Lupus Capital Share Discussion Threads

[zooter11] 29/3/2010 13:13

Especially when I own BOS. Hypocrites

[jeffian] 29/3/2010 12:49

So did I, zooter. That's why I raised it and would intend to do so at the AGM if it can't be found elsewhere. The company seems to have done a great job of paying down debt and has the potential cashflow to continue on that path, with apparently ample headroom on the new covenants barring Armageddon, so why would the banks want to get involved with dictating management strategy to the Board? I am also uncomfortable with the specific charge over GT shares which looks like a guillotine hanging over that little gem.

Whatever the agreed 'ratio' is, I hope that there is a mechanism to release these draconian conditions once it has been reached. As long as we are operating within agreed covenants, there is no need for the banks to try to manage the business themselves and they ought to step back and let the Board get on with it.

[zooter11] 29/3/2010 12:31

I got the impression that he was being careful not to state that.

[jeffian] 29/3/2010 12:13

I was away last week but pleased to see the reaction to a pretty solid set of results after such a difficult year on so many fronts. A personal milestone is that the share price has now risen above my original acquisition cost - just need it to get back to the Rights Issue levels now (140 and 180)!

My only slight disappointment in the tone of the Chairman's statement is that it is very clear that we are still in thrall to the banks. I've only skimmed the report so far but does anyone know what debt/equity ratios need to be reached before the banks release their grip on our cojones? ("Undertakings from the Group not to pay dividends until the net debt ratio has been reduced at both Group and subsidiary levels.")

[topvest] 28/3/2010 18:52

Great results and fantastic cash generation. Looks very promising here in the medium term. Debt levels seem very moderate for a business of this size and quality + will be paid down in 3/4 years at this rate. I do believe we may get back to break-even on our investment, in time. Never thought that was possible at one time.

[itsnobigdeal] 26/3/2010 22:31

I see that Denis Mulhall has been buying Lupus shares. Does this mean that he is going to stay on after all? I hope so. I would be grateful if anyone could let me know.

[a0148009] 26/3/2010 08:14

Yes, net assets of 226m close to EV, mkt cap 105m plus debt of 111 divided by no.of shares issued = 166p, I do get cautious when a manufacturer has such a high level of intangibles. Seems there is a lot of optimism going forward, but they are very lean now, hence Collins reference to operational gearing.

AO

[a0148009] 25/3/2010 17:05

Andrew

How do you arrive at 150p NAV per share.
There is 223m Goodwill Allocation and 135m Intangible Asset Allocation.

[stevemarkus] 25/3/2010 10:37

I'm surprised not to see any comment on the results. I thought they were reasonable given the circumstances, and the market seems to be agreeing, with the share price up nicely just now. ANy thoughts?

Cheers,
Steve.

[sir brainy] 24/2/2010 00:10

What a load of door locks

[jeffian] 23/2/2010 23:32

I've never heard of them either but I'd take it with an enormous pinch of salt. Looks like the sort of unsolicited 'brokers report' you get offered by people who have bought your details from shareholder lists etc. Appear to be based in Portugal(!) and their reference to Hunting plc as "its closest peer" doesn't instill confidence. Hunting is in the oil services business so I assume they are making comparison with the GT business which is now a very minor part of Lupus compared to their building products side.

[solarno lopez] 20/2/2010 07:28

Sir Brainy GH not a chance at a small part he would hate it you do not know GREG like i do he is master of all he surveys not the bag carrier

[jeffian] 19/2/2010 22:41

I think the "time to walk away" is when it has fulfilled its potential as a building products company. It may not be 'Tomkins Mark 2' but it is clearly at the bottom of the building cycle and there must be some growth to come from recovery. Watch people like WOS and TPK; I think we're in their ballpark now.

[sir brainy] 19/2/2010 21:54

Time to walk away

[topvest] 19/2/2010 21:35

lol - no chance! He needs to run the show or keep away.

I would still like Greg to be running Lupus, but it's not going to happen.

[sir brainy] 19/2/2010 19:30

Is it conceivable he could wave the olive branch and get a seat on the board, ie NED with a small say in strategy going forward?

[jeffian] 19/2/2010 19:24

"Rest assured that with a £9 million personal investment and an 11.3% shareholding I will not be going away so please do not think that this is the end or even the start of the end."

Oh dear. I hope this is not indicative of an extended guerrilla war which will be disruptive and unhelpful to the company. Whatever one thinks of GH (and I supported his original comeback attempt) he has rather been the architect of his own downfall and made mistakes in handling subsequent events. Arguably (assuming he had the choice!), it was a mistake to resign in the first place if he had long-term ambitions to continue managing the company and it may have been better for him to have fought his battle with the banks from the inside, even if he was foisted with their 'turnaround team' for a while. The bigger bloomer, though, surely, was not lining up his institutional support before calling the first EGM - those are the sort of battles you need to go into knowing you have the resources to win rather than just charge over the top and hope sufficient troops follow to back you up! That has been compounded by slagging-off the institutions rather than opening up a charm offensive to bring them round. It's a bit rich to be criticising institutions for taking a stand and voting on things on principle when for years they have been attacked for NOT exercising their voting powers!

Anyway, as for the way forward, if GH really wants to continue this battle, I sincerely hopes he does so by discussions behind the scenes with management and major shareholders and only comes back if some sort of consensus is achieved. The idea that we are doomed to fractious EGM's every few months fills me with dread and on the evidence of the last one, unless he adopts the approach I have suggested, I suspect his support will dwindle further.

[jeffian] 16/2/2010 11:10

Re: 3951, although I'd be loathe to see it go, it's such a small part of the enlarged business I doubt it's material one way or the other now. Given that there have been attempts to sell GT by two previous managements, it has always been a bit of a mystery to me why this little gem has failed to attract a buyer at the right price (though I posited a reason in 3932) and I always felt Wood Group (WG.) was a natural home.