We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Customisable watchlists with full streaming quotes from leading exchanges, such as LSE, NASDAQ, NYSE, AMEX, Bovespa, BIT and more.
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Stock Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Manx Financial Group Plc | MFX | London | Ordinary Share |
| Price Change | Price Change % | Share Price | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.00% | 14.75 | 08:00:00 |
| Open Price | Low Price | High Price | Close Price | Previous Close |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 14.75 | 14.75 | 14.75 | 14.75 | 14.75 |
| Industry Sector |
|---|
| GENERAL FINANCIAL |
| Announcement Date | Type | Currency | Dividend Amount | Ex Date | Record Date | Payment Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 26/03/2024 | Final | GBP | 0.004551 | 16/05/2024 | 17/05/2024 | 24/06/2024 |
| 21/03/2023 | Final | GBP | 0.003764 | 15/06/2023 | 16/06/2023 | 19/07/2023 |
| 10/03/2022 | Final | GBP | 0.002443 | 01/06/2022 | 06/06/2022 | 23/06/2022 |
| 15/06/2021 | Final | GBP | 0.001724 | 15/07/2021 | 16/07/2021 | 10/08/2021 |
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 16/10/2024 12:59 by smithie6 btwanother company doing lending in the UK, lse:stb ..it has a p/e of ~6, double the p/e of 3 for MFX. I guess that MFX perhaps deserves a lower p/e because with a cap. value of only £18m many institutions/fund surely are not able to own any shares in MFX, (& some PIs avoid companies with such a small cap. value) whereas STB has a cap. value of ~£150m, where many institutions/funds are allowed by their own rules to invest. but being half price in comparison, that looks way overdone imo. ------ How do STB & MFX compare for growth 2019 & 2023. Revenue (data taken from financial summary page of advfn) STB. £165m. £185m. increase = x 1.1 MFX £26.7m. £53.3m. increase = x 2.0 (revenue 2023/revenue 2019) (MFX. doubling the revenue in 4 years, impressive) For revenue growth MFX wipes the floor with STB, yet the p/e of MFX is half that of STB ! Doesn't make sense imo. imo either STB is too expensive or MFX is too cheap ! |
Posted at 14/10/2024 12:39 by smithie6 ...I guess that if MFX could borrow some dirs for say 6 months from say Revolut, Equals or TimeI guess that MFX perf. might well improve a lot. .....but with so many experienced dirs on the MFX bod (9 directors now !!) one might hope that MFX have all the experience/knowledge they need ?? or am I being overly optimistic ?! Well, with the UK banking part of MFX soon starting up, 1 year !! after getting the licence, we should find out in the next 3-9 months how good, or not, the MFX directors are ! (with 1 year of preparation !! & plenty spent on IT, one hopes it will go well. Plenty of time & money has been spent. Perhaps the work done has been good. (MFX apparently had ~60-70% of client activity in ~2020 without papers, ie. its digital, so, in theory MFX have some years of experience & also existing working IT for operating on-line). |
Posted at 14/10/2024 11:15 by smithie6 sector news....from recent months"lse:ipf Retail partnership credit now available in 450 stores in Romania" (IPF specialises in small personal loans at a high % rate to ppl who are high risk & who can't get loans from banks. So, not the same as MFX but it is a lender as MFX is). MFX has plenty of liquidity.....be interesting to see if there is any news in H2 about it using that liquidity. Perhaps by PA Ltd expanding, finally, in to another sector (dentists, lawyers, retail.....) or perhaps a tie up with a retail chain. Or perhaps one or more of the other subsidiaries expanding its lending. (one subsidiary/associate received £10 million from MFX not so long ago to increase their lending). Or might the frequently mentioned interest in the insurance sector start happening ? And MFX is expected to soon have a surge in cash available to lend out, because MFX says it will start taking deposits (on-line) in coming weeks in the UK. (The UK has a population about 1000 times the population of the IoM (which is only `84 thousand !!) so the potential for growth is very big, if MFX can take advantage of the opportunity). ----- Interesting to see that Revolut " almost tripled its revenue to £1.8bn in 2023. Its accounts are quick to open and offer competitive foreign exchange rates in an easy-to-use app." ...that shows how fast growth can be for an on-line banking service. "tripled its revenue" !. MFX is seen as a much more sleepy slow moving banking company but there is always a chance that the new UK banking division could grow quite nicely, not with the same % as Revolut (where billions of £ were invested). Although, yes, 1 year after getting the licence MFX is still not yet taking deposits. :-(( |
