Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Interserve LSE:IRV London Ordinary Share GB0001528156 ORD 0.1P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  -2.30p -3.87% 57.20p 1,764,417 16:35:28
Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price
58.90p 59.35p 61.00p 57.20p 61.00p
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Support Services 3,250.80 -244.40 -176.00 85.6

Interserve (IRV) Latest News (1)

More Interserve News
Interserve Takeover Rumours

Interserve (IRV) Share Charts

1 Year Interserve Chart

1 Year Interserve Chart

1 Month Interserve Chart

1 Month Interserve Chart

Intraday Interserve Chart

Intraday Interserve Chart

Interserve (IRV) Discussions and Chat

Interserve Forums and Chat

Date Time Title Posts
16/8/201821:36Interserve - Awaiting A Recovery9,791
15/3/201817:00Interserve - Still Awaiting a Recovery!39
28/1/201813:01Fake news1
17/1/201818:54Fake news1
15/1/201820:38Steady rise...-

Add a New Thread

Interserve (IRV) Most Recent Trades

Trade Time Trade Price Trade Size Trade Value Trade Type
2018-08-16 15:52:1560.422,6021,572.08O
2018-08-16 15:52:1158.8319,33011,371.05O
2018-08-16 15:35:3159.9011,0416,613.56O
2018-08-16 15:35:3159.9011,0416,613.56O
2018-08-16 15:35:3160.0511,0416,629.96O
View all Interserve trades in real-time

