Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Pcf Group Plc LSE:PCF London Ordinary Share GB0004189378 ORD 5P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  0.00 0.0% 8.50 0.00 01:00:00
Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Nonequity Investment Instruments 42.34 2.11 0.60 14.2 21
Last Trade Time Trade Type Trade Size Trade Price Currency
- O 0 8.50 GBX

Pcf (PCF) Latest News

More Pcf News
Pcf Investors    Pcf Takeover Rumours

Pcf (PCF) Discussions and Chat

Pcf (PCF) Most Recent Trades

No Trades
Trade Time Trade Price Trade Size Trade Value Trade Type
View all Pcf trades in real-time

Pcf (PCF) Top Chat Posts

Pcf Daily Update: Pcf Group Plc is listed in the Nonequity Investment Instruments sector of the London Stock Exchange with ticker PCF. The last closing price for Pcf was 8.50p.
Pcf Group Plc has a 4 week average price of 0p and a 12 week average price of 8.25p.
The 1 year high share price is 15.25p while the 1 year low share price is currently 7.50p.
There are currently 250,240,136 shares in issue and the average daily traded volume is 0 shares. The market capitalisation of Pcf Group Plc is £21,270,411.56.
toptomcat: ST comments in ICPCF's recovery potential revealedThe Aim-traded specialist bank has finally resumed trading again and its long-awaited results highlight an undervalued profitable business with a solid loan bookPCF's recovery potential revealed· Net loans and advance down slightly to £425m· New business originations a fifth lower at £122.9m· Less than 4 per cent of portfolio in forbearance at 31 March 2021· Interim pre-tax profit halves to £1.2m due to sharp rise in cost-to-income ratioShares in Aim-traded specialist bank PCF (PCF:15p) finally returned to trading this week, having been suspended since last summer ('PCF's financial control failings exposed', 28 June 2021).Previous management's failure to properly report PCF's exposure from funding provided by PCF Bank to its wholly owned subsidiary Azule led to an Independent Review that also identified several deficiencies and failures in PCF Bank's financial control and reporting function. It has been a tortuous process for the new management team to put in place the requisite reporting and compliance procedures as part of the overall remediation process. It has come at a cost, too.Although the net interest margin dipped only slightly to 6.8 per cent in the six months to 31 March 2021, and net operating income rose 4 per cent to £14.7m, PCF's cost-to-income ratio ballooned from 48.2 to 66.3 per cent as operating expenses rose 40 per cent to £9.8m. The upshot being that although the credit impairment charge declined from £4.7m to £3.8m, the additional £2.8m of operating expenses meant that pre-tax profit fell from £2.5m to £1.2m. However, there are several positives.Firstly, the impairment charge included an additional £3.2m provision for defaulted receivables that were either seriously in arrears or where the assets acting as security have been sold. It looks like a kitchen sink exercise to clean up the loan book.Secondly, PCF's stable capital ratio of 16.7 per cent remains comfortable as does its liquidity coverage ratio of 488 per cent. The £425m loan book is being funded by £338m of low-cost customer deposits, £59.6m of drawings against the Bank of England's ultra-low interest rate Term Funding Schemes, and the balance is from £54.9m (21.5p a share) of shareholders' equity.Thirdly, impairment charge on the £186m consumer loan book (mainly used car loans) was minuscule (£0.4m) and is likely to remain low given that used car prices have soared in the past 12 months, so even if a customer defaults there is hefty security. PCF's £64m bridging finance loan book is high quality (nil impairments) and is well diversified, too. Moreover, with 93 per cent of new business originations in prime credit grades, then default risk has diminished.Fourthly, the £175m business loan book incurred slightly lower impairments of £3.1m, but the majority of the charge represented the kitchen sink exercise.Investors need to wait the release of the annual results (to 30 September 2021) for when the board will reinstate financial targets and guidance. However, PCF remains profitable even at this low point, has successfully navigated through the Covid-19 pandemic and a major overhaul of its management and financial controls, and retains a solid loan book which generates a stable net interest margin.Priced on a 31 per cent discount to book value, the shares offer recovery potential. Hold.
cc2014: The RNS is I think is good news for shareholders. A profit of £1m is at least something and means there is a business to rebuild, so with patience the share price will slowly recover, albeit I'm not sure how I can value it until I have some insight into where we are today vs interims which are a year out of date. I suspect the loan book is down significantly, causing economies of scale issues, but nonetheless even if they spend the next 18 months breaking even whilst they continue to sort things out, from where we were in May that sounds a very good outcome to me. Profitability will flow in due course. I await with interest the investor meeting later in the week where hopefully there will be some insight into where PCF are now and where it is going.
