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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Naked Wines Plc | WINE | London | Ordinary Share |
| Price Change | Price Change % | Share Price | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.00% | 53.90 | 16:35:08 |
| Open Price | Low Price | High Price | Close Price | Previous Close |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 55.60 | 53.10 | 55.60 | 53.90 | 53.90 |
| Industry Sector |
|---|
| GENERAL RETAILERS |
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 21/9/2023 18:23 by creditcrunchies I've been a nw customer for about 6 years I kind of know the growers and grape styles I like they've always been better than what you get at supermarkets. The problem with UK supermarkets is they have a small selection of different wines of each region in the world taking up several aisles. Always hit and miss. NW do have a problem they have got a massive inventory of wine from growers that aren't so popular. That is the problem they've got how do you value hard to sell wine without dumping below cost? All of the wines I choose are the fine wines that have drink before dates 10 to 15 years from now that age really well racked. Trouble is cheaper wine has a shelf life of only 3 years. Look at what's on offer at supermarkets cheaper wines with 3 yr shelf life. I'd be cautious as an investor for that reason |
Posted at 11/3/2023 06:55 by carcosa Investors may wish to be made aware that this company has a business relationship with the failed Silicon Valley Bank. |
Posted at 14/9/2022 08:56 by typo56 If there's a rights issue I was thinking at 40p. Now I'm thinking 25p.As I keep bashing on, the rights price doesn't really matter to investors, it's the amount they're trying to raise that matters more. The price is still psychological though and a reflection of the underwriters' risk appetite. I'm obviously getting a bit ahead here. There's no certainty there will be a rights issue or any fundraise but it would be preferable for shareholders to a placing to city mates with a token open offer. |
Posted at 01/11/2021 15:57 by simon gordon Couple of investors who are keen on WINE:Capital Employed podcast - 28/9/21 High ROCE and Widening Moats An interview with Partnership Investing, and two stock ideas. |
Posted at 01/11/2021 11:46 by 74tom I bought an initial stake this morning at £6.80 having spent most of yesterday researching this share. It's very hard not to be impressed at what they are trying to achieve. They undoubtedly have a far better moat than the likes of Virgin Wines and their shareholder base is possibly the most impressive I've ever seen for an AIM company. What's more, most of the US investors have been aggressively buying shares in the past few months, suggesting that it isn't just Light Street that see significant long term potential here.When you've got Baillie Gifford, Conifer Capital, Morgan Stanley etc buying heavily around the current levels, it may be worth paying more attention to what at first appeared a rampy CNBC interview. Standstill EBITDA was £39m in 2020 and they are aiming to grow the top line at 20% per annum, the addition of a strong balance sheet with £85m cash and no debt makes the current market cap of £500m seem very fair as far as I'm concerned. If they can double revenue over the next 5 years & achieve their targeted 10% EBIT margin then a four bagger should be very achievable, especially with what looks like an imminent NASDAQ listing. E.g. 2026 revenue @ 20% per annum growth; £769m 2026 EBITDA @ 10%; £77m 4 bags from current level = £2.5b market cap £2.5b / £77m = 32x EV - EBITDA. Fevertree currently trades at 43 x EV - EBITDA, however at one stage it was significantly higher, so why can't WINE achieve something similar? Happy to buy more on any dips from this level, I'm sure the American's will be as well... |
Posted at 13/6/2019 09:35 by ariane Proactive Investors - Run By Investors For InvestorsHomeNewsArticlesLON: Majestic Wine stumbles as chairman unexpectedly resigns, swings to loss in full year 10:19 13 Jun 2019 The AIM 100 wine seller also suspended its final dividend for the last financial year, saying investors would receive a special dividend after the sale of its retail business Wine pouring Majestic is currently trying to sell off its retail stores and become an online-only business Majestic Wine PLC (LON:WINE) suffered a bit of a hangover on Thursday after its chairman, Greg Hodder, unexpectedly resigned amid a swing to loss in its latest full year results. The AIM 100 wine seller said Hodder would step down at its AGM in August and retire from the board six months later after a period of transition. READ: Activist investor Elliott lodges bid for Majestic Wine outlets, media reports Majestic added that John C. Walden had been appointed to the board as a non-executive director and chairman designate, while Nicholas Devlin, the president of the US division of the group’s Naked Wines online business, had been appointed as the new chief operating officer. The announcement of Hodder’s departure was accompanied by the firm’s full-year results, where it swung to a loss amid an ongoing process to sell off its 200-store retail estate and shift toward its Naked Wines business. The company reported that its growth plan for Naked was on