Interserve (IRV) Top Chat Posts

Interserve Daily Update: Interserve is listed in the Support Services sector of the London Stock Exchange with ticker IRV. The last closing price for Interserve was 59.50p.
Interserve has a 4 week average price of 57.20p and a 12 week average price of 56.65p.
The 1 year high share price is 187.50p while the 1 year low share price is currently 52.75p.
There are currently 149,719,938 shares in issue and the average daily traded volume is 809,187 shares. The market capitalisation of Interserve is £85,639,804.54.
aendjo: To be fair, Jeffian gives good advice. It certainly is more important to probe the robustness of the investment opportunity rather than focusing on speculative pressures on the share price - although the latter may inform optimal timing for entry or exit. I think the two aspects complement each other. On the robustness of the investment opportunity I believe I have put forward my arguments before in quite some detail but to summarise: 1) The services Interserve provides are and will still be essential in 10 years time; 2) There are considerable barriers to entry for new competitors and one of Interserve's biggest competitors recently went out of business; 3) On the bogeyman argument of the Government bringing in-house ousourced services, with the words of Sir Amyas Morse (Comptroller and Auditor General) July 2018 “there are a lot of areas where Government does not have the capacity to do anything else but outsource” and in some parts of government, “the capability of even acting as a prime contractor is not necessarily there”; 4) On margins - this was discussed in some detail in numerous earlier posts - but it is my assessment that Interserve can restore margins close to 5% - something that the company has delivered as recently as 2016 - a "crisis" year; 5) On debt - the company is clearly over leveraged but with EBITDA of 116m in 2017 and EBITDA of 194m in 2016 and the renewed focus on margins it is my assessment that debt is serviceable. Non core disposals and most likely refinancing within the next 18 months are probably going to accelerate the process (debt is too expensive) but not vital. The company is not on the brink of bankruptcy; On how much will the investment "will bring in the foreseeable timeframe": 6) If the above assumptions materialise (and - I'm stating the obvious here - there is clearly no certainty that they will materialise. Risks are spelled out clearly in the company report. These include further liabilities in EfW, construction restructuring costs, a untimely bump up in LIBOR rates). I was saying, if the above assumptions prove to be correct the share price will converge towards intrinsic value; 7) Based on an estimated free cash flow of 35m-50m per year (which is conservative in my opinion), intrinsic value of the stock is 150-180p per share; 8) This compares with an average 114p broker forecasts (nothing very recent, understandably there has been some fence sitting: Liberum 80p 11/6/18, Peel Hunt 140p 1/5/18, Numis 124p 30/4/18, Berenberg 95p 23/3/18, Stifel 130p 22/3/18); 9) Based on low liquidity underpinning the downward trend from 110p and on the magnitude of upwards swings in share price whenever the volume of shares traded per day exceeds 1 million, I foresee a rapid swing in price on any news that would make the above assumptions more likely to materialise. In this context (i.e. evaluating the timeframe) the volume of short positions is relevant. There are probably ballpark 10m share shorted. The maximum upside for the whole community of shorters (company going from 67p to zero) is about 6.7 million GBP. That's an unlikely scenario in my mind. The potential downside is 8.3 - 11.3 million GBP(assuming a retrace towards 150-180p) - much higher if the share trades back to the 52 week high (17.3 million GBP, 240p). 10) In conclusion, I am forecasting a 2x to 3x in a relatively short term (months not years). Either way, I am not a trader but a long term investor so I will happily sit on my shares and see what happens. The above are just my own opinions. I am not a financial adviser. This is a high risk investment. Do your own research. Have fun and be cool.
cc2014: Aendjo, I'happy to be corrected on this but weren't EY, Deliotte etc who were paid £45m for their efforts working for IRV? Certainly auditors do not work for the government, they work for IRV. No lender has the right or ability to employ experts to consider the finances of a company unless covenants are breached. It's not a nice little club where the company, the lenders and the experts all get together, share the information and do a deal over a decent whisky. The company uses all its experts and negotiation skills to get the loan package on the best terms possible. This doesn't mean the plan is robust or achievable, it means IRV have managed to convince the lenders it is, although clearly there must be some considerable substance behind it. Further, one might consider whether the lenders do believe the plan is achievable but where they are as screwed as IRV at the time? The economic term here is "opportunity cost." The best decision is that which maximises the return for the lender even if that return is a loss. Pages 43&44 in the annual accounts which you have referred to on the stress tests are incredibly useful to ascertain the risks involved in this company. They refer to sensitivity analysis and that IRV can withstand 5 out of 6 scenarios but not all 6 at the same time. My concern would be that the tests are interlinked. So, for example a reduction in work in test 1, is also likely to trigger failure of test 5 operating profit and test 6 working capital. Likewise if they fail test 4 insurance claim, they will fail test 6 automatically. Some of the tests seems pretty tight to me. A reduction in operating profit of 10% isn't large, again £25m working capital movement is tiny for a company of this size. That's not to say that even if they fail the tests the share price will fall. It's 63p. Some might argue the risk of failure of these tests is priced in already. Or it might not be. Remember, part of this is about the going concern statement in the accounts which it might be helpful to note only holds a one year time horizon. Finally page 39 shows what will happen over time to the lending terms or rather it only shows us part of the picture. From September 2019 if net leverage remains about 3.0x there'a ratchet increase. How much? We don't know so how can we form a judgement. Or rather I assume if the ratchet increase was small it would be published. The market currently thinks the share are worth 63p. The market is wrong all the time. Markets move on rumour as well as fact. Good luck with your trade.