Posted at 07/10/2024 12:02 by smithie6 Tiger...so Rene Nominees Ltd now has 3.6%. I thought that it might be Mr D.Banks, (ex- MFX director): or his son Aaron Banks who owned a notable % (15-19%) of MFX in the past but which was all (~18 million shares) bought by MFX & the shares cancelled in 2020. And it is him. Mr Banks was imo receiving turnover & profit from MFX for comissions for loan business introduced by him to MFX, as well as being a director at MFX. Those comissions were killing the group's PAT. MFX made a decision to reduce the comissions that it was paying. During a number of years that has continued & the comissions paid have reduced. However it now appears that Mr Banks (junior or senior) is back as an owner of >3%. Is he again also receiving comissions by introducing loan business to MFX noting that the amount of comissions paid has jumped up in the last 12-18 months ??!! ----- Here is a link to information that shows that Mr Aaron Banks is the owner of Rene Nominees Ltd ....and that he was trying to benefit personally via business with another listed company Iofina.....and when that business did not happen ....Mr A.Banks was not happy at all & he called an EGM to remove a director & put himself on the bod !! ----- Mr Banks bought >3% in MFX , held by Rene Nominees ; if he did it recently at these recent prices it shows that Mr A.Banks thinks the shares are cheap. Or did he buy at 16-20p and only bought a few shares below 16p to go over the 3% reporting % ?. (if he bt at 16-20p then he surely must think that 13.3p is a cheap price to pay to buy shares !, so, will he add more ?). Do we know when A.Banks went over the 3% reporting limit ?....was an RNS issued ? ---- Zeno Capital of Tortola, British Virgin Islands no longer holds >3% based on the info we can see. In Nov. '22 it held 3.2%. I think its holding went up to 5% at one time. It first appearred when the shares first went from 8p to 15-20p. In the AR for '22, Zeno Capital had 5 million shares. ~4.3% at that time. Held by Vidacos Nominees. ----- trying to track the sales/buys (& motives, logic) of any declared holders of >3% is of course very tricky, since someone holding 2.999% only needs to buy a small number of shares to go over 3.0000% & have to get an RNS issued. And vice versa, from 3.001% a seller may go to 2.999% or may go to 0% & they don't have to report they holding/sctions below 3%. |
Posted at 06/10/2024 11:21 by smithie6 ...long sufferring readers of my posts are surely used to read me criticising the MFX chairman Jim Mellon.and that imo that various things that he writes are imo just not true ! or are white lies and intentional misrepresentation of what is 'true & fair/correct' (as required by the Company Act 2006; not that the UK regulator has ever actually applied said Act !) Here is a new complaint. In the H1 '24 accounts Jim Mellon writes about the profit made by subsidiary British Lending Exchange Ltd. " Our UK based sub-prime lender, The British Lending Exchange Limited" Well, according to Companies House UK there is no record of such a company !! I repeatedly complain about the low quality of the MFX accounts. This is yet another example. yet again Jim Mellon 0 Smithie6 1 ======= We pay the bod £1m/year and yet the quality of the accounts is imo pathetic. Clearly no one checks the accounts to identify & remove any mistakes or make sure that the text used can be understood by a reader. It appears to me that Jim Mellon writes the text & he also signs it off, without letting anyone else check it for errors. Giving 2 very different profit numbers for PA Ltd on different pages (one number being 2x the other) without any explanation was another error. Giving the MFX PBT as £3.5m was arguably another error since MFX owned 50.1% of PA Ltd not 100%, so the PBT of lse:mfx was not £3.5m. But that is an error that has been repeated for ~2 years, so hopefully all shareholders that read this msg board know all about it. ======= (updated) ....I had forgotten that MFX did any lending at all to the sub prime sector !! ....neither of the words prime or sub-prime appear in the pdf