Menzies(john) Share Discussion Threads

[dr biotech] 15/2/2022 08:06

“The Board will consider the best interests of Menzies' shareholders and all actions to maximise shareholder


They need to engage with NAS. And any other suitors….

[sundance 13] 15/2/2022 08:04

I may take some off the table today as agree both sides seem far apart, however NAS do seem okay & so I would be surprised if we didn't see a 3rd and final bid, perhaps 550p - 600p, or somewhere around that area. The word 'final' was absent from their response yesterday, which I think it wouldn't have been of increasing the bid was out of the question.

[george stobbart] 15/2/2022 08:04

MNZS Board is greedy. just take the money

[milliecusto] 15/2/2022 07:58

Counter offer to be made m, just brinkmanship going on

[northwards] 15/2/2022 07:47

Not sure what to make of the rns. Feels a little desperate perhaps.

[aishah] 15/2/2022 07:43

NAS will need to do better:

"The Board of Menzies has engaged with its shareholders following its announcement of the NAS Proposal on 9 February 2022. As previously announced, the Board of Menzies has unanimously rejected the NAS Proposal, having concluded that it is opportunistic, conditional and that the terms fundamentally undervalue Menzies and its future prospects."

[csmwssk12hu] 15/2/2022 07:42

I’m glad I got out at 480 now, I hope for those still holding another bid comes in but that rns has we are at stalemate written all over it, the board want more and the bidder doesn’t want to pay, what is clearly apparent is 510 is a good offer, they were £3 before the bid and they’ve not even made it above £5 since the offer was announced, Greed springs to mind, so the reward is 40p or so yo the upside or £1.60 to the downside, imho dyor

[hamhamham1] 14/2/2022 11:36

Yeah, NAS won't buy any shares before the bid accepted, else it would push the price up and secondly, if bid rejected, they left with a load of shares to unload.

[mfhmfh] 14/2/2022 11:16

Need a bid from a rival company

[kaffee] 14/2/2022 09:58

Of course it is in their interest to buy in the open market if you believe the 9.40 brigade on these boards.

They only need to keep the price low so that at the point they cross the threshold required to make a bid its a low ball one, that gets rejected and they keep going hoovering up shares until they wield substantial influence with the size of their holding.... and it gets done over a champagne lunch.

[csmwssk12hu] 14/2/2022 09:55

If they were serious about taking it over they would be buying everything up to 510

[dr biotech] 14/2/2022 09:42

Would be interesting to read NAS forecasts for their own business in the years ahead and apply that here. I can’t seem to find their financials though.

NAS won’t be buying in the open market, not in their interests to drive the price up.

[kaffee] 14/2/2022 08:11

>>mammyoko14 Feb '22 - 07:45 - 2070 of 2072

Of course it is unreasonable. Their justification are the words "near term" in the statement.

They know MNZS has positioned itself very well to go gangbusters in the Post Covid world.

[csmwssk12hu] 14/2/2022 08:08

That’s slightly concerning they haven’t bought a single share yet

[zingerburger] 14/2/2022 07:47

closer to 600p writen on this imho

[mammyoko] 14/2/2022 07:45

Forecast EBITDA to 31/3/2022 is £68m. Forecast net debt is £200m. Shares in issue = 85m. Multiple @ 510p = (85 x 5.1 + 200)/ 68 = 9.3.

The question is whether it is appropriate to apply a multiple to historic EBITDA in an environment where historic earnings have been suppressed and investors can reasonably expect EBITDA to increase significantly as their markets open up. That is the argument around an opportunistic time to launch a bid. NAS are suggesting that business is going to be tough in future. As an investor, you have to decide whether that is likely. Clearly, it's in NAS's interests to suggest this. The MNZS BoD are suggesting that an EBITDA figure of £101.7m is achievable. Of course, that is also designed to suit the BoD's position. As investors, we have to decide whether EBITDA will remain the same or increase in an environment where the company's markets are reopening. I prefer to believe the latter is more likely and so using what is soon to be historic EBITDA undervalues the company.

There is also the question of whether 9.3x or 9.5x EBITDA is an acceptable multiple for a business that has a much larger share of the market than NAS. I would suggest that a multiple of at least 10x EBITDA is more appropriate.

References to debt are irrelevant as debt is taken into account in the EV/EBITDA calculations above.

[sundance 13] 14/2/2022 07:32

Full & fair but not full & final? That said if board not engaging at all hard to get a deal done.

[buffettjnr] 14/2/2022 07:31

Protesteth too much me thinks

[dr biotech] 14/2/2022 07:31

Seems the board need to engage properly with NAS. Reckon 550 will be enough.

[nobilis] 14/2/2022 07:28

the kuwaitis are going to go sgrressive and dawn raid the shares

[nobilis] 14/2/2022 07:25

great 940p it is then

[george stobbart] 14/2/2022 07:17

RNS just out. NAS is corrent, MNZS board is using fake data to show the takeover multiple is low

[gargoyle2] 13/2/2022 21:32

@deanowls, agree with your post above. nobilis' "900p can win it" is probably the truest of the recent posts, but not particularly insightful. All other posts about the progress of the bid, attitude of the board, bla bla are pure speculation.

[buffettjnr] 13/2/2022 20:16

George, have you compounded at 30%+ for 13 years? If not, zip it and listen to those who know what’s going on.