cc2014: IRV needs to recapitalise. £50m isn't enough. £200m would be. Maybe £100m might be. The bondholders could waive some debt in return for capital. If IRV defaults on it's covenants a discussion might occur then. But bondholders won't take the pain unless shareholders take more. Rights issue. £100m is more than the market cap so it's going to be challenging to get that underwritten unless the price is really low. If IRV doesn't or can't recapitalise it needs to get a wiggle on and dispose of some assets. The longer this takes the more the share price will drift. And that's the conundrum. Bond holders aren't up for waiving the debt, the appetite for a rights issue is lowered as so many of the shares are held by PI's, so we drift slowly downwards until such time as a significant piece of news changes things It's frustrating for shareholders as the drip, drip, drip you can see going on every day. We can all see the pattern, selling all morning, then they drive it up into the close so the selling can start at a higher price then the average trade price for the previous day. The pattern is repeating and repeating and we can see the price is struggling to hold 62.0+. It will carry on until all the buyers at 62+ are exhausted or it's a really bad day on the markets and it gaps down. IRV need to announce another decent disposal...
aendjo: From evidence (11/6/2018) public accounts committee: Chris Evans: I was looking at the weekend, Ms White, at Interserve and especially investor tips, and a number are betting on Interserve’s share price going down. Also, the same people—I think it’s Marshall Wace—hold a large short position on your company at the moment. How concerned are you by the market at the moment, with that sort of news? Debbie White: The Interserve investor portfolio is split roughly into three components. We have Coltrane Asset Management, who have been a long-term shareholder and have added to their shares over this period of time; they own about 27% of the company. We have Farringdon Asset Management, a Dutch-based organisation. It split into two funds recently, and they together own roughly 10%. The remaining 63% is held by retail investors. That is not an investor dynamic that you would want to see in the longer term, because the share price is dependent on very small changes in mood. The share blogs say x, y and z—there is a lot of speculation on the share blogs—and that tends to drive the share price. It is certainly not being driven by our larger investors, or by any new investors coming in. Part of the recovery plan is actually about talking to new investors—the funds you would expect to see owning parts of a UK plc—about joining the shareholder base. I am not that concerned about it, actually. That might sound a bit flippant, but I am not being flippant. The variation is principally driven by retail investors. Our plan is very robust. We announced the first of our disposal sales in the last two weeks, which has brought in a significant amount of cash, and we are on track with the things that we are doing. We have to deliver our recovery plan, and I think the share price will respond accordingly.
cerrito: A delayed AGM report. I thought a good meeting and was surprised that only 5/6 private share holders there. No aggressive questions asked. Chairman was open and gave clear answers. What was good was that he, the CEO and the CFO all appear to be comfortable in their own skins- in fact in the results webcast I thought they came over very well and it seems the CEO and the CFO have a very good relationship- something very necessary to resolve the situation but of course in no way sufficient. Only 43 m out of a total of 149 m shares voted and apart from 17 pc against the remuneration report it was virtually unanimous- ie for all the problems the company has, the shareholders seem to be on side. There was no presentation or prepared statement- I guess they would say no change since when the prelims were announced six weeks ago; for those who have not caught up with it I recommend the informative webcast of the presentation of the full year figures to analysts. A question on EFW and indeed I was reminded afterwards the decision to do these goes back to 2009/2010. He reminded us that Derby was producing electricity but there were to use his words non trivial steps to be undertaken before full commissioning and that the subcontractor who failed in Glasgow was a key one. He confirmed that discussions had not started with Pennon about the final financial settlement for Glasgow and thus had to keep their mouths shut. Chairman said that Coltrane were a supportive shareholder who had had meetings with the CEO/CFO. They saw value in support services companies like IRV and their interests and the company's interests were aligned. While I appreciate that given the way they hold their 25+ pc holding they may not be able to vote all their holding I am assuming they did not vote at all given low turnout. Asked why it had gone pearshaped so quickly given that reading his statement last year would give one no inkling that we would be where we are today he said that at last year's AGM they had not fully taken on board the EFW issues that had occurred: that they had been banking on a hockey stick pick up on profitability in late 2017 which had not occurred and then when in the eye of the storm on talks with the banks, Cerillion had come along. In reply to a separate question the CEO said the mantra was standardisation, simplification and focus. The Chairman was asked to comment on comments made by the CEO in the webcast that debt even if all the Fit for Growth goals were achieved would be too high and that strategic options are being looked at to delever the Group. This was confirmed by the Chairman who commented that not only was the debt too high it was also too expensive. The options being looked at included the obvious debt for equity swap, sale of a business, and/or fresh equity. He said that a decision on which way to proceed would be made at the end of the year. This is all very sensible and logical; that said it will be hard to avoid the vicious circle of a possible debt for equity or new equity offering not keeping the share price depressed for the next year. Obviously the first Half's results will be important but not sure in reality how much scope there is for an improvement in the trading that can move the dial. Of course if they can meet their goal of getting final clarity on EFW costs by year end that will lift a cloud on the share price .do not know if it is realistic to expect negotiations with Pennon to have finished by then. PS I have held since 2009. My instincts tell me this is attractively priced but not sure what short term catalyst there is to drive the price higher and talk of a capital reorganization will keep a lid on the price. PPS The Chairman said that EFW was the cause of the current situation saying that £250m will have been paid out plus the extra £50m for fees for the financial restructuring. That said listening to the CEO in the webcast clear that there are many operational inefficiencies which are being rectified. PPPS There is a tendancy on these boards for people to be rude about the contribution of NED' s but speaking to one of them I was struck that over the last year they have had to do far more than they signed up to when they joined.