file for the AR for 2023. But they do appear once in the AR for 2022. With mention of sub-prime lending to UK SMEs. At the end of 2023 the loans in place were ~£6.5m. With bad debts/loans of £1m. But it seems to be fairly consistently profit making now. I thought that the MFX thing was all about low risk lending, asset backed lending to businesses, lending to people with cars via PA Ltd (if they can run a car they are hopefully/often a low risk borrower), etc Interesting to see that what was perhaps the last founding director resigned at Business Lending Exchange in August '24. James Smeed (MFX CFO) is now the sole director I think. So, founding directors departing at PA Ltd & at Business Lending Exchange. Can the MFX dirs now run these 2 subsidiaries & any others in a good manner; as well/competently as the founding directors did ? Are these subsidiaries now more profitable due to having a lower cost for directors (since a number have departed) ? |
Posted at 05/10/2024 13:44 by smithie6 btwbe interesting to know interest rates for deposits (& loan notes) & money lent out (& deposited in treasuries) for H1 '24 A) deposits & loan notes cost = £ 10.7m + 3.85 (commission expense) = £14.6m £ 409 + ~£30m loan notes = £439m % = 14.6/439 = 3.3% B) money lent out (& deposited in treasuries) income = £27.2m + 0.766 + 2.0 (incl. £0.3m gain existing but not booked)+ 2.2 comission = 31.6+ 0.8 = £32.4m £370m +70m treasuries +23m (lent/moved to other banks) =463m % = 32.4/463 = 7.0% C) difference = 32.4-14.6 = £17.8m ======== Observations 7.0% interest rate average is very dull/low imo when you have bank branches & staff to pay for and a bod that eats £1 million per year !!!!!!! while the interest margin is healthy enough.....but clearly most/much of the cash generated is eaten up paying for bank branches & their staff. The big hope over the last 2 years was that PA Ltd (which obtains the highest % on money lent out) would do well, expand in to other sectors & that it would lift the profits of the group. Sadly PA Ltd has dissapointed many of us with its growth (although the information provided to us market is very little & is very 'cloudy') & it has not expanded in to other sectors (or not that anyone would notice). And the recent news is that PA Ltd is seeing challenging conditions & remedial actions will be taken at PA Ltd. So, the big hope, PA Ltd, is currently looking faded compared with the bright star that it was in the weeks after MFX bought 50.1% of it. And the CEO of MFX resigned from the bod of PA Ltd in January 2024. That does not give the impression that the MFX CEO plans for PA Ltd to expand rapidly & take over the world, otherwise he would have stayed on the bod imo. :-( Many investors in MFX in the last 2 years were interested because of PA Ltd & were not very interested in the rest of MFX which have seemed to be trundling along with ups & downs (Edgewater Wealth Managers, MFX forex) & little growth in profits. Although those smaller subsidiaries did well in H1 '24 & made a notable contribution to the group profit. Any chance they might provide growth for MFX ? |
Posted at 27/9/2024 19:57 by smithie6 apologies for another post from mebut Just to make one point. That it appears proven that Douglas Grant as the CEO does not have a golden touch. - PA Ltd. failed to deliver the target of >=@£2.5m/year PAT - plan for acquisition of PA Ltd. Not delivered to plan. - plan for expansion of PA Ltd in to other sectors. failed. - growth in profit & prospects/hopes for PA Ltd have hit a brick wall after high profit growth in 2023, profit is apparently down in H1 '24 but a lot of that profit growth in '23 was perhaps/probably due to one off cost cutting (getting rid of directors' cars etc)....the turnover didn't increase that much (15% ?) - D.Grant departed from the bod of PA Ltd (the great white hope for MFX shareholders) in January 2024. Which appears to register failure to deliver according to plan. PA Ltd was the biggest most exciting acquisition by MFX. No shareholder is interested in any of the other subsidiaries. - Exploitation of the new UK banking licince which was hailed by the dirs as great news. 1 year later & no use appears to be being made, at all, of the UK banking licence despite it producing many fixed costs for MFX !! - cash going out for fees & comissions has rocketted, when the plan for last X years was to keep reducing/avoiding paying it ! - while the stated plan/strategy has