cc2014: Happy New Year to you all. Some great posts recently. My view, much of which I have said before. The directors have been constrained from lending by the PRA for some time, albeit no official enforcement action has taken place. PCF is a regulated bank which has failed to file a set of audited accounts on time and everything flows from there. How for example is the PRA to make decisions on PCF's capital ratios if PCF cannot provide sufficient evidence to the auditors to get them signed off as a going concern? Every month for the last three months, savers fixed rate bonds are maturing and their cash is being returned to them. Indeed the rates were so low before September that it's been happenning for many months before that. In addition PCF are locked out of the wholesale market and the accounts show that the BOE may be requiring some of it's money back early as PCF may not be able to provide sufficient collateral to support the BOE loan. Effectively PCF is being slowly wound up and I believe this will continue until there is audited set of figures for Sept 2021. So, it's a race against time. Every month that PCF is constrained from lending, PCF is losing gross margin to support the overheads and underlying profit becomes pressurised.
dandigirl: hippo, you missed me! How nice! Happy New Year to you and all who post here - or are just interested watchers. Let the fun really begin later this month. Let us look forward to the AGM; it is to be hoped that a physical meeting can be held where the Board - with or without Franklin - can be confronted. However, lest I am considered as too glib, you should know that we, too, do have quite a lot of PCF shares, which were worth quite a lot of money, and we will suffer considerable pain and loss like all others. Our thoughts go out especially to the Reverend and his flock; he will have had a trying Christmas and like the rest of us be hoping for some clarity sooner rather than later. From reading recent posts, it appears that thoughts are broadly aligned. As I have posted, I too subscribe to the notion that all this has been somewhat overdone. However, the origins start with the failure to report accurately. This is seen as a heinous crime by the regulator. It is this that is likely to lead to a fine from the FCA later rather than sooner IMV. Such behaviour is not allowed, ever. And everything else followed from this failure. It was this that did for young Maybury. Chairmen just love to have an opportunity to remove a CEO. It must make them feel very macho, more manly. Recent history is littered with examples, Stephen Hester, Rana Talwar, Martin Taylor and Malcolm Williamson are the sort of names that come to mind. Some deserved to go, others didn’t. In fairness, though, it was action that Franklin had to take. He would have been viewed in a bad light, had he not done the deed. BTW, does anybody know if Mr Maybury is still here or has he skedaddled back to Aus? I don’t think we should get fixated on the 2020 numbers. They are way out of date and a lot has happened since. We wait to learn whether or not the cure is worse than the disease. topvest, I don’t think we should worry unduly about a run on the bank for a whole bunch of reasons. As has already been posted, funds raised are for fixed periods and cannot be withdrawn overnight. Secondly, there is the FSCS guarantee up to £85k to comfort depositors. Thirdly, the banking licence would have been suspended by now although it is not clear why PCF has stopped taking retail funds. Fourthly, PCF appear to have access to wholesale finds in case of need. Then there is the BoE as a provider of last resort. And the business now appears to be closely managed on both sides of the balance sheet in the full glare of oversight by the regulators. PCF will be on a watch-list and required to provide very frequent updates. Because of the FSCS support, we would place funds with PCF in a heart beat if the rate is acceptable. I think I have changed my mind regarding a SOMERS buy-out. I think every effort is being made to retain the listing. It cost a lot of money to become a bank; the quote is of value and something not to be given up lightly. Moreover, private equity is always looking for an exit; the listing provides one such. Without it, SOMERS options to off-load/reduce are limited to a third-party sale only. If the RI is underwritten only by SOMERS then there is indeed a risk that the SOMERS shareholding becomes too large. But there is some leeway, isn’t there? Could it not increase to a higher percentage - 80%? - and retain the listing. And much depends on whether the other shareholders stump up? If the prospectus looks okay, we will. Finally, I think a very big and bright light should be shone on GT as the IA. I hope that SOMERS are all over this with their legals. If we had the wherewithal, that is where we would begin.
