/01/2021 |
| 25/06/2020 | Final | GBP | 0.0122 | 20/08/2020 | 21/08/2020 | 25/09/2020 |
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 09/9/2024 09:23 by smithie6 I have just now submitted to buy the new shares oferred to me,at only 8p/share Anyone with FPO shares don't forget or be to slow to decide....or you might miss the deadline at your broker. The deadline at your broker is surely X days "before" the deadline at FPO to give your broker time to do his job. |
Posted at 05/9/2024 10:32 by blobby Smithie,“Blobby, do you agree with the points I have made?” Not entirely, although it is an interesting discussion. It would be nice to hear from Mr Gyllenhammer about his views for the company. I’m not sure that his involvement with the many companies that he has invested in has often benefited other shareholders. Consequently, I’m nervous about his increasing interest in the company. In listening to the last FPO presentation I formed the impression that the directors were not particularly happy with Mr Gyllenhammer’s shareholder activism. However, there may be some positives to this as well as some negatives. I am concerned that Directors have other interests which are taking time away from their job at FPO for the last year or so. In particular, I’m hoping that post the UK general election that Ben Habib can devote all his work time to the company. I take this fundraising and the new lease at Blue Tower to be positives. Perhaps the corner has been turned and there are plenty of good opportunities for FPO to find if the company directors look for them as they have done in the past. |
Posted at 04/9/2024 21:02 by stablehound I’m an infrequent visitor to this site and the recent posts have been an interesting discussion on the position in which FPO now finds itself. I have held shares almost since the listing at which time I much admired the manner in which Ben Habib was then able to read the property market and using his entrepreneurial skills to deal well for the shareholders and for himself.Sadly for the shareholders those days are long gone. The market has changed dramatically and the sort of opportunities that Habib was able to spot are unlikely to return. Given the position the company now finds itself in and the very reasonable offering shareholders are offered I propose to take up the shares I am offered but not without a deal of grinding of teeth. The offering by the directors and the director underwriters seems entirely reasonable as the interest of the shareholders and the directors seem to be aligned. Without this deal it is hard to see how that smoke and mirrors deal for the purchase/financing of the troublesome Polish office complex could be resolved. Without a deal that resolved that situation the company would, despite its asset valuation, be in a position close to technical insolvency, which would have been of benefit to none of the currently interested parties. Assuming that the fundraising goes through as planned I sincerely hope that the non executives prevail upon Mr Habib to step aside to enable this company which has assuredly now had its day to be liquidated or otherwise dismantled so the shareholders can see a return which is somewhere near the net asset value. Despite the fact he is a material shareholder the Company cannot be allowed to remain Ben Habibs cash cow |
Posted at 04/9/2024 19:21 by smithie6 my point about Mr Gyllenhammer was partly to highlight that some shareholders are being treated differently.Mr Habib, director owns 14% of the shares Mr Gyllenhammer owns 25 % Can you justify why Mr Habib is allowing himself (because he wrote the rules for this share offer ) to take up unwanted new shares at a big discount (@8p/share) when bigger shareholder number 2 (Mr G.) is not offerred that chance ?!!....just because he did not write the conditions for this cash raise !?...one has to agree with me that shareholders are not being equally treated. I can see that allowing small shareholders to apply for excess shares at 8p might be prohibitively expensive, but there are solutions to that. The application for excess new shares could be for a minimum of £5k worth, then in £2.5k steps. Few PIs would apply for £5k of excess shares, one assumes. but at 8p you never know. But if Mr Gyllenhammer and other big shareholders were to apply for large amounts of excess new shares then I argue it would benefit all shareholders since it might well avoid the 2 directors obtaining too big a % in the co......& with the shareholdings of other directors & managers might put the company under the complete control of the dirs & managers & that, at any property company, is never a good thing. The property sector is full of corruption/fraud/imm ECDC, DCI, Probus, many more ...a never ending list (together those companies have lost investors hundreds of millions of pounds !, yes, hundreds of millions !!! always happened imo because the dirs or property managers have had too much power. Hopefully FPO won't be just one more. ----- that Mr Gyllenhammer has bought a big % (25%) gave hope of perhaps all PI stakeholders being able to keep/make the operation of the dirs & the co. correct & transparent etc. If this cash raise puts a bigger % of the co. in the hands of 2 dirs, imo the opposite is the case. Blobby, do you agree with the points I have made ? |