FAILED to be delivered the exec dirs & the bod they have rewarded themselves very highly, 973k for the bod in '23 & ~1m shares for free for the CEO ! - while the stated plan/strategy has FAILED to be delivered by the execs & the bod the communication from the company to shareholders and the market is a DISASTER ! ( every poster on this forum complains about it, including large shareholders).....th - the H1 accounts stated that a fall in performance at PA Ltd was expected in advance of H1. NOTHING was communicated to shareholders or the market imo !! The AR makes NO mention of this. - it seems that every time that MFX issues accounts it just creates a cloud of confusion because the numbers give in the text (written by James Mellon) never agrees with the actual numbers inside the accounts. These H1 accounts it has happened YET AGAIN ! That, imo, is PATHETIC ! & imo the dirs should be ashamed. The accounts need to be viewed by shareholders & the mkt as being clear, correct, understandable & to have no contradictions. Yet, all MFX accounts are imo difficult to understand & always include contradictions !! This time around the chairman wrotes that profit at £1.9m for PA Ltd is down & remedial action will be taken. Yet £1.9m for pbt (=~£1.4m pat) for PA Ltd is 58% higher than it was in H1 2023 !? And the accounts give/infer a PAT for H1 for PA Ltd of 2 x the minority interest of £372k for H1, = ~£744k HALF the PAT that the Chairman claims that PA Ltd achieved. This creates a situation of doubt, not good. (imo incompetence but we have to wait & see if the co. can provide a logical explanation; the accounts do not include any explanation for this major contradiction). - & main part of MFX, Conister bank, is operating at a loss, & borrows tens of millions via loan notes at 6% to then deposit it in treasuries & get ~4%, losing 2% on each £ !!, imo. while the chairman claims that Conister is operating "admirably" !! From treasuries MFX gets an income of ~£4m/year (100m @~4%, +/- X) When the treasury rate reduces to 2% that £4m will be reduced to just £2m. How will MFX compensate for a £2m fall in profit ? Is there a plan ? - while the stated plan/strategy has FAILED to be delivered the exec dirs (Douglas Grant & James Smeed) on their high salaries present data to shareholders & the market which is FALSE. the dirs take the shareholders for idiots ! (for the data for H1 2023, & 2023 annual data.....MFX owned 50.1% of PA Ltd & 50.1% of its profit. Giving data in a presentation to shareholders which included 100% of the profit of PA Ltd (in order to present more impressive growth & profit numbers) was intentionally presenting FALSE data. (& imo disgraceful). And when questioned about this the directors still avoided being honest. 'ah, but we will own 100% in the future'. (well, when you own 100% include 100% in the profit numbers in presentations, until then, include 50.1%, & stop telling porkies !!!) ======= If one compares the accounts & communication for MFX with another company that does lending to businesses in the UK (as does MFX), lse:time. The accounts from Time communicate text & results from directors that are executing according to the company's stated plan & are successful at what they do & have everything under supervision/control. Their accounts & text & their presentations (!!) give confidence to their shareholders & the mkt. Very different than for MFX, which is opaque in its reporting (eg. forecast drop in performance in H1 at PA ltd was kept secret from shareholders & the mkt !), every time MFX issues accounts a cloud of unknowns or contradictions is created (again this time) & MFX does not like to interact with shareholders or potential shareholders, whereas at Time I think they are quite happy to communicate with investors (they present to investors, eg. at Mello). ===== imo the low p/e given to the MFX shares in part shows the low regard that the market gives to the bod of MFX. imo they should not repeat year after year that the market is wrong but instead they should imo change & take on board some of the criticisms given in this post, many of which have also been posted over the years by other posters. Beckham changed from an uncontrollable problem player, a bit wild, to someone much more controlled & then diplomatic & tactful. change is possible. And of course MFX need to manage Conister & debts/loans & start making money out of a £300-£400m loan book rather than it (+ HQ & central costs) dragging down profits achieved by the various subsidiaries in the UK. If Conister (incl. bod & central costs) continues as a loss maker & the cost of the bod remains bloated then it will be harder for MFX to attract share buyers. And need to make a success of the UK banking licence or will it fail to achieve the plan for it, as has happened for PA Ltd. |
