Register for streaming realtime charts, analysis tools, and prices.
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Type | Share ISIN | Share Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Punch Tvns | LSE:PUB | London | Ordinary Share | GB00BPXRVT80 | ORD SHS 0.9572P |
| Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.00% | 180.25 | 0.00 | 00:00:00 |
| Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 179.50 | 181.00 | ||||
| Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| - |
| Last Trade Time | Trade Type | Trade Size | Trade Price | Currency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | O | 0 | 180.25 | GBX |
Punch Taverns (PUB) Share Charts1 Year Punch Taverns Chart |
|
1 Month Punch Taverns Chart |
Intraday Punch Taverns Chart |
| Date | Time | Title | Posts |
|---|---|---|---|
| 23/8/2020 | 14:05 | MEREVIEW TAVERNS LTD | 5 |
| 18/4/2018 | 14:26 | Punch Taverns - with charts | 1,631 |
| 14/10/2009 | 13:17 | *** Punch *** | 1 |
| 17/2/2009 | 08:27 | All 7,560 Punch licensees invited to buy pubs | 1 |
| 01/1/2006 | 01:14 | Thread for drunks to pop in at midnight. All welcome! | 2 |
| Trade Time | Trade Price | Trade Size | Trade Value | Trade Type |
|---|
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 06/8/2020 08:20 by jhonmah Is this a share tip? |
Posted at 18/4/2018 14:26 by la forge British pubs are disappearing. Here's whyBritish pubs are disappearing - here's why British pubs are disappearing - here's why 7:44 AM ET Tue, 17 April 2018 | 04:19 Tom Chitty | @mrtomchitty Published 5 Hours Ago Updated 4 Hours Ago The British pub industry is in decline and technology is to blame. That's according to the British Beer and Pub Association (BB&PA), which is trying to put the brakes on the industry's near 40 year decline. A quarter of Britain's pubs have disappeared in the last 35 years. In London, 32 of the city's 33 districts have less bars and pubs than they did in 2001. "People are spending more time in their homes and the technology and the environment at home is more comfortable than it ever was," David Wilson, director of public affairs for the BB&PA, said. Some publicans say the smoking ban played a big part in the pubs decline. Some publicans say the smoking ban played a big part in the pubs decline. The issue of Britons staying at home, streaming Netflix and drinking supermarket booze joins a growing list of problems that the pub industry is facing. The indoor smoking ban in 2007 resulted in a rapid decline in pub goers, while a change in tastes towards wine has seen beer consumption fall since 1979. Across the U.K., people are also drinking less — an obstacle that The Jerusalem Tavern, one of the oldest pubs in London and located in the capital's Clerkenwell district is trying to tackle. "The younger generation now like to keep themselves fit and I've noticed that there's not so many people drinking at lunch-time." General Manager Daniel Lucas said. The number of pubs and bars fell from 4,835 in 2001 to just 3,615 in 2016 The number of pubs and bars fell from 4,835 in 2001 to just 3,615 in 2016 The solution for most pubs has been to increase and improve their food offering, "That's pretty much how the majority of the industry is keeping afloat, by the food sales rather than the drinks," Lucas said. Not everyone in the beer industry is suffering though. The number of independent pubs is actually increasing, which has seen the rise of the micro-brewery directly supplying the beer to the pub. There are now more than 2000 breweries in the U.K. for the first time since the 1930s. For the large pub groups, however, the outlook is not so rosy. Ei Group, the largest pub owner in the U.K., saw it's pre-tax profits fall 68 percent at the beginning of last year. |
Posted at 28/1/2017 23:25 by paulypilot I've had a terrible experience recently with Heineken/Star. So I really hope they do NOT take over Punch.We salvaged one of their pubs, called the Bowling Green, in Nantwich, and ran the pub for them, as a favour, in return for a deal to refurb it. Anyway, Punch strung us along for a year, with numerous delays. We incurred losses, but didn't mind, as it was agreed that we would get a nice refurb & then hopefully operate at a profit henceforth. What actually happened? Star/Heineken poached our bar manager, and did a deal with him, deceitfully, behind our backs! They lied repeatedly, and are totally untrustworthy. Basically, Star/Heineken are sharks, who took advantage of a small, financially struggling little company (us), to line their own pockets. The people at Heineken/Star are untrustworthy, in my experience. So I very much hope that they do not get their greasy mitts on some good pubs! Regards, Paul. |
