Leeds Share Discussion Threads

[cg1953] 25/1/2008 03:25

arthur.
much as i have long suspected; your latest post neatly exposes the ongoing complicity/duplicity.
whats worse, is that both past and present independent directors are guilty of complicity/collusion.
the stewardship of ldsg is not, nor has been in the wider shareholder interests ever since these 2 swedish clowns, masquerading as financiers, got involved.
further, LSE rules have been deliberately ignored/broken.
all these infractions should be brought to the attention of the FSA for a wider investigation.
Oh, but i keep forgetting its far too small for that. lol.

[arthur_lame_stocks] 24/1/2008 18:38

Am I being held to Ransom poacher? I reckon they're cheap too even though they've double from their low I think they could double again or even treble over the next couple of years.

I have an email from Ewen Wigley to Johann Claesson, sent to me in error, which shows that Peter Gyllenhammar was being consulted on the day to day running of Leeds long before he was employed by the company in any capacity.

[poacher45] 24/1/2008 16:43

If you say please I might ask all your questions Arthur when I attend my 5th Leeds AGM. You did not comment on my Ransom comments.
I must admit you have all thought of some interesting questions.

[deswalker] 24/1/2008 16:37

Obviously I agree with the sentiment here. If anyone is going to the AGM please try and pin them down on an outer at fair value for smaller shareholders. Explaining politely that the reason the share price isn't higher is purely because of the uncertainty that management are deliberately creating and seeing their reaction to this accusation would be very telling, even without a straight answer.

The explanation given in the Finals that they are doing us a favour by providing liquidity to shareholders is the weakest excuse I've heard. If they were committed to giving shareholders a fair return on their investment then we ought to see a Tender Offer at a range of prices approaching NAV (a bit like FWY did last year). Right now they're not even bidding it up to last year's levels despite the NTAV per share being 10% higher.

Some answers are needed. Sorry I won't be there to ask the questions myself. Not that sorry though, Leeds or Cape Town. Tough choice :0)

[bracke] 24/1/2008 11:02

I am wary of share buybacks particularly when a dividend is not being paid (no improvement in dividend due to reduced shares eligible for the dividend)

My main concern is that the two major shareholders will acheive a majority holding and can then do what they want. Not good for the remaining shareholders.

[arthur_lame_stocks] 24/1/2008 09:59

It would also be interesting to know if there has been any progress on the appeal on that 5 acres of land in Bradford if anybody is going to the AGM.

Other than that it might be nice if somebody asked the management how the small shareholders are ever going to see a return on their investment if the market refuses to put fair value on them and they refuse to pay a dividend.

[the diviner] 24/1/2008 06:43

roomey,

Like Arthur, I am in favour of share buybacks, (as long as they buy the shares back below NAV).

I would very much like to see dividends being paid as that should have an immediate beneficial effect on the share price and would give us a tangible return while we wait for the value to out. (An added bonus is that any money paid in dividends cannot be wasted on speculative ventures or building up Hemmers for a cheap price management buyout).

A problem is that the two controllers have little incentive to make a move and without dividends, the LDSG share price may just bumble along for a long time to come.

[roomey] 24/1/2008 00:24

cheers Arthur do not have access to AR as share held in nominee a/cs and not on co. web site yet, have fear regards share buy backs as benefit the two major holders to a greater extent than smaller holders and they are not having the desired effect, feel divis would be fairer also co. basically controlled by them no one representing smaller shareholders on the board who are still in the majority just and looking after everbodies interest

[arthur_lame_stocks] 24/1/2008 00:10

roomey

I'm in favour of the share buybacks, at least they're buying them in at levels well below NAV that it's having a positive effect on the remaining shareholders. Remember you percentage of the company also increases. It might increase the risk of us getting screwed which is the major risk here I think.

On the Nordhorn front, there's more info in the AR but I don't have it with me. From memory there is talk of 1.5m being borrowed by Hemmers, again unsecured and without recourse to the parent and the purchase of freehold property.

It's probably worth finding out more about what they're doing there is anybody's going to the AGM.