Posted at 20/9/2024 07:16 by smithie6 btwthe PBT for all of PA Ltd in 2023 was £2.3m The max purchase price of the 2nd half of PA Ltd was fixed 2 x averaged PAT over 3 years, with a max of £5m (ie. an averaged PAT of >= £2.5m). MFX have done the acquisition early, with the agreement of the sellers. 1) Does that mean that the PAT of PA ltd has increased & is set to be >=£2.5m for 2024 ? (this is imo a major risk reduction for MFX, owning 100% gives more power than owning 50.1%; all & any conditions or restrictions or obligations that applied to MFX (wrt the owners of 49.9%) have now all gone !) 2) by reducing the number of directors that are not part of the buyer, MFX, is it fair to assume that the cost of dirs (+ pensions, + any private health care, + any car costs) at PA Ltd has surely reduced ....& that surely makes PA Ltd more profitable ...& also more valueable. 3) the risk for MFX shares has now imo notably reduced, by adding complete ownership of a company with an established track record & a very large distribution base. (if lose 1 individual garage as a client it has no impact on MFX because it is just 1 out of a large number). 4) MFX wanted PA Ltd because the nett margin on money loaned was/is much higher than its other lending. And MFX has obtained a UK banking licence, with the aim of getting deposits at a good % rate for MFX. Take that deposit money & lend some of it out via PA Ltd. The pieces of the strategy are all in place. MFX now needs to succesfully exploit/operate (& hopefully grow) the opportunity/strategy ---- There are risks/rewards for all shares, but imo the mkt has not noted the reduction in risk, imo, for MFX shares. While yes, the low number of existing investors at MFX have noticed & have been buying the shares that some big holder has been selling, mostly before the RNS for PA Ltd. Without that seller the share price would imo be notably higher. ---- (& as someone posted.....there is a good chance that just the value of PA Ltd is higher than the cap. value of MFX....we have to wait to see what the H1 profit of PA Ltd was to get a better view). |
Posted at 17/8/2024 21:27 by smithie6 ah ha----- ....although it would be nice if the co. was willing to output a bit more news, anything ! ....X months of complete silence... :-( ---- ...looking at the PA Ltd website ...there is no real growth of their client base in to retail, dentistry, etc (I think about 5 dentists are signed up, for all of the UK) ...not based on the info on their website anyway ...& one of the aims mentioned by PA Ltd & MFX was to expand in to other sectors. If it has not happened, which was a stated company target, why not ? ----- What has the bod been doing to justify their cost of ~£800k-900k/year...w (everyone & their friend sits on the bod... one non-exec gets >£100k/year. High for a small cap. company. Hope he earns it !) The uk banking licence was obtained some time ago (Oct '23)....& for about 1 year before the co. invested assuming it would be granted. Yet, so far there is no news of any progress. Last time I looked at the MFX/Conister UK website they were not yet offerring to take deposits from UK clients. Well, fingers crossed that the interims will reveal that they have been working hard & made progress. The costs for the UK banking section are being paid every month, high cost of its director (~£300k), office rental in B.stoke (in a trendy office building), reception/admin. staff, lights, heating, insurance, monthly building service cost, .....need to get some gross profit generated from the UK banking licence to counter balance these costs. ---- profit from foreign exchange function/division, MFX Ltd. btw ...despite the words from the chairman about "impressive performance" from the foreign exchange subsidiary.....the annual profit halved ! "...with an impressive performance .... and earned a profit of £0.7 million (2022: £1.4 million)" (sadly I now ignore whatever the chairman JM writes since imo it is often very different than the truth !; which is a sad state of affairs) I expect the profit from this division/section to fall again in this period. Why ? Because there are so many new/newish listed & also unlisted companies doing foreign exchange now, & always at lower % margin/commission. (Wise, Argentex, xe.com, Revolut, Equals, Finseta (lse:fin; ex Cornerstone), Sokin (fin. payments, surely does forex & many more imo). (& look at the bad problems at Argentex forex, with big share price slide down from 120p to 35p) ...clearly, imo, the margin doing foreign exchange is falling year by year) ...