Nahl Share Discussion Threads

[blackhorse23] 07/7/2022 00:09

Bought some MCB today which looks potential returns of 200 percentage

[ali47fish] 04/7/2022 09:50

isnt this still good long term

[blackhorse23] 28/6/2022 00:34

MCB looks excellent value, https://www.mcbride.co.uk/about-us/corporate-policies/board-matters/

[blackhorse23] 09/6/2022 16:00

I am 25% down , sold this & bought IGR

[johnhemming] 29/3/2022 10:19

Allenby note with TP of 65p

[blackhorse23] 16/2/2022 09:46

Excellent buying opportunity ??

[blackhorse23] 14/2/2022 13:07

Bullish buying signals from brokers

[blackhorse23] 04/2/2022 08:27

Brokers price target 150

[blackhorse23] 03/2/2022 21:57

Profit H2 2021 ... 4 millions when other companies posting looses

[blackhorse23] 30/1/2022 22:04

Looking bullish

[blackhorse23] 26/1/2022 14:21

Made £4m profit H2 2021 while most of companies in negative

[blackhorse23] 25/1/2022 22:44

Company making profit & pays good dividend

[p1nkfish] 05/1/2022 16:39

I'm working way through their materials but probably wont post everything here as its a small punt on my part. So far not too worried and the debt doesn't put me off.

Will see what comes out.

[p1nkfish] 05/1/2022 14:34

I'm not so sure loglorry.
New here and can see a path to better times.

[loglorry1] 05/1/2022 11:08

I can see a bid for Bush but as I've explained above nobody will bid for an indebted business which is impossible to value. Unless they explain how their business model generates cash in sufficient detail a bidder would be mad to take a punt on the legal side.

[p1nkfish] 04/1/2022 10:26

What chance they receive a bid?

[loglorry1] 23/12/2021 10:40

Covid had an early affect and NAH did use it as an early excuse. Quite early on driving movility data showed driving was back to normal as ppl avoided public transportation.

Clearly during furlough less at work so less work accidents. Also probably slower to settle cases. Again if they published claims book size this would all be visible.

[johnhemming] 23/12/2021 09:09

@loglorry1 If I remember rightly FEN were saying it would be a reverse takeover which implies an implied premium, but probably not the 80p-£1 figure that could be argued for.

[loglorry1] 23/12/2021 07:37

Thanks Bully. I have read reports and watched presentations. The bottom line is that when a corp doesn't make simple metrics about its business clear it's always because it's because in so doing it shows poor performance. If the underlying metrics were good they'd be crowing like mad.

personally thinks legal is ok but since legislative changes, it's become far less profitable. Buying leads has become v expensive and sadly the % of RTA which comes from them now produce little to no profits. Maybe the lead costs will drop but I'm not convinced. I sincerely hope your profit ramp-up is correct but I have my doubts.

@johnhemming that's precisely the same as saying FEN couldn't recover the costs of paying up for the legal business they didn't want by selling it on.

[johnhemming] 23/12/2021 07:26

>Wonder why?
I would think that FEN were not willing to offer enough.

Covid clearly has some effect on case numbers as well.

[bully15] 22/12/2021 22:21

I can appreciate it has been a difficult business to stick with given the results over the past few years. I’m a fairly new investor in the company but I do think the business is on a positive path. I would definitely recommend going back over the past few years reports, interims and presentations (particularly the most recent investor presentation) to try to reassess the future outlook and earnings power of the legal business 2-3 years from now, most of the info you are looking for can be pieced together from available info, but you’re right that it is not clearly laid out by management. In general I think you will find that a combination of large amounts of capital being invested into developing NAL as well as minority payments to their JV firms is a large part of why the profits you talk about haven’t materialised yet, but as they faze out the JV partnerships completely and now that the capital investment into NAL is now complete, once the book matures from 2023 onwards and the law firm works up to max, the results will come through in the Income statement as much more cash is thrown off. Sorry for the long message, I don’t normally post on these boards but I thought it might be useful to offer a different perspective on their legal business which I feel is misunderstood, over Bush which is usually the main focus in discussions I see. Good luck and all the best

[loglorry1] 22/12/2021 20:55

Bully I've held quite a few NAH for many years (to my cost). The story is always that there is latent value in the claims book and that it takes 1-3 years to materialise. They are not starting from a standstill and they are still sending a lot of claims to panel law firms. So I fail to see why the claims book is not throwing off more cash as claims roll off the end and new ones are added? This is not a company going from an empty claims book building it up.

Further we were always told in the past that the debt was "covered" by the value of the claims book and if marketing spend was stopped and leads not generated (apart from organic) the claims book could be run down to pay off debt. Clearly with 17m of net debt that is begging to look less than truthful.

I really do hope you are right and the market cap is so low now I do still see value here but the message from directors is far from clear.

I wish the would just tell us the following :

* How many leads do they generate
* How much does on average does it cost to generate a lead.
* What split from that is RTA/Non RTA/Specialist
* From that split what is the value in each case and how long does that take to settle.
* Currently in the claims book what value (using the metrics above) exists if we were to just put it in run off.

Perhaps you know the answer to these basic questions but whenever I try to find out I just get obfuscated or partial answers.

Lastly, if the legal business was valuable then FEN would have taken NAH and flogged it off to a buyer and kept BUSH. That transaction failed. Wonder why?