Johnston Press Share Discussion Threads

[luckymouse] 21/2/2017 21:32

This is getting interesting

[brando69] 21/2/2017 21:18

i think the volume tells the story... if we don't get another holding RNS tomorrow I'll eat my hat.
BTW Crystal Amber looks like a cracking investment in its own right. Cooking on gas at the moment.

[netcurtains] 21/2/2017 18:40

mmmmmmmmmm

anyone with any idea why the significant rise today?
Just asking,

[gfrae] 21/2/2017 16:35

Would anyone buy JPR ? Or would the pension fund deficit frighten everyone off ?
What about TNI... a merger between the two might make sense ? Can't see why competition authorities would object or pension fund trustees.......it is a fight for survival in the regional newspaper market,a consolidation might help some papers survive.

[mister md] 21/2/2017 14:42

Volume over 1 million so far

[mister md] 21/2/2017 13:03

from total quiet to mass-buying again ;)

[netcurtains] 21/2/2017 06:49

Daaza: There is a LACK OF DEMOCRACY is UK investments. If you have shares in an ISA or SIPP you are not the "real" owner of the shares. The company you have the ISA or SIPP in does all the voting (if they can ever be bothered)...

The set up of UK investment industry STINKS - we're all slaves to ISA and SIPP blue chip companies run by boys from the same schools as the failing and over paid company directors.
We're stuffed by TORYs every which way you look.

VOTE LABOUR!



The vast majority of individual shareholders in public companies hold their shares in nominee accounts, i.e. in accounts created by their stockbrokers to record their interest in the shares of companies. Does that mean that in law you are a member of the company with all of the rights and protections provided by Company Law (i.e. under the Companies Act 2006)? The simple answer is no!

Smash the ruling elite!

WRITE THAT IN THE I AND SCOTSMAN!!!!

[dazzaa] 20/2/2017 22:40

Well the share price is still hovering around my personal benchmark so I'm contentish but I'm not buying yet.



Some times when your not directly thinking of anything (I do that alot) in particular, I happened to focus on JPR (probably subconsciously due to eddy and his noble rant)
What HAS happened to the shareholder value in this share? For the Board of Directors, Chairman and CEO to say SFA on their dismal performance and to still get voted in year after year after..............the share price to go from £2 to under 5p without a statement of contrition, I realised that it would be quite normal for AH not to meet CA and why should he, what difference will it make to his day what's their 21% going to make him do ?

He has the backing of the board at the moment but then we blame AH for all the ills of the company, should we? where was the (I'm repeating myself) Chairman for the last few years and rest of the Board letting him run the share price down to near zero and more to the point I was watching them do it and now Camilla steps up to her starting line stating her faith in AH.

The Company any company surely should be run for the benefit of its investors and that should be paramount to all those that are given that responsibility.

CA will make headway that I'm sure.

[stdyeddy] 19/2/2017 23:11

Thanks hunter. I was wondering when the next CA/jpr article was coming. Interesting
profile on Rich B. He seems to be a diffident sort, standing a little behind an empty
chair in the gloom. And his indirectly reported quote about him being a businessman
rather than a fund manager is revealing too, suggesting the way he'd like to be seen
rather than the reality. Evidently his background is more analysis than sleeves-rolled-up
at the sharp-end of business. Kind of explains the gentle run-up to this 'confrontation'
although you can hardly call it confrontation when AH hasn't met him and CR has essentially
told him to mind his own business and be a nice quiet shareholder.

I think the key phrase in this piece is that final quote beginning; “If we and other
shareholders feel this isn’t the best course..."

So the question on my mind is; what exactly are the other major shareholders saying?
Does anyone here know?

[thevaluehunter] 19/2/2017 22:40

Bernstein is focused on Johnston Press, the troubled newspaper publisher behind the i and a host of local titles, including The Yorkshire Post, where Crystal Amber holds a 20pc stake, making it the company’s biggest shareholder.

Johnston, which is struggling to adapt to the decline of the local newspaper industry, is labouring under £137.7m of net debts, and many in the stock market believe a debt-for-equity swap is looming. Bernstein has publicly questioned whether Ashley Highfield, the publisher’s chief executive, is the right man to lead the business through what the investors believes is an inevitable restructuring.

It appears to put Bernstein on a collision course with the publisher’s board. But he warns: “If we and other shareholders feel this isn’t the best course and Ashley’s had long enough to get it right, then it’s our right to act.”

[luckymouse] 18/2/2017 13:21

Well it didn't go through that time - but osc's still bullish and base has a pair of cup n handles which is also encouraging

[netcurtains] 18/2/2017 09:38

This is the colour picture they had in the newspaper. It looked really good.