& the MFX FC ltd does not act directly but uses an intermediate party ....so a client is paying a % to 2 middlemen not just 1.....I can't see much of a future in that business model, over time ppl will imo just use cheaper services. While, sure, customers of Conister may keep doing some FX using Conister since they have money in an account at Conister & can hopefully quickly do an on-line currency conversion, but the turnover & profit from the MFX fx division/section is from businesses not from £200-£500 conversions by Conister bank clients (any margin on that surely appears in the numbers for Conister IoM bank & not in the separate FX company's accounts. ---- in the annual prelims it said "Looking further ahead, the unwinding of the pressure on our net interest margin will naturally drive organic growth" ...the nett interest margin has been going the wrong way imo, getting smaller, MFX paid high interest to get in new money in the last fin. year. MFX imo needs to increase that nett margin (to help pay the inflation on wages, UK banking operating costs & hopefully increase the PAT). It will be interesting to see if any of that happened in H1. Of course as the BoE interest rate falls (1 reduction so far & the mkt expects more, over time) the income from regulatory capital deposited at the BoE (or in Gilts etc) will reduce, giving a negative impact on the PAT. And a negative impact imo from the FX subsidiary. And some inflation on costs, although lower than previous years hopefully. The group needs to get all cylinders firing & be able to absorb (& exceed overall) likely negative impact imo on the PAT from FX & fall in BoE % rate. Since we have had a news blackout for months (the norm. for MFX) us PIs have no idea imo how the group is getting on. (although we think that the development of the UK banking licence has been perhaps 0/10 (since we think deposit taking has still not started !) & that the expansion of PA Ltd in to other sectors such as retail, dentistry, lawyers has achieved 0/10 (ref. PA website info). So, I'm hoping the H1 news is good but some indicators are not so rosy imo. (sure, the chairman will claim record everything but I will ignore that since his claims & the actual reported financial data (= the truth !) are 2 very different things !). |
Posted at 31/3/2024 21:52 by smithie6 StockopediaEV ...perhaps depends exactly how one defines EV. MFX has a +ve TNAV, so imo the EV should be lower than the cap. value. MFX has numerous debts & credits, one has to careful when calculating the nett amount. Ok, the official definition of EV excludes assets such as owned buildings etc. The term EV is perhaps completely useless if one doesn't consider the NTAV in the same evaluation. Especially important for property shares, hire equipment shares etc. ----- Stockopedia has not yet updated for the '23 results, so the data is for '22, (+ any errors). That was a discussion X months ago about EV. ===== How can Stockopedia give a much higher "momentum" mark to TIME than MFX when MFX has gone from 17p to 24p , just in March ? +41%/month !! While TIME is going sideways recently!! TIME has gone from 38p to 39.5p in last 2 months ! 1.5p/38p. +4%. +2%/month ...& yet Stockopedia says TIME is much better for momentum than MFX !! ...I won't be rushing to subscribe to Stockopedia ! ======= And imo if anyone looks at the comparisons with ratios between TIME & MFX, MFX wins in every department for things like profit per £ of share etc. TIME has done well for EPS growth in '23, a bit ahead of MFX, but one needs to smooth it out over 2-3 years , and then the TIME perf. drops back & MFX perf. rises. Arguably the p/e for these 2 companies should be about the same. The p/e for MFX has risen a lot in March, share price up 41%, perhaps it will keep going up ;-). Stockopedia didn't expect MFX shares to rise so much, I did, so I was buying . ;-) |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions
Hot Features
Premium
