Lamprell Share Discussion Threads

[srpactive] 24/11/2014 19:33

That will be the figure the mbo will go for then.

[bugle4] 24/11/2014 17:37

Analysts at Nomura dropped their price objective on shares of Lamprell Plc (LON:LAM) from GBX 215 ($3.36) to GBX 200 ($3.13) in a research report issued to clients and investors on Friday. The firm currently has a “buy” rating on the stock. Nomura’s target price would indicate a potential upside of 40.35% from the company’s current price.



Still represents approx' 35% upside from here.

[esteban1] 24/11/2014 07:14

The man from the Pru increasing his hold to 12% won't do us any harm.....probably won't set the market alight either!

[srpactive] 21/11/2014 11:23

Yes if we close above 147p, are you new here CR, if so
very welcome my itv friend.

[cockneyrebel] 21/11/2014 10:55

Triple bottom here?

CR

[srpactive] 19/11/2014 21:25

rns, maybe this upset the cfo.

[blippy2] 19/11/2014 11:57

Buy at 140p Sell at 150p. Lather. Rinse. Repeat.

[plunger2] 18/11/2014 17:25

Market Cap tonight c £480m. Net Cash at 30/6/14 = £180m
Therefore MCap (net) = £300m = $470m.
Turnover 2014 (probably) $1,100m.
I can't imagine Steven Lamprell is too happy with this.
So is he a buyer or a seller? As long as he is one or the other I'll likely be happy!

DYOR JMHO

[blippy2] 18/11/2014 16:53

Up hill and down dale with this thing.

[bulltradept] 18/11/2014 15:39

So Lam falls because it's not the take over target?

[plunger2] 16/11/2014 16:47

And the longer the oil price stays down the greater the likelihood of mergers in this sector:

[srpactive] 14/11/2014 20:30

We will not, this happened at rtd, exactly the same.

Management fanfairing bad news and keeping expectations low,
then there was profits in the business and after a number
of years they decided on a dividend being paid, then low
and behold before the xd date being given they receive a bid
from the management. A number of years ago they were listed
as one of the most successful mbo in the uk.

It will happen here too,

dyor

regards

active

[plunger2] 14/11/2014 17:35

Well I think the balance sheet IS beefed up enough to pay a dividend - why?
By my reckoning by 31 Dec 2014 the Retained profits should be $330m AFTER a (token)dividend of $11m (as suggested by me). In their last dividend paying year (2011) the closing Retained profits were only $320m. Since then we have had a Rights Issue which (by 31 Dec 2014) should leave Shareholders funds at $660m versus $534m at 31 Dec 2011. That uplift should be enough to keep the banks happy with the gearing.

Let's assume srpactive is wrong re the mbo then surely Kennedy will insist that they signal some sort of divi when the 2014 results are released. It would PROVE the rehabilitation and JK could take a bow. If they don't do this then longer term shareholders may start asking questions about lack of confidence etc.

Now if srpactive is right we may not even get that far. Who knows?

JMHO DYOR

[srpactive] 14/11/2014 15:10

Returning to the dividend list would send a very strong message
that the company is back in good health, the city would buy
into the story in there droves, but that would help the share
price so they would not look to do that, would they.

[gta5] 14/11/2014 15:03

The recent RNS is great news and gives credibility to a continued recovery, but surely all talk of dividends is a little premature? We're not even out of the woods yet from the past financial mess this company was in. I for one would prefer to see a beefed up balance sheet long before taking a few p in dividends this or the next year.

GTA.

[cockneyrebel] 14/11/2014 15:01

Nice intraday reversal.

CR

[srpactive] 14/11/2014 14:58

That is another way to keep share price depressed, no dividend.

If they wanted the share price higher they would be falling over themselves
to introduce lam back to the dividend list even if it was for 0.2p.

MBO, yes, I'll stake my life on it.

dyor

regards

active

[plunger2] 14/11/2014 10:57

Well they've certainly delivered again. Of course we'll await news on the dividend front. But how can they not pay a dividend for 2014? My guess is that their pre-tax could be $80m (no tax and a further $30m exceptional profit) for 2014. Do they need to add the whole $110m to reserves? No in my view; so I am now expecting a dividend. A 2p dividend costs a mere $11m - so I reckon it's a no brainer.

Now I have no idea if there is a mbo or takeout on the horizon. But if there were to be, based on 2014 and 2015 projected it must be £2-£2.50 at rock bottom. When the policy is so determinedly "under promising and over delivering" it's hard to read. BTW I'll not be surprised if TW takes over from JC - all in due course naturally!

JMHO DYOR

[tipjunkie] 13/11/2014 13:21

how much would a mbo cost them though?

[srpactive] 13/11/2014 12:49

Maybe that is why we had such a mark down on the rights
issue to ensure a low offer got through.

[mad foetus] 13/11/2014 12:35

srp,
I think a few of us have thought this possible for some time. I had at one time thought it would need £3, but perhaps £2-£2.50 would do it now.

[srpactive] 13/11/2014 12:33

mbo looming, maybe that is why the cfo left and the share
stops at under 180p as that is the figure they will be paying.

Thirty percent mark up from here is 191.75p, maybe 200p
if we are lucky.

dyor

regards

active

[mad foetus] 13/11/2014 12:22

trigger,
It was $1.2bn at the end of June. We added another $365m yesterday, so I guess it is $1.565bn +/- whatever changes there have been in terms of projects completed and new ones obtained since June. But I suspect it is better than $1.2bn, which in itself indicated 20% yoy growth. Why are they not shouting this?