Ashley (laura) Share Discussion Threads

[fenners66] 15/6/2017 10:53

Whiskey - I have to agree with srp on this one.
I own some GVC , I cannot remember if I found them through a yield screen or not but I suspect it was from reading about them on another board.

After all preaching to the converted gets you no-where its the new converts/ new buyers that get share prices rising.

[srpactive] 15/6/2017 10:32

Posters have different stocks in different sectors.

[srpactive] 15/6/2017 10:27

Discussing different stocks on different threads
is just discussing.

[whiskeyinthejar] 15/6/2017 10:21

I haven't noticed you ramping particularly on this thread. But you ramp your holdings repeatedly on other threads.

I did a quick search on GVC thread for ALY



This reveals you've ramped ALY 70 times just on the GVC thread.

That's Seventy times. 70.

[srpactive] 15/6/2017 10:05

The last ic comment 24.2.17, said Cantor Fitzgerald
expect yr end June 17 to be profit £11m eps 1.2p.

dyor

[ny boy] 15/6/2017 09:57

Zero is the end game I guess

[srpactive] 15/6/2017 09:56

f66

I wear my heart on my sleeve and say what I do and feel,
recovery situations are difficult but that is what I
like to do, each poster can criticise me as much as they
wish. If I get it wrong, I get it wrong.

More good posters with insight researching is good for all,
please keep posting.

[fenners66] 15/6/2017 09:21

srpactive -

New to this board and have not read through the 1000's of previous posts so please forgive me...

I am reading between the lines and assume that you are the supporter mentioned above.

Not sure which part "unfair comments" are whether the company or the poster
Taking the co part though I have seen companies before that despite being listed were majority owned by the directors. Investors were calling value in the company because of potential etc, but the more pertinent fact is that unfettered majority director shareholders will first and foremost run businesses in favour of themselves.

After all they have the mandate , they do all the "work" and they "own" the company - so who cares about the distraction of the other holders.

What you get then is pet projects , higher admin costs and lower dividends after all why give cash to strangers?

The chart above shows what the market thinks - regardless of operating results - I will keep ALY under review but things will have to change to spark my interest

[pictureframe] 15/6/2017 08:04

waiting for sub 10p then in again

[rcturner2] 15/6/2017 08:03

He can't offer 12p.

There are rules about what the lowest price offered can be.

[srpactive] 15/6/2017 07:48

This is all down to management, years ago LA floral
fashion was classed out dated so did not do too well, now
floral is all booming my wife informs me, with the likes
of Reece Witherspoon doing well, Cath Kitson and
others who are floral based and we king of floral are
not, completely wrong, dyor.

[11_percent] 15/6/2017 07:28

Are we saying here that MUI own the office, and not ALY.

[srpactive] 15/6/2017 07:23

w

Everyone knows I go for recovery situations, and
aly recovered very well from when I started buying
in the single digits. They moved to 35p with a very handsome dividend
and the yr 14 -15 results were very good.
I was not expecting the Singapore purchase and the
situation now. The profits are meant to be £11m by
analysts not me, they also enrolled a very high
profile young talented designer ( not sure where that lady is )
to turn the fashion around, aly should not be here.
Please do not come on here making such unfair comments.

[woodhawk] 14/6/2017 20:10

WhiskeyInTheJar,

That's precisely why I got out of this stock earlier in the year - the management clearly doesn't give a monkey's!! Thankfully I still had most of my stake remaining! At least one regular contributor here has been ramping this almost non-stop all the way down (until very recently) when I think he ought to have known better. Some of you will know who I refer to. DYOR!!

[whiskeyinthejar] 14/6/2017 00:24

Yes that's my understanding - he controls about 60%.

It's not a coincidence IMO that MUI and Laura Ashley are both into hotels and office buildings.

Interestingly, though MUI share price did quite well over speculation about his divorce. IIRC. The feeling there I think was that the outcome could be that the value locked up in some of his badly performing assets could be realised (sold) as a result of the divorce.

Similarly if he was to sell some of his stake in LA that then I guess that might be good for LA depending on how he did it.

[fenners66] 13/6/2017 22:51

Whiskey that makes things a lot clearer.

What is his beneficial holding?
It looks like 25% but there is a MUI asia with 35% has he got control through that?

Therefore 60%?

I see that the directors remuneration went up by about 66% last year with someone responsible for asia climbing from about £10k to £176k starts to make a convincing story not to invest.

[mister md] 13/6/2017 20:39

Fen, on this site it keeps showing relisted at current date but not sure if really uptodate. States ground floor for rent

www.commercialguru.com.sg/listing/20062369/for-rent-forte

[whiskeyinthejar] 13/6/2017 19:38

Exactly. Daylight robbery.

But when an offer is made to the prevailing share price, at say 12p, people often accept it rather than take the hit of it falling back again to say 10p. Or even lower.

[whiskeyinthejar] 13/6/2017 17:01

Im not trying to short or buy in lower. I just think I can learn from stocks even when I dont hold. In fact its often the best way.

The office block isnt my main concern. Peng knows property (it's one of main businesses of his MUI group) and so Ive a fair idea he will soon make a profit selling the building.

The elephant in room IMO is Peng himself, who as majority shareholder can do as he pleases with little explanation.

I think it's obvious he doesn't care about the share price. I suspect that's hes happy to see the share price go down as if he wants he can bid to buy remaining shares at any time. The costs of listing on AIM are significant for small companies so win win for him.

iirc the shops don't perform that well, perhaps they should be dumped, but the online business and the hotel is generating significant cash.

Shareholders can fight him over what he would decide to offer, but I think if he made an offer at 12p today it'd go through.

[fenners66] 13/6/2017 15:18

I bought in to LA on the original floatation (how long ago was that?) and lost some money.
Noticed the advertised yield was getting interesting but finding out stuff like they spent all the cash on an empty building gets me worried....

[phowdo] 13/6/2017 14:35

I vaguely seem to remember they were already tenants of part of the building at the time and that it was bought from some listed Singapore real-estate company.
Could be wrong though, its been a good while since I looked at this.

[fenners66] 13/6/2017 14:26

The picture on google street view was from when it was totally unoccupied with the estate agents sign on the outside ( I guess a few years old).

The same agent has a lapsed advert you can still find on google so I believe it was from the same time.

I do not believe the quote for rent is since LA bought the building