[roomey] 23/1/2008 23:52

trying to gauge fellow shareholders views on share buy backs prior to agm,my own view is that they should stop as it is quite obvious they are not having the required effect of bringing the share price closer to the nav and are mainly benefiting the two major shareholders whos joint holding is now approaching 50% having not had to purchase a single share with there own money only another 6% buy back to reach this milestone.the best and fairest way of benefiting all shareholdes would be to start paying dividends again eps last year was 1.5p if this was paid out in dividends at the current share price this would represent a 7.5% return on our holdings.
secondly while the company is right to grasp the opportunity presented to it by a competitor leaving its market im having a problem with the figures quoted for doing this spending £1.85m yes million on increasing the facility at Nordhorn seems excessive especially on leasehold premises and how is this going to be financed by further borrowing hemmers or from parent companies cash pile.Any feed back would be appreciated

[jhan66] 10/1/2008 13:30

Thanks Poacher, I've been in that BDO building a few years ago it's only 200 yards from the station (think). Chance I might make it.

[deswalker] 10/1/2008 13:00

poacher ... many thks for the info. Still no electronic version of the AR available on the website. Unfortunately I can't go on 31st Jan. Not back in country until 10 Feb and was expecting it to be in March as last year. Oh well ...

If anyone does go, then I'd be grateful if they could try and pin management down on the usual issues (when can we expect to see management delivering value to all shareholders in the form of an share price much closer to NAV) plus whether they've thought of relisting in Germany in order to achieve this.

Then, if anyone's feeling brave (remember it is your company too), a simple

"Are either of you (JC and/or PG) planning on screwing us smaller shareholders by making a low ball MBO offer ?"

Ofcourse it's highly unlikely you'll get an answer but the body language when faced with such an upfront question ought to speak volumes. I'm annoyed I won't be there to ask it myself.

Des

[poacher45] 10/1/2008 12:34

Have been to the last 4 or 5 AGM's with various degrees of hope or desperation. This years meeting is at 12 noon on 31st Jan at BDO Stoy Hayward LLP, 1 Bridgewater Place, Water Lane Leeds, LS11 5RU. This has been taken from the annual report which I received yesterday. I have a spare copy Des Walker and jhan66. Although there does not seem to be any more information than already published. At least the directors have listened and made the time and place better this year.

[bracke] 10/1/2008 12:08

DesWalker

Many thanks for your informative post.

As to the question you would ask 'The Swedes' I doubt that you would get anything like a straight answer.

[deswalker] 10/1/2008 11:51

jhan ... I don't know a date or a venue yet. They say the AR will soon be available from the website and that the details will be in there. I'm guessing it will be in Yeadon and if the times and dates suit then I'm thinking of going along.

I'm not unhappy about the expansion of Hemmers. If all the UK bits and bobs can be tied up and the central cash used for buybacks and inter-company loans for expansion then this share becomes a clean play on Germany (and possibly Eastern Europe in future). A better place to be than here in the UK IMO.

However as we all know, the 20 thousand dollar question is the intentions of the two Swedes and I think I'd like to ask them this question in person.

A relisting in Frankfurt would be great news IMO.

[jhan66] 10/1/2008 11:37

Des, Can you advise when AGM is ? (is it at Yeadon?)

couldn't find info on website but borrowed the current share breakdown below-


Shares in public hands 16,662,436 (47.7%)

Shares not in public hands
Mr Johan Claesson and associates 7,978,050
Mr Peter Gyllenhammar and associates 6,732,499
A subsidiary company director 60,000
Shares held in treasury 3,467,015
18,237,564 (52.3%)
Total Ordinary Shares 34,900,000

Mr Claesson and Mr Gyllenhammar are directors of Leeds Group plc. Their percentage shareholdings are:

Ordinary Shares % of total shares % of total shares excl treasury shares
Mr Johan Claesson and associates 22.9% 25.4%
Mr Peter Gyllenhammar and associates 19.3% 21.4%

[deswalker] 10/1/2008 10:47

I've got to the bottom of the 4,825,000 shares number from the Finals (the maximum number of shares to be bought back this year).

Before yesterday's 100k buyback there were 31,432,985 voting rights of which the biggest shareholder (JC) holds 7,978,050. If they were to buy back 4,825,000 voting rights then there would be 26,607,985 outstanding leaving JC with 29.98% of the voting rights of the company, just below the 30% threshold where the compulsory bid rules take effect. That's where they've got the 4.825 mill number from.

Ofcourse another 4,725,000 is a lot of shares and if JC is keen to get his holding up to 29.98% then surely he's going to have to bid the share price up much closer to NTAV IMO.

If, as appears to be the case, they are pinning their colours solely to the Hemmers mast by direct investment and share buybacks then I wonder whether the medium term plans might be for a name change and a switch to trading in Frankfurt.

I'm thinking about attending the AGM this year. Is anyone else planning on going ?

