Imperial Brands Share Discussion Threads

[pj84] 09/10/2023 09:51

Under the above is a link to an Expert view article including the below on Imperial Brands (can’t seem to post the direct link without messing up the thread size).
A couple of snippets from the article

"Hargreaves: Imperial Brands fires back up

Imperial Brands (IMB) has bounced back after a sluggish first half and even a proposed ban on cigarettes in the UK is failing to dampen its prospects, says Hargreaves Lansdown."

...

"The group is now expected to deliver modest growth in revenue and operating profit for the 12 months to the end of September 2023, which analyst Derren Nathan said was ‘particularly encouraging given the inclusion of the now suspended Russian operators in last year’s comparators’."

and

"‘Imperial’s yielding close to 10% and [the] commitment to further shareholder payouts in the current financial year suggests that’s not going to combust any time soon.’"

[tuftymatt] 09/10/2023 09:35

Positive and let's hope we can get back towards 2000.

Happy to keep picking up the dividends while we wait though and for me think about averaging down too while it remains under 1790.

Good luck all 👍🏻

[pj84] 09/10/2023 09:30

Edit reposting to try not to mess up thread size.

[spud] 06/10/2023 11:44

Phil - As with most UK companies, its still undervaluing IMB by a good 25-30%.

Hopefully the interest surrounding AV will redress that imbalance going forward.

spud

[philanderer] 06/10/2023 10:29

upgrade


Citigroup raises Imperial Brands to 'buy' (neutral) - price target 1,980 (1,865) pence

[careful] 05/10/2023 18:39

You smoke you are likely to die early and save the country trillions.
No more state pensions to pay, or other expensive healthcare issues that come with longevity, also care home fees.
Life expectancy would reduce dramatically, the actuarial tables of the insurance companies prove that.
A heavy smoker gets an enhanced annuity.

Let us be clear, if everyone smoked heavily and died early it would be massively beneficial financially to the country, even after allowing for treatment of smoke related illness.

But there is a moral issue here, should we help people live a very long life, enjoying a well earned 30 years or more retirement?
..but can we afford it?

[fenners66] 05/10/2023 17:44

They say if you smoke there's a 25% chance you will get cancer.
I don't know what the chances are of the other ailments because of smoking.

Would it be fair then to say ok you can smoke - but there's a 25% chance the health service turns you away like a lottery to spread resources?

Of course those non-infantilised would surely pay privately for healthcare to hedge their bets?

[1knocker] 05/10/2023 16:40

Fenner, when they became adults I stopped making the rules for my kids. A view expressed when asked for (and because I am only human sometimes when it is not), yes.
But always followed by 'but its your life and your choice'.

Infantalizing people by directing their lives does not create responsible, self reliant people. We have to accept that the right to make choices carries the risk of making bad choices, or at least choices we do not ourselves agree with.

[laurence llewelyn binliner] 05/10/2023 14:43

The progressive dividend policy (+1.5% a year) is a bit light to what most would like compared to the +10% of pre 2020, but when the BB is cancelling 8% of the share capital in 2024, we could reasonably expect that to add the same to the share price instead..?

[marktime1231] 05/10/2023 14:37

Key market strength, pricing beats volume decline, Russia exit shrugged off, next gen taking off, net debt down to a sustainable x 2. Tick tick tick. A bit worried that we will not get all the dividend progress I was hoping for though, maybe two x 51-52p finals. Going in the right direction at least.

An immediate start on an even bigger buyback is great news for those of us who believe in concentrating the dividend. I get the idea that a muted share price response works in favour of that programme, but I still wish it had kicked up strongly like last year, maybe there is more to come with tips in the press.

Looking forward to the hard numbers on 14 Nov and those lovely big dividend announcements. And a plain English explanation of "adjusted operating profit growth to accelerate to the lower end of our mid-single digit range" which is utter gibberish.

[spud] 05/10/2023 14:35

Fenners - Most vape Chinese products and no one knows how bad that could be. At least if they buy from a regulated company, there are some safeguards.

spud

[fenners66] 05/10/2023 14:21

1knocker - but you have to factor in they will have gotten used to it - or be in hospital with cancer or dead by then ... let alone the number of people smoking is actually declining year on year...

I think the sensible part of this move which diffuses so much of the argument - is that if you legally smoke now , no one is ever going to stop you. (they may continue to restrict where it can be done),
Does anyone Really want to see their kids start smoking ?

[cassini] 05/10/2023 13:22

It's important to realise the 'conservatives' aren't actually conservative any more. Not for a long time.

[pander45] 05/10/2023 12:26

He won't be in government to see it through.

[fenners66] 05/10/2023 12:09

danes - yes it is selective on the debt cost - of course it is as anyone would look to remove the costliest debt first.

The fact they still have it and are regularly reporting the headline blended cost as 4+% irks me as clearly they have not removed the most expensive debt and hide this in the detail for anyone who can take the time to actually find it.

[careful] 05/10/2023 11:44

Sunak. is our friend.

He could have slapped a punitive profit tax on IMB / BATS

Instead he comes up with an almost comical and unworkable scheme.
After sleeping on it, everyone buys back in.

[daneswooddynamo] 05/10/2023 11:36

Just a view. A bit selective on the debt cost if I may say so, sure they have a 15 year old issue at 8 percent plus but their all in cost will still I reckon be less than half the equity cost

[spud] 05/10/2023 11:35

Back to where we were 24 hours ago. I guess that price spasmn yesterday will have flushed a few of the weaker holders out and should make it a less bumpy ride back up to the £20 level (and beyond hopefully) as the two chunky dividends lure the yield hunters in.

spud

[fenners66] 05/10/2023 10:41

danes - It costs nothing to pass the owners their share of the profits.

Whereas it costs up to 8.25% in interest to debt holders (discussed above), thus decreasing profits and removing a large part of any growth resulting in a firmly ex-growth market view and share price rating.

Your "it costs the company" to give shareholders what they already own and arguably are due is a large part of the doctrine problem.

But by far and away the important part is those major "shareholders" i.e. the institutions that play with everyone else's money want liquidity and they control the votes - so no matter what it means to a retail shareholder who wants to hold the share for dividends their ability to play the market whenever is what is going to hold sway.

Contrast with say illiquid property funds - when some want to redeem cash they get told to wait , its gated we can't sell now we may make a loss... so very liquid shares with a willing bulk buyer give the insti's much more room for manoeuvre

[laurence llewelyn binliner] 05/10/2023 10:28

#Careful, neat strategy, this share is all about the dividends.

On a total return basis, I have had 50% of my costs back already, and I am sure some holders will have had 100% or more and still own the share for nothing.. :o)

[daneswooddynamo] 05/10/2023 10:08

That’s the plan

[careful] 05/10/2023 10:07

Good to buy back shares when price is low.
Saves paying out the big divi so costs nothing.

My cunning plan is to hold until they have bought all the shares back apart from mine.
Then I will be the proud owner of a profitable cash generative business.