track, with the underlying revenue growth rate having accelerated to 14.5% in the year compared to 11.3% previously. However, for the year ended 1 April 2019 the overall group swung to a pre-tax loss of £8.5mln from an £8.3mln profit in the prior year despite revenues rising to £506.1mln from £476.1mln. The plunge was attributed to accelerated investment in the Naked Wines business as well as lower profitability from the retail arm. The final dividend was also suspended as a result of the restructuring process and would be replaced by a special dividend equal to the 5.2p paid out in 2018 upon completion of the retail business sale. The group’s chief executive, Rowan Gormley, said that the company was at a “crossroads On Wednesday, the bidding process for Majestic’s stores was gatecrashed by activist investor Elliott Advisors, pitting the US fund against other potential buyers including European private equity group OpCapita and Softbank-owned Fortress. Gormley added that a further update on the sale process would be provided if and when negotiations with the potential buyers concluded. The company is aiming to complete the sales process over the summer, in time for the important Christmas and New Year season, however, if this was not achievable it would continue to run the businesses independently until it could restart the sales process in 2020. Chairman departure “unexpected surprise”, says broker In a note to clients, analysts at Liberum Capital said the resignation of Hodder had come as an “unexpected surprise” while also questioning why the final dividend needed to be suspended. Analysts also thought shareholders would receive a higher special dividend than the 5.2p, and wondered whether the payout meant the company intended to invest significantly more into acquisition spend than they had previously forecast. “These results are complicated and detailed [and] raise more questions we were not expecting”, the broker said. Liberum currently has Majestic pegged at a ‘buy’ rating with a 500p target price. Analyst questions online move Commenting on the results, AJ investment director Russ Mould questioned whether Majestic’s strategy of moving to an online-only business was the right path for the company. “There are disadvantages to being an online business with wine. Aside from potential breakages during customer deliveries, you lose the interaction with customers in the shop. Majestic has developed a good reputation for having knowledgeable staff who are happy to make suggestions to customers visiting stores and there are also the sales benefits that come with wine tasting sessions. That type of connection would be lost by going online-only”, Mould said. He added that the company talking about resuming the sales process for its retail arm in 2020 if it failed to secure a buyer over the summer was “a bit worrying” as it suggested a sale was “far from a done deal”. “And shareholders are likely to be a bit miffed that they will only get the equivalent of the final dividend from the 2018 financial year as a payoff if Majestic is sold, rather than a bumper one-off payment. In fact, they won’t get a final dividend for the 2019 financial year at all if the business isn’t sold”, he said. In mid-morning trading, Majestic shares were down 7.8% at 293.1p. |
Posted at 28/3/2019 06:20 by newtothisgame3 #Majestic #Wine (#WINE) shocks investors with plan to ditch physical shopsWine specialist could become an online-only operation as it prioritises the Naked Wines brand |
Posted at 08/2/2017 12:22 by gengulphus Looks to me like an opening auction with very little interest, allowing it to set a 'false' opening price on just a few orders, followed by nearly an hour without any trades so that the opening price remained the current price for that long. As soon as a trade did happen, the jump mostly reversed.The sort of thing that could cause an opening auction to set such an opening price would be something like just two orders in the auction - one an opportunistic selling order hoping to get a high price, the other a buying 'market order' (a special type of order used in auctions only saying that the investor will accept whatever price the auction settles on). I think (*) that would result in the opening auction producing an uncrossing trade (the type UT trade) at the opportunistic selling price, for the smaller of the two numbers of shares - in this case 41 shares. And an opening auction that actually results in an uncrossing trade will set the opening price at the price of that trade. In any event, looking at the trades list, only that 41-share uncrossing trade was affected by that (or whatever other technical effect produced the strange price jump). Total effect on all the investors involved in the auction was that the buyers overpaid the sellers by 41 times about 15p = about £6. So not a big deal! (*) But am not certain - it's several years since I last looked at precisely how auctions resolve, and only the general outline has stuck in my mind... Gengulphus |
Posted at 09/1/2017 13:06 by blippy2 No probs gswredland. Interactive Investor can be a bit hit-and-miss on their timetable sometimes. |
Posted at 09/1/2017 11:18 by gswredland Thank you blips - thought it was today according to interactive investor |
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