Posted at 25/7/2024 13:49 by blobby Great news on leasing:It's a good plan to ask shareholders for capital to pay for the fit-out. However I'm not sure how this will work out and what it will do for the share price in the short term. |
Posted at 29/11/2023 17:36 by smithie6 BtwAR for 2023 Directly owned properties, Claimed market value =54 million € PBT from lease income= 0.8 million € & this excludes profit from any one off sales. If FPO tried to buy such a group of buildings & paid a yield from the PBT of 10% (too high phps but good for simplicity) then FPO would pay 8 million €. 8 million € is much lower than the claimed market value of 54 million € !! ------ While for sure the selling price for a building only 30% full would not be based just on the income from that 30%, but a buyer would not base his buying price on it being 100% rented out since he doesn't know how long that might take to happen. And at what price. And he has to deduct from the value the summation of his annual losses until he gets enough occupancy to be at break even. ===== The key question is how much is the Gdynia building "really" worth with ~70% of it being empty, loss making & the progress to rent out the remaining empty space being slow in the last 12 months. The occupancy is essentially the same as it was 1 year ago imo. |
Posted at 27/11/2023 13:37 by smithie6 Continuation.....And next 2 questions are quite logical imo 1) what is the real market value of a building ~70% empty & losing 70k€/year ? 2) ) what is the real market value of a building ~70% empty & losing 630k€/year ? (Some might argue that the answer to question 2 is...zero !! even if the accounts claim it is X million ! How much discount would a buyer want versus the value if fully rented ? 50% ? 70% ? There is probably a list of pension funds etc willing to buy a property if it is >90% rented out at say 8-10 X the annual nett profit. But almost no one willing to buy a building that is losing 630k€/year ! A buyer needs deeps pockets to absorb those losses for W years. And a buyer is exposed to risk (if stays 70% empty then they wld suffer a big loss if they sold it). This means that the market value when 70% empty is much much lower than if 0-10% empty. Is the valuation used by FPO real/fair/correct ? (I need to dig more in the accounts but I think the valuation is probably/surely wrong). |
Posted at 27/11/2023 10:17 by smithie6 Guywhite knight"Few deals make the stellar returns already generated by Gdynia with more to come." The Gdynia building is ~ 70% empty, & produces a yearly loss for FPO I think. Can you justify why you wrote that "Gdynia...stellar returns" The company data I see says you are wrong. ====== The progress in renting out empty space in Gdynia & Blue Tower. In the last 12 months I don't see any overall change !! (Perhaps an RNS mentioned renting out 2% of the space, not significant at all imo) No one wants to rent there ?! The company is perhaps asking too high a price/m2 ? Would a lower price be better ? Fully rented out at price X would surely be better than X +30% & having 70% of a building EMPTY !!! |
Posted at 07/6/2023 07:07 by stevegrass777 RNS loans platform, it's hard to comment much on this until it starts to bring results in.Obviously it sounds like FPO are bringing other investors in as well as ourselves so a shared risk approach sounds a good way to start,and they seem to have a conservative lending criteria. |
Posted at 10/5/2023 12:21 by guywhite knight You are aware the Gdynia property was bought by FPO with the debt in place? The company made a cash on cash return of 100% per annum on its investment for 6 years, depreciating the property all the while knowing the value would eventually be below the debt. It then renegotiated the debt level from a position of strength giving the company the opportunity to make a capital gain, while avoiding a wipe out for the bank. Sounds like damn good property and financial management. |
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