[netcurtains] 17/2/2017 19:33

Really good colour picture in todays "i" on relaunch of Broadchurch TV series.

TOP MARKS

Well please I was wrong about this weeks closing price!

[mattab] 17/2/2017 16:03

Eddy

S.A. seems a likely plausible candidate from the above link. Was employed there (based in Leeds - Flagship centre at the time!) - from the UPN days. Before JPR bought from RIM for 560 million as I recall.

A.H. has a total disregard for all Shareholders any shares he acquires - he sells - no skin in the game.

Pity they have to pay him off a million.

Wish I could get paid so much for total abject failure. I would be ashamed. Many careers and jobs cut short during his tenture and what JPR should have done is not employ him at the outset.

Hindsight eh - well overdue he is brought to task.

[stdyeddy] 17/2/2017 14:13

jim, dazz, karlos: thanks. I like to share thoughts so we can pool our knowledge and help each other to
stay on top of the jpr story. (I know none of this news to you dazz.)

And thanks Matt for this early tip on a prospective CEO. SA looks like a very plausible CEO candidate to
manage change at jpr.

More hammering from Rich B here:
hxxp://www.cityam.com/259293/activist-investor-takes-swipe-johnston-press-chief

Heaping the pressure on now. Unbelievably, it seems that AH hasn't been to see jpr's largest shareholder
even after saying publicly that he would, about a fortnight ago. I wonder if this is AH exhibiting his
traditional disregard for shareholders.

From the city am article:
Bernstein has now told City A.M.: “We’ve not met Ashley, nor has he offered a meeting.”

On 5th Feb City AM published a discussion with AH where he reportedly said: "...no doubt David and I will
go and see them now the trading update is out. We’ll get a meeting in the diary to go and see them as we
would all of our key shareholders.”

So it seems there was a doubt! I wonder when he might find space in his diary for a meeting that
everyone's talking about and expecting to happen. If he leaves it much longer it'll be after Steve Auckland
turns up for work at AH's current desk.

[karlos885] 17/2/2017 11:49

Nice one Eddy some good bedtime reading there!

[mattab] 17/2/2017 10:20

CA lining up Steve Auckland.

Name from the past....

[dazzaa] 17/2/2017 10:01

eddy I thought there was a screen fault on my phone (your post was so long) that was a whopper of where we are and will answer a lot of questions for a lot of people so thanks for the time taken which I imagine was not inconsiderable.

[jimrclark] 17/2/2017 07:00

Excellent piece, stdeddy.

[stdyeddy] 17/2/2017 03:30

karlos, jim, the outline of CA's jpr manifesto is contained within this Telegraph article from 5 days ago:



brando and I have posted this link before.

As I see it there are three inter-related challenges for jpr, CA and the other major shareholders and the
first two of these are the focus of the Telegraph piece:
1. Appoint a new jpr board
2. Restructure the debt so that the interest payments become more manageable
3. Improve the quality of the core product to achieve maximum revenue from copy sales and advertising

CA has engaged the jpr board over the last few months and Rich Bernstein is now raising the temperature
and publicly calling for new management. The article says he 'told The Telegraph that he lacked faith in
chief executive Ashley Highfield, and finance chief David King.'

This is the strongest public statement so far from Bernstein, regarding the CEO and finance director and
it's backed by a sensible rationale (read the article to see why).

Prior to this there had been several news articles in recent months describing director/shareholder
meetings. jpr directors were saying they're doing a great job; CA was saying politely that it has concerns.
Now the gloves are coming off.

Meanwhile CA is increasing its share stake presumably for tactical and commercial reasons:
A. The greater the number of shares owned by CA, the easier it is for Rich B to achieve a majority
shareholder vote for company actions such as appointing new board directors or agreeing new funding.
It's about control.
B. The greater CA's holding, the more profit they can achieve from a jpr recovery. It's about making
money.

In terms of shareholding, 30% is a key figure. If CA goes over this level I think it's likely that they are
compelled by the city code to bid for the entire company. That might not be the best outcome for us here.
A recovery or a debt restructuring will probably get the share price much higher than the offer CA might make to
buy the whole company. Also, as several of us have mentioned before, it's not CA's usual way of doing
things so I'll be surprised if CA launches a buyout. Obviously it's not impossible though.

I'm guessing that the next significant event could be resignations by directors and/or a shareholders'
meeting regarding a change of directors (challenge no.1). Either outcome will probably cause a massive
spike to the share price because a new team endorsed by the largest shareholder (CA) is bound to be tasked with
renegotiating the bond debt and success in that area could instantly increase the value of the share equity
(challenge no.2). Arguably jpr's effective market cap is comprised of the shares plus the debt; reduce the
debt and the shares rise (assuming profitability remains broadly constant).