cc2014: Alternatively If they hadn't lent them the extra £200m, all confidence in the supply chain would have collapsed and the banks would have had to have written off £640m. It is possible to argue that without the extra £200m the company would have limped on but given that by the companies admission debt isn't going to peak until later in the year, it would have had to limp on by paying the supply chain later. So, they lent them £200m, so they can sell say £400m of assets and they "only" have to write off £440m instead of £660m. They may not even need to write off the £440m - perhaps Debbie can turn it around or manage to create enough free cash flow they can get alot more of that £440m back as well. Perhaps given enough time and skill the banks won't have to write off anything. Another 2 years and perhaps they can get a rights issue away. Perhaps in three years time the banks will take another 20% of the company and roll the reduced debt. In one respect the banks did something very sensible. If they had thrown them say an extra £50-£100m which would have got them finished with EfW, it would still have left IRV struggling for cash and leaving the supply chain worried. The £200m is high enough it gives IRV some flex. The banks didn't have a choice. It was a different choice than Carillion though. With CLLN, they had been trying to sell assets for 6 months with little success, whereas IRV does have some things to sell. £40m cash so far by unwinding the cable hedge, that property in Scotland say £25-50m, equipment services could raise £250m, the JV's are generally profitable so they could sell those too (releasing ring-fenced cash as well). There's more I could list. All this stuff they can sell, they won't get top dollar for now but it is stuff that at the right price is saleable. With CLLN we have seen after 2 months, the liquidator hasn't managed to sell hardly anything on a going-concern basis, mostly firms have just agreed to take the staff of the liquidators hands. It has managed to sell 4 hotels. What was CLLN doing owning hotels I have no idea but my point is IRV has stuff to sell and CLLN didn't, principally because IRV screwed up on EfW and the rest of the business is good. Note the use of the words "step-down" in relation to the debt. What I believe this means is there is a timeline in which IRV has free will to sell some assets. If this does not flow, the banks will step in and force the sales. In summary the company persuaded the banks that without another £200m they weren't a going concern and would go bust. I'd say they persuaded the banks they were insolvent. Which is why the share price is 80p ish. There's a reason it's cheap.
schofi2: And the experts say: @hxxps:// Interserve plc 98.7% Potential Upside Indicated by Liberum Capital Posted by: Amilia Stone 22nd March 2018 Interserve plc with EPIC/TICKER (LON:IRV) has had its stock rating noted as ‘Reiterates217; with the recommendation being set at ‘BUY’ this morning by analysts at Liberum Capital. Interserve plc are listed in the Industrials sector within UK Main Market. Liberum Capital have set a target price of 180 GBX on its stock. This would indicate that the analyst believes there is a potential upside of 98.7% from the opening price of 90.6 GBX. Over the last 30 and 90 trading days the company share price has increased 19.75 points and decreased 3.4 points respectively. The 52 week high share price is 249.75 GBX while the 52 week low for the stock is 52.75 GBX. Interserve plc has a 50 day moving average of 90.42 GBX and the 200 Day Moving Average price is recorded at 131.73. There are currently 145,714,107 shares in issue with the average daily volume traded being 2,928,182. Market capitalisation for LON:IRV is £134,341,121 GBP.
cc2014: feileb21 Mar '18 - 15:35 - 8443 of 8452 0 1 0 GG According to the CEO, the reason why d4e is off the agenda until mid 2019 was due to the current low share price and instability of the share. The are looking for more institutional investors (currently only 35%) for less uncertainty in the share price The CEO stated a d4e currently would not stack up financially as the share price is too low - they would not raise enough equity / reduce enough debt. Your post shows you do not know how D4E works. It is not dependent on the share price.
aendjo: Morning everyone. It looks like we’ll have to wait just a little bit longer for the announcement. The shares will continue to trade sideways in the meantime and I would not try to read too much in it. I suspect many holders underestimate the potential upside for the share price if 1) refinancing is agreed and it is not extremely dilutive and 2) if results are in line with trading updates. In my opinion, if Interserve finds a robust financial footing and it becomes clear it is not going bust, it will go back to being traded on fundamentals. A very conservative P/E of 8 takes the share price above 220p (based on market cap = 8 * [41m, projected headline profit]). Projected total operating profit for 2017 is 76m, so if you used that the share price would be in the high 300s. Clearly 300p may seem like a “crazy” upside from the current share price, but I would urge holders to consider the actual value of what they own, so that they can identify the right time to sell (if they buy into the recovery story, clearly). To give you a sense of perspective, the share price was 240p in March 2017, in March 2016 it was 415p... 3 years ago, March 2015, Interserve shares traded at 600p. Three years is a blink of an eye in the life of a global company with a workforce of 80,000. I feel I was extremely lucky to be able to buy a considerable chunk of this at the premium price of 129p. I’m not joking when I say I’m going to sell at no less than 300p.
dexdringle: "Peel Hunt recently valued Interserve on a sum of the parts basis only at £1.80. Presumably they are proficient in reading a Balance Sheet" Pointless. There isn't a single company where the share price tracks the tangible NAV in the balance sheet: Barclays Bank - Tangible Net Assets per share £3.34. Share price £1.98 Taylor Wimpey - Tangible Net Assets per share £0.88. Share price £1.97 Interserve - Tangible Net Assets per share -£1.18. Share price £1.23 .....etc
Interserve share price data is direct from the London Stock Exchange
add chat code
Your Recent History
Gulf Keyst..
FTSE 100
UK Sterlin..
Stocks you've viewed will appear in this box, letting you easily return to quotes you've seen previously.

Register now to create your own custom streaming stock watchlist.

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

P:42 V: D:20180816 23:32:03