cc2014: Hi Graham, I agree with everything you've written. For sure, Somers and UIL are audited by one of the big four and will have to have justified to the auditors satisfaction the valuation of the investments. From my personal point of view though this reflects everything that is wrong with the audit world. Somehow UIL have and KPMG have found some accounting rule that means they can value the stake is Somers at higher than they can sell it for in the open market. Of course the quoted price on the exchange is only one valuation method and we do not know the detail Out of interest I looked up the NAV of Lloyds. It's 52.3p in the last set of accounts and LLOY is currently trading at 45.1p. Should investments trusts therefore use a figure higher than 45.1p in their books. I think not. It doesn't make sense, yet apparently that is allwowed under the accounting rules if the stock is illiquid, which again makes no sense to me as trying to shift a large stake in an illiquid stock can't usually be done at market price, but instead a lower one. I'm drifting off topic though. The main point is that the value in the books of Somers for PCF has not been written down to some horrible number and therefore we some decent hope for shareholders that when the suspension is lifted the share price will not be destroyed. It would be nice to think we might see an RNS before the Xmas break
hopespr1ngseternal: We should all bear in mind that the share price was around 30p before sellers front-running the bad news pushed it down to the suspension price of 24p. If BV is now 20p and sustainable profit is in the region of 5m this would justify a share price around 15p after the dust settles, i.e down about 50% from 30p. Just saying…..
dandigirl: That there is harm being done is surely not in doubt? Immeasurable at this time but will become clearer as and when we are informed by this lamentable Chairman and his Board. A steep fall in the share price upon lifting the suspension is surely not in doubt too? Whether it is down to 15p or more or less will be both harmful and measurable. hippo: I would bet your life that the share price will not open above the 24p suspension price. The steam is already leaving the used car market. It will have passed by PCF. Such a pity. As above, business trading at a reduced level is harmful to the P&L too. Then there is the actual costs of these shenanigans. Big harmful hit to the P&L, no? As will be the additional on-going costs. I remember the share price being in the high 30s. It may have reached 40p+. It will be years before that kind of number is seen again. It will not be a blip. hopes: You are right, I was referring to trading in the shares. I, too, am of the view that a RI will be required to help rebuild the balance sheet to produce economies of scale. Increased cost base has to be accommodated with increased business. and hippo: a big ho, ho, ho to you too. Meanwhile, dream on guys.
cc2014: #3525 CC: May I politely suggest that it is inconceivable that the company would have announced Caroline Richardson’s appointment to the Board without her prior express consent. Is it possible that you are talking the company down because you hope to buy in cheaply after the suspension is lifted? For someone who has clearly stated that he will not invest in the company you seem very focused on small details. I said I'd reply to this. The reason I'm so interested in PCF is twofold. Firstly the stock market has been very generous to me over the years. I do alot of research and seem to have some knack for it. However, more recently I've had some really bad investments, more than can be explained by a run of bad luck. I therefore have to challenge myself as to whether my investment process still works or I have changed something. PCF is one I made a decent profit on but I was lucky or skilled not to buy back in as the share price got so cheap. So, I need to see how this plays out to understand whether my decision making process was correct and what I can learn. Secondly I hold a large amount of bank regulatory capital, both directly and through funds. Some of it is fairly illiquid and further some of it is unquoted. Bank regulatory capital pays a premium because it carries risk. PCF Tier 2 capital pays around 8% for example. Of course you don't get rates like that without giving something up, so with regulatory capital if things go wrong, the bond may not pay interest or the bond may be converted to shares or indeed your capital may be lost. For example I hold some West Bromwich regulatory capital, a building society which one might think from it's size would be financially healthy. However, West Brom got into financial trouble over a decade ago and hasn't paid any interest on some of it's regulatory capital since then. It's trading at around 60p in the