Leeds Share Discussion Threads

[the diviner] 29/9/2007 11:26

I agree that the Johan and Peter have been in control for some time; nominee accounts see to that. I do not know if it is good, bad or irrelevant: I am open-minded towards it.

I am glad to see some action and I am happier than I was because sooner or later, if the buybacks do continue, the weighing machine must click in.

[the diviner] 29/9/2007 11:24

DesWalker,

oops; your right of course.

That would be the case if the shares went staight from us to them but since they go to the treasury for cancelation it needs to be doubled to 2 million shares, (which is about 14 more 150k buybacks)

Regards,
TD

[deswalker] 29/9/2007 07:56

Diviner

I think it's a few more than that.

Shares in Issue = 34.900 mill
Insiders = 14.771 mill
Treasury = 3.467 mill
Public Hands = 16.662 mill

So it would require (16.662 - 14.771 = 1.891) mill shares to go from Public Hands to Treasury (and then cancelled due to 10% rule) before the three insiders owned more shares than the Public.

I can't believe that they are thinking in terms of dirty tricks. It would be so straightforward for the FSA to trace back through events (and I'm sure there would be heaps of complaints). No, I'm with Arthur and believe we will see some form of return by 30 Sep 08 which is fine by me as I've only been holding for a year so far. In the meantime the NTAV per share gets steadily bigger.

[cg1953] 29/9/2007 07:24

diviner
the 2 swedes have effectively controlled ldsg for 10 years and on a 'opportunity cost' basis its been a disaster for all concerned other than the directors.
a 'concert party' if ever there was one, but the fsa dont give a toss.
all we can hope for now is a takeover bid by someone who wants hemmers, cash, and tax losses !!!!
but then again the swedes dont seem to care about value, other than the good value at buying in at less than .22pence.

[the diviner] 28/9/2007 23:30

Well at least we appear to be getting some activity; the share buybacks and cancellations make up for the feeling of being locked in and going nowhere fast.

For those who like to keep and eye on the percentages owned by Johan and Peter; if the shares in the treasury shares are ignored and the company buys in about 1 million more shares they will have over 51% between them. (That is about 7 more 150k buybacks).

[deswalker] 28/9/2007 20:56

Confirmation of the 150k buyback of a couple of days ago. Also the cancellation of some shares.

[arthur_lame_stocks] 25/9/2007 21:01

Looks like it doesn't it.

Anybody here into DSN? It's my favourite recovery/breakup/sum of the parts play at the moment. I reckon they might be worth anything up to 30p, currently 9p.

Could go bust mind you, but I don't think so personally.

[deswalker] 25/9/2007 17:47

Looks like another 150k today.

[arthur_lame_stocks] 22/9/2007 14:27

Another 200k bought in. They're really going for it at the moment.

But surely they're going to need to cancel some more shares soon. I hope we don't get fined or something because of such a stupid thing.

[jonak] 21/9/2007 12:21

and another 100k today, at a guess

[arthur_lame_stocks] 20/9/2007 21:03

Yes but don't forget that the company is profitable. After 6 years I would hope they will comfortably have had another 10p-15p in earnings.

I think the shares are 50% undervalued now.

I see they've bought in another 150K of stock today.

[the diviner] 19/9/2007 21:15

I too would be happy with 50% on todays price providing we get that within a year or two from the purchase date.

As time goes by we will pass a point were we would have achieved more than 50% in a building society account paying 7% interest with no risk. (ie. six years).

[arthur_lame_stocks] 19/9/2007 20:30

I've seen some Gyllenhammar companies give spectacular returns, some get broken up and the cash returned, some get taken over and some go broke. So a bit of a mix as far as I can see. I keep holding because I believe that the shares are worth 50% or more than I can sell them for now, which is a good return, it's profitable so the value is going up and not disappearing and because I believe that we'll get a return in the foreseeable future.

[the diviner] 18/9/2007 22:28

Right now this is a type of value trap. (There is value here but it's going nowhere fast).

It seems that many of us are becoming impatient with the lack of progress.

Buying back shares at below NAV is good; cancelling all those in the treasury would be better.

In the companies that I hold shares in that PG has a large presence this appears to be a familiar trend with the share price just bumbling along going nowhere fast, small market sizes that keep shareholder locked in no divided out of the cash pile to give us something while we wait.

These days the larger shareholders do not need 51% to have total control as many people hold shares in nominee and most of the nominee holders do not get a vote.

[arthur_lame_stocks] 18/9/2007 21:31

I don't worry too much about the buybacks. I think they're a good idea. They boost EPS, NTAV/share and they take cash out of the business which means PG can't spend it on something like CRU, CHUK or CPL.

I think the eventual value is likely to be 30-40p a share. I hope we don't have to wait too long for it though, i've been holding these a couple of years now.

[deswalker] 15/9/2007 12:44

jonak,

I have similar concerns but the three insiders (the Hemmers director holds 60k shares) are still 2.4 mill shares short of a majority of Voting Rights. Even then they would come under very strong scrutiny as they are not supposed to be acting in concert and it would be relatively straightforward to tell whether any sly Swedish deal had been done in the background as a related transaction to any takeover here (eg JC gives PG cash, shares or votes elsewhere in return for PG voting for a lowball offer here).

They have also said on numerous occasions that they would buy back shares up to NAV for the benefit of all shareholders. It's hard to see how they could offer us less than NAV without attracting further scrutiny and they'd be crazy to risk the wrath of the FSA for the sake of a few pence per share IMO.

I still think they're acting for our benefit for the time being. I can't see us getting back much more than NAV but who knows. Both a NAV and EBITDA/EV valuation leads to about 32p per share fair value excl any uplift from the land court case.

Des

[jonak] 15/9/2007 08:06

I'm worried the share buy backs are a way for the swedes to increase their relative holding without spending their own money - a back door buyout. Between them they own well over 40% now. I think if they don't buy shares themselves, although their fractional ownership has gone up, they don't need to disclose anything.

[gingerplant] 11/9/2007 13:11

Arthur - you're a prophet:

Buy back of Own Shares

Leeds Group announces that on 11 September 2007 it purchased 350,000 of its own
Ordinary Shares to be held in treasury. The shares were purchased at 21.5p each.

Leeds Group also announces that it is canceling 600,000 of its Ordinary Shares
held in treasury, in order to bring its holding in treasury below 10% of the
issued share capital.

As a result of the above purchase and cancellation, the total number of Ordinary
Shares now held in treasury is 3,505,618 and the number of remaining Ordinary
Shares in issue is 31,932,985.

[arthur_lame_stocks] 10/9/2007 19:22

It looks like 340k were sold today. Hopefully the company will dip into the market and buy them back, but they might need to cancel some of their treasury shares first.

[the diviner] 08/9/2007 10:42

I think that it is about time that we had some positive action that would drive the LDSG share price onward and upward.

Cancelling all the shares in treasury, paying us dividends out of the unused cash and only spending money on Hemmers that is likely to see the shareholders get a good rate of return would be welcomed. (Changing the policy with regard to the cash and declaring that they are no longer looking for new investments but plan to return any unneeded cash back to shareholders would provide a boost).

I would not mind LDSG just sitting there if we received a 5% PA dividend but up to now we have not had any dividend, the present directors may/may not be overly generous to themselves but the previous directors were IMHO far too well looked after when they left office.

My fear is that too much our money will be invested in Hemmers before it is sold, (perhaps, via a management buyout).

[jonak] 23/8/2007 20:22

over 10% of shares in treasury after todays buy back. Must cancel some surely.