Leeds Share Discussion Threads

[ansc] 01/2/2010 08:53

A brighter trading statement from Dawson this morning. Will it give a much needed fillip to LDSG's sp?

I'm not holding my breath.....

[arthur_lame_stocks] 24/1/2010 18:24

Don't think i'll be able to make it Des (it's in Leeds isn't it?). But i'll be very interested to hear what you've got to say about it. Perhaps we could come up with some questions for you to put to Gyllenhammar and co.

[deswalker] 24/1/2010 12:12

I'm heading to the AGM on 3 Feb and shall report here in due course.

Is anyone else going and if so do you fancy meeting for a quick coffee and chat afterwards ?

Des

[deswalker] 24/1/2010 12:09

Thks TD. Header updated.

I have sympathy with your views.

[the diviner] 24/1/2010 10:54

Des,

I sold some last week and now I am down to 20,000.

I have just about had enough of the LDSG value trap.

Regards,
TD

[deswalker] 18/1/2010 16:44

Buyback. 50k at 14p.

[arthur_lame_stocks] 29/12/2009 12:56

Some action at DWSN. Let's hope it's not Leeds going for the rest of the old dog.

[arthur_lame_stocks] 12/12/2009 10:27

Hi Des I agree entirely about EET. I complained to Leeds some time ago about investing in EET in the first place and they then went on and bought some more shares which were sold at a further loss. But there was little buying interest in EET except apparantly Scribona so I think there's something dodgy gone on there like you.

[deswalker] 11/12/2009 08:05

Just catching up on this from Kenya.

I shall be going to the AGM and asking about EET. Who did they sell it to ? Scribona ? If so then questions need asking.

I was told at the last AGM about the new investment in EET and that they hoped to recoup their losses. Then it was announced that they had put another 200k in as I was told. The final loss is even greater than that booked last year. Not impressed.

On the other hand they are at least doing what they said they would do with Hemmers, namely improving cashflow and working capital.

Yeadon is back on the agenda and they've spent 53k on the legals so far so they must be fairly keen.

Let's hope that they have learned some lessons from EET and won't rush into things again. But I'm not holding my breath.

However, I shall certainly let them know of my displeasure with things at the AGM and question to whom and why EET was sold. I want to be sure it hasn't been a mechanism to transfer assets from LDSG to Scribona at a knock down rate.

Des

[hugepants] 10/12/2009 21:14

Yes the bad news was flagged up in advance but there is very little interest in this mutt.

Also I had a quick look at last years accounts and Hemmers has freehold land and buildings worth £1.75M. So the LDSG balance sheet is amazingly strong. There is 9p cash per share and;

freehold land and buildings = 6p
Dawson stake = 4.5p
Working capital including cash - ALL liabilities = 29p

[arthur_lame_stocks] 10/12/2009 19:05

I actually thought the results were pretty good all things considered. I mean we knew there was going to be a small loss. It's also interesting that they haven't given up on the Yeadon land although I think we should look on that as purely a bonus if we ever get anything out of it (then again we should probably look on it as a bonus if we ever get anything out of Leeds Group).

[hugepants] 10/12/2009 10:12

EET was a bit of a disaster as investments go. But I think Hemmers must be worth more than twice the current share price.

[jonak] 10/12/2009 02:32

NAV up, debt down, small loss....and management still looking investment opportunities.
Share price is low because no-one is buying 'em; if there was an easy way to realise the NAV, some-one would be piling in...they're not, so apparently there isn't.

[arthur_lame_stocks] 09/12/2009 18:34

Everybody underwhelmed by the results then?

[rainmaker] 29/11/2009 16:21

Thanks Guys, interesting stuff but my overwhelmingly impression of PG is that he invests in failing Companies when he doesn't have to. In the last five years or so where was he when MSB International, London Forfaiting, Uniq, SDI Group, Stanley Gibbons Group, Teather & Greenwood, Theo Fennell were available at or less than their liquidation value? Most of these Companies had a bright future.He doesn't seem to look at or taken into consideration a Companys intangible assets or their business franchise.

regards

[jonak] 23/11/2009 22:12

Putting a positive slant on it, the article makes him seem like us, investing in an undervalued company and hoping to maximise his profit, except he is actively engaged in trying to turn the company around ....

[arthur_lame_stocks] 22/11/2009 22:59

PG and JC are definitely linked.

[the diviner] 22/11/2009 22:19

Hi Arthur,

Yes, they are to be commended for not taking huge directors fees. (Let's face it there is not a lot of work involved in running LDSG but it has never stopped the useless dirtbags in other companies from being very kind to themselves).

Personally, I never wanted to put any money into Hemmers to build it up and I did not want them to invest our cash elsewhere, I would have preferred that they had sold Hemmers for whatever they could have got for it without the investment and returned all the cash in the bank and the Hemmers sale cash to the shareholders.

Now that our cash has been invested in Hemmers, it will probably be sold as soon as it starts to come good but my fear is that we will not see a return on the extra cash that LDSG has put in and that it could be sold of cheaply as a management buyout.

My main hope is that PG and JC are not linked otherwise I cannot seen us making anything out of this.

Regards,
TD

[arthur_lame_stocks] 22/11/2009 19:25

I think with Leeds we should give hime some credit. Between PG, JC and EW they are only drawing a salary of about £30k combined. I'm sure if they wanted to they could screw £300k a year out of it.

I also don't believe that he's happy to let companies deteriorate, although he's obviously not averse to putting in a low bid and getting the value for himself where possible.