Once a new management team is in place they can tackle the ongoing quality issues (challenge 3).

In the Telegraph, Rich B makes the point that AH and DK handled the last cash-raising and it ended badly
for shareholders. Essentially all of the £140m equity injected via the rights issue has disappeared.

These funding rounds under AH and DK have also been characterised by very high interest payments
which have stymied recovery - vast amounts of the business profits are sucked out in interest. By my
calculation there are still five coupons to be paid on the bond debt and these will amount to over £47m
between now and June 1st 2019 (anyone, please let me know if my arithmetic is wrong).

The Tele article ends with: “Realistically it looks as though the bondholders and the equity have to sit
down and come to a settlement,” Mr Bernstein said.

That sounds like a debt-for-equity swap to me but there might be other tactics available, instead or in
combination with a swap. As an example, jpr managed to buy back £5m of the bonds in 2015 (see link
below):

hxxp://www.johnstonpress.co.uk/investors/news/bond-buy-back-announcement

There are two interesting aspects to the 2015 buy-back:
1. The bonds were bought 'on the open market'
2. The price paid represented a very small discount to the nominal value (98p against a £1 face value)

Well things have changed since then. The open market price that I'm seeing reported is a bid/ask spread
of 60/70p (see link below).

hxxp://en.boerse-frankfurt.de/bonds/johnston_press_bond_plcls-notes_201414-19_regs-Bond-2019-xs1028954441

I wonder if it's possible for CA and a new jpr board to come up with alternative funding to buy back a large
proportion of the bonds on the open market at those prices and effectively get 3 for 2, potentially wiping
£70m of the bond debt if they bought it all and drastically reducing the £47m in coupon interest by finding
lenders who'll accept a much lower interest rate.

Even without a massive management reorganisation there's scope for significant debt reduction. jpr has
some of the sale money from the East Anglian and Isle of Man titles burning a hole in its pocket plus there
should be cash on hand from current profits. A slug of money, say £22m, spent on the bonds now might
buy £33m in bonds (3 for 2), reducing debt by 15% and saving interest of over £7m between now and
June 2019.

That's allocating £22m now to achieve an £18m benefit (£11m bond discount plus £7m interest) in just two
and half years and it's not even spending; it's doing the thing they promised to do two years back - reduce
the debt mountain. I doubt the i is making that kind of return and they paid £24m for that. Repeat that buy-
back in 2018 using asset sales and profits, and debt will be reduced to just four years earnings, raising
the share price by my estimate to at least £1 - and probably higher - if profits can be maintained at recent levels.

Where previously we would hear almost nothing from jpr between trading updates which then delivered
nothing but bad news, we're now seeing CA call jpr management to account. So far nothing tangible has
resulted but the changing frequency and tone of the discussion suggests that jpr will have to respond very
soon with new management and new debt approaches. And every significant change should gradually
push the share price back where it belongs. I hope that 40p will look laughably unambitious a year from now.

[dazzaa] 16/2/2017 23:57

If only we knew, we do know that CA is not going to go away and sulk, in fact the opposite.As said earlier it's not in their cv to run companies perse but to aggravate the status quo and they are good at what they do but everybody knows that, hence the share price revival on current news.As eddy has already stated AH will be waiting until he's pushed but the game will be played out by the pr boys, AH is not averse to personal publicity but his commercial nouse is now being questioned and to be fair his job now is completed, and CA whose timing is impeccable will state that privately and then publicly it's already happening an Jpr trading volumes are considerable.Again the new chairman has yet to emerge. We are as said just spectators and we are here for profit, really the question is do you think Jpr is going to go bust knowing what you know or triple in value.

[jimrclark] 16/2/2017 23:30

I would have thought that CA would have not committed more cash until they've had a chat with AH, which was due at any time. I assume that they have had that chat and have got some confidence that they'll get their way! Things are looking up!!

[brando69] 16/2/2017 21:33

At 21% things are interesting. Could Tindle or the Malaysian magnate help them CA get to 30%?

[karlos885] 16/2/2017 20:28

Dazzaa and Eddy, are we assuming CA are buying up more shares as a threat to AH who isn't agreeing to their terms? Lets face it if CA buy this company and its all over for not just Ashley but probably all the top rankers! I personally think AH won't resign and admit defeat until he is given the almighty sword. Things are to easy at the top. I wish I could run my company on a credit card.