Des

[deswalker] 09/1/2008 16:34

Buybacks start again. 100k at 18.5p

[arthur_lame_stocks] 22/12/2007 12:35

It's interesting that the board want authority to buy back another 15% of the company's shares. I can't see them getting anything like that much in the market unless they're going to bid up the price a bit.

[jonak] 21/12/2007 23:21

here's the text for the first link
you'd need to register otherwise

LEEDS Group might be focused on operations elsewhere, but it is set for a battle with the council in the city where it takes its name from.

The company' which was once involved in the Yorkshire textile industry then went into funding equipment leasing and now focuses on German fabrics, is taking Leeds City Council to court over a five-acre plot of land it owns in Yeadon.

The land is next to the former Scott & Rhodes factory and Leeds Group had plans to sell it for development. However the city council has moved to register the space as a village green.

The company is now seeking a judicial review of that decision.

Meanwhile announcing its annual results today, it confirmed it has totally withdrawn from the textile manufacturing business. It has a German-based fabrics company called Hemmers-Itex which it is keen to develop and it is also looking for new investment opportunities.

The company made pre-tax profits of £760,000 in the year to September 30 compared to £743,000 last year.

Hemmers-Itex sales were 7.4% higher at £17,523,000 with pre-tax profit at £662,000.

Net asset value per share increased by 10% to 34.4p while earnings per share from continuing operations were 1.5p.

The company won't be paying a dividend while the board "continues search for suitable investment opportunities".

Chairman Ewen Wigley said: "The board continues to look for other acquisitions or investments that will strengthen the group and benefit shareholders. In the meantime, Hemmers-Itex continues to perform in line with the expectations of both its management and the board."

[hugepants] 20/12/2007 00:37

Leeds Group in council battle over land
19th December


Leeds Group still on the acquisitions trail

[the diviner] 19/12/2007 19:41

Hi Arthur,

I believe that you are the right person for the job. (Your views mirror those of most who post here and the main job of a None Executive Director/ (NED) is to protect shareholders interests).

We do not need a person with textile industry knowledge or any other specialist knowledge but we may need a strong independent NED to look out for the interests of minority shareholders. (Someone who can read a balance sheet is looking for an outer and wants to maximise shareholder value).

I suspect that the combined shareholding of those who post here is in excess of 3% and that the Executive Directors, (who many suspect are linked), would be reluctant to vote against a NED who was proposed by private shareholders. (The fact that LDSG shareholders had tried to appoint their own NED could itself be beneficial as it could stir the two controllers into action and encourage them to make a bid).

I have sent you a private email with my details; I hope that you will allow me to nominate you as a NED.

It may not succeed but there is a good chance that it would.

Regards,
TD
PS. I am reasonably happy with the results and building up Hemmers may be the way to go but I suspect that giving shareholders the cash may be an even better option. (Unless we have a voice on the inside, we will not have any real influence in what they do).

[arthur_lame_stocks] 19/12/2007 18:40

Hi Diviner

Thanks for the vote of confidence but i'm not sure i'm the best person for that job. I think there are probably some here with textile industry knowledge that might be up for it but my guess is we've no chance of getting anybody independent on to the board anyway.

As for the figures I was pretty pleased.

At least they are doing something with the cash, if I get time i'll email the company and try to find out a bit more about their expansion plans. For example it would be nice to know how big (by turnover) their competitor was and how much of their business they hope to capture and whether they were serving the same areas or overlapping areas or whatever.

They must think it's quite a good opportunity to invest a couple of million quid into it.

This could prove the outer we've been waiting for, then again PG makes some disasterous investments so we'll just have to wait and see.

A full year profit from Leeds though, rarer than a Panda's orgasm that.

[the diviner] 19/12/2007 09:48

As I posted in September, (post 731), I would like a dividend as that is that would give us something tangible while we wait.

It is all very well building up Hemmers as long as they do not sell it to themselves on the cheap. (I am still concerned that too much of our money will be invested in Hemmers before it is sold, (perhaps, via a management buyout).

I would like to see one of our number being appointed as a director.

I would recommend Arthur_lame_Stocks

[tiredoldbroker] 19/12/2007 09:10

Apologies, HugePants, I think my fund of festive imagination is already exhausted this Christmas !

It hardly seems 5 and a half years ago that I first wrote about LDSG - its been an "interesting" ride but I do feel somewhat depressed at this point about the lack of anything moving in the favour of the independnet shareholders.

In case I don't have time to post again, a Merry Christmas and a patient New Year to all those interested in LDSG.