I think the thing with Gyllenhammar is to recognise that he's not the patron saint of private investors and that he's trying to make himself money. Also he's a bit hit and miss and he's bought into some dreadful companies where I simply couldn't understand what he saw.

That said he can also be a catalyst for change and i've made money following him a number of times. I'm currently invested in LDSG, DSN and HTH and in all three i'm not currently worried about the investment, despite sitting on substantial losses on both DSN and LDSG as I don't think any are going bust.

What I wish is that he'd get back to doing what he was known for which is breaking up these small groups and giving the cash back to shareholders. Now he just seems to want to build businesses up.

[the diviner] 22/11/2009 17:49

Des,

I do respect your opinion and I also hope that you are correct about PG. However, The article lists 14 companies, 10 of which he holds his optimum sit and stew the PI's until they all give up holding of between 25% and 30%. In 3 out of the remaining 4 companies he presently holds over 20% and will soon no doubt build his target holding of between 25% and 30% on the dips.

We know why he does not buy more than 30%.

Why does he choose just over 25% ?

I suspect that the answer to that is that it prevents anyone else doing a Gyllenhammar on him. (ie. The bidder would need over 75%).

As he said to the Fool Interviewer;


Stakes
In the past he has been accused of trying to assert control over companies on the cheap by becoming the largest shareholder but avoiding the "trigger stake" of 30%, which would force a mandatory bid. He explained his thinking on this.

"We have in the past taken a number of PLCs private – bidding for 100%. To pass the 30% limit is rather 'dramatic' on a number of levels: financially, management responsibility, pension issues, etc."

"Passing 25% gives us a 'blocking minority' – it becomes really unlikely that
someone would bid for the company without our commitment to accept such an approach. Holding 29% certainly does not give you control over a company. I meet some really hostile directors in some companies where I have 29% - the last thing they consider is to give me control over 'their' companies."


It is clear to me that his policy is to obtain a blocking percentage of just over 25% and sit on it until most of the PI, s sell because they are losing out on their holdings.

The next part of his apparent policy can be found in what he said when he commented on how he had made back his loses;


"This has however been more than compensated for by profits made from acquiring 100% of a number of companies such as British Mohair, Union, Yorklyde and others."


When he buys between 25% and 30% his outer is to acquire 100% of the shares.

My issue is that he just sits on his 25% to 30% while the companies deteriorate/bumble along and he does not have any real incentive to turning them around until after he has obtained his 100%.

Regards,
TD

[deswalker] 22/11/2009 15:41

David,

I spoke with PG and JC at the last AGM and am planning at being at the next one. I must say I walked out much more optimistic about their intentions than when I walked in but who knows ...

Unlike TheDiviner I interpreted the TMF article positively. Willing to engage with others and generally wanting shareholders to be more involved etc. Yes there was mention of Takeovers but not really de-listings.

I think PG and JC are their own men more than people think. They are clearly close but maybe not that close. I remain hopeful of their intentions but then right now I'm the last person you should be listening to in this regard.

Regarding trading, PG said that working capital management inside Hemmers was something that had to be addressed before they stood any chance of considering a sale of that business. So I was pleased to see that bit of news.

The pre-tax-loss was disappointing but as we all know this stock is about the Balance Sheet.

We'll see what the results bring, but operationally at EET, DWSN and Hemmers there has been some real improvements I would say. But boy is this a slow burner !!

Des

[arthur_lame_stocks] 22/11/2009 11:32

Moaning aside, I presume we're going to get the results in a few weeks time.

A small loss isn't a disaster and it sounds as though they've generated cash by running down working capital. Also they hope to return to profit next year and with a market capital of £3.5m there's a hell of a lot of bad news priced in.

I am most interested in knowing how that investment in EET has performed. I've complained to Ewen Wigley about this before. It's just Peter Gyllenhammar using the company's cash for his own purposes.

It would also be nice to know if there is any news on the 5 acre Leeds site.

The cash balance in the holding company will also be interesting as I presume this is still held seperately from Hemmers and hence should provide a floor to the value assuming the Swedes don't lose any more of it.

Dawsons is a bit of a problem, what can Leeds do with it? The large pension fund is always going to be there, it's too big to wind up. Although Dawsons don't look like going bust just yet and it might still prove to be a good investment. Perhaps there could be some synergistic benefits between the two as they're both basically distribution businesses operating in different geographical areas but similar products and sourcing from similar regions.

Just a few thoughts!

[davidosh] 22/11/2009 11:17

I thought some of you guys engaged with PG and directors at the AGM over his intentions ?

[arthur_lame_stocks] 22/11/2009 01:16

Peter Gyllenhammar needs to be careful here. He and Claesson haven't exactly played by the rulebook.

[the diviner] 22/11/2009 00:47

The Fool Article say it all; his policy appears to be to sit on about 29% blocking any other potential takeover bids until the share price drops low enough for him to buy the lot at a cheap price.

Gyllenhammar just sits there like an albatross around all of our necks.

As I seen it, we will be lucky to break even with LGSG; when the loss in the interest that we could have received if we had just held the money in a Building Society account is considered.

Probably, our only hope for is if a group of shareholders with a combined holding of just over 10% got together to prevent him from forcing us to sell our shares to him when he does make a derisory bid.

However, that would not stop him from delisting the shares as we would need 25% to prevent him from doing that, which is probably why PG likes to sit on just over 25%.

The posters on the other ADVFN thread hold just over 2% of the LDSG shares and we will probably need about 5 times that to prevent him from just looking after his own interests and 12.5 times that to stop him from delisting the shares.

Regards,
TD