pound, was lower than 20p at the worst point and will probably make it's first interest payment in over a decade next year. I'm drifting slightly but with PCF I'm interested to see how the PRA handle the situation because I cannot think of any situation like this where a bank has failed to file accounts. We can already see that the PRA have taken no formal action yet behind the scenes I'm sure it's no coindence savings accounts were withdrawn on the last day before they were required at companies house. I'm trying to establish whether I'm running too much risk, which I'm minded to think I might be, given I enquired about 3-4 years ago about buying some PCF Tier 2 debt. It is my view that the PCF Board in reality are no longer in control, but puppets to the PRA and that even when the accounts are filed and the governance gaps are resolved the Board will remain puppets. A look at Manchester Building Society which has passed all it's capital ratio tests for years, yet was unable to write an new business due to the PRA, shows that it's extremely difficult to escape the PRA's grasp once things go wrong. As an aside it is my guess that part of the lack of communication is because the PRA have asked the Board not to communicate anything without the PRA having first sight of it and the PRA move slowly. PCF is a small bank and the PRA will have much bigger priorities. Best to say nothing because the PRA are trying to manage the issue away, the issue being that there's a whole load of money owed to savers and the Bank of England by PCF and who knows what's really going on because the accounts are so poor they cannot agree them with the auditors, even after 13 months. Easiest way for the PRA to deal with a bank that cannot do it's accounts is to quietly run down the exposure to retail investors deposits. A few will have over £85k invested. So, we will see how this works out in due course. The PRA's favoured solution would be purchase and recapitalisation by a larger bank. That seems difficult given the type of loans PCF make. Maybe one for PFG who owe the PRA a favour. I would imagine Somers are the solution of last resort given they presided over this mess in the first place.
cc2014: What is in their 2020 Annual Report is a “fair value” for their PCF holding of US$31,955,429. This is a very low carrying value, as with a holding of c162m shares, that is just 19.8c, or a sterling value of approximately 15p. That compares to the suspension price of 24p. At the end of Sept 2020 which is Somers year end, according to my chart from HL it looks like the mid price for PCF was approx 17.5p, so I'd suggest Somers just valued it at around the bid price, so 15p. Now during Q1, PCF's share price rose so Somers would have marked it up. And then in Q2 it fell so Somers would have marked it down. At end Q2, half year, Somers had $727m under management of which PCF was $44.6m (see the half year report) or around 21p a share which fits with my HL chart. So, they have written it down from 21p a share to some lower number. Tbh I wouldn't read too much into it. They made $66m in the quarter after writing down PCF. If I were them I'd have written it down to some stupid low level so when it comes back from suspension it can show a lovely mark-up in the next quarters gains and give the fund another great performance.
graham1ty: Somers is a quoted company in Bermuda, so have been trying to look at their own announcements re PCF 20 May, the day after suspension, Somers 2Q results make no reference to the suspension, but just report the total PCF loan book of £440m 9 August 3Q results report an increase in Somers NAV of 61% so far this year, and record record net income of $262m for the first nine months of the year, and a total shareholders funds of $680m. However, it goes on to say “.....a reduction in the value of PCF where Somers has marked down the value of its PCF holding to reflect that company’s shares are currently suspended from trading”. What I cannot see is any numbers, and idea of how much it is written down. What is in their 2020 Annual Report is a “fair value” for their PCF holding of US$31,955,429. This is a very low carrying value, as with a holding of c162m shares, that is just 19.8c, or a sterling value of approximately 15p. That compares to the suspension price of 24p. It implies that Somers have written down their holding to below 15p. Their August announcement states they are written down because the shares are suspended, NOT because there is an assessed reduction in valuation, thought that may be pure wishful thinking. I can see no further announcements from Somers to the Bermuda Stock Exchange re PCF
Pcf share price data is direct from the London Stock Exchange
ADVFN Advertorial
Your Recent History
Register now to watch these stocks streaming on the ADVFN Monitor.

Monitor lets you view up to 110 of your favourite stocks at once and is completely free to use.

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

P: V: D:20220528 20:04:29