Posted at 28/1/2017 23:25 by paulypilot .Regards, Paul. |
Posted at 28/1/2017 23:25 by paulypilot I've been advised to delete this post. |
Posted at 14/1/2017 18:00 by jimbobjames2002 Taken from Langton Capital - 2017-01-13 - Punch Taverns daily email by Mark Brumby:"PUNCH TAVERNS A REMINDER OF WHERE WE STAND: Punch has agreed to a break up bid from Heineken and Patron Capital at 180p per share. The is irrevocable except if a rival offers 200p or more. Documentation is promised 'by 20 Jan'. The first closing date is then 21 days hence. A rival offer, which would have to be at 200p or above, is likely towards the end of that 3wk period Saying a second bid will come in the week beginning the 6 Feb is not unreasonable. Given the benefits of vertical integration, Punch should be worth more to Heineken than to anyone else A counter from Patron / Heineken at 210p to 220p could not be ruled out Punch's NAV is c285p It would take a builder of such an estate c300p per share and perhaps 20yrs to build such a portfolio of pubs The end-game could, repeat could, be materially closer to the 285p NAV level than it is presently." |
Posted at 15/12/2016 14:48 by jeffian Hmmmmmm. Punch claim a Net Asset Value of over 350p/share and the 'discount to NAV' is also a metric used by ETI to justify the investment case. Be interesting to see how close they get and how that reads across the industry.......... |
Posted at 15/12/2016 14:47 by praipus Bit confused so have Patron got control with 51% or have they got to get real and up the price? |
Posted at 09/1/2013 09:23 by cestnous Telegraph today.Business Secretary Vince Cable has declared war on pub companies who are "squeezing" their tenants through contracts that are "focused on short-term profit". Large companies such as Enterprise Inns and Punch Taverns, which lease their properties to tenant landlords, have been accused by campaigners of hastening the demise of Britain's pubs by "overcharging" for drinks and rent. It is estimated that 23,500 of Britain's 50,000 pubs are run on "tied" agreements, which can force publicans to buy beer at 50pc above market rates and pay "excessive" rents on the pubs they run. According to the Campaign for Real Ale, more than 3,500 tied pubs have closed since 2009. Mr Cable announced plans for an independent adjudicator with the power to fine large pub companies if they are found to be exploiting their tenants. The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) will also consult on a statutory code to stamp out poor behaviour. Related Articles Enterprise shares boosted ahead of FTSE review 10 Dec 2012 Brewer Fuller's warns high taxes threatens jobs 23 Nov 2012 Leisure industry will drive economic growth: letter in full 06 Jul 2012 Pub reforms come under attack as share prices surge 24 Nov 2011 Mr Cable said: "There is some real hardship in the pubs sector, with many pubs going to the wall as publicans struggling to survive on tiny margins. "Some of this is due to pubcos exploiting and squeezing their publicans by unfair practices and a focus on short-term profits." BIS says it will ensure tied pubs will be "no worse off" than publicans who are on contracts that allow them to make their own decisions. The crackdown was announced ahead of a debate in Parliament today, at which the Government was facing a potential revolt. It was feared rebel MPs could side with Labour's shadow pubs minister, Toby Perkins, who was pressing the Coalition to stand up to "greedy" pub companies. The beer industry already has a voluntary code of behaviour and recently introduced its own arbitration board, the PICA-Service. But campaigners say self-regulation has been "a farce". Greg Mulholland, chair of the all-party Parliamentary Save the Pub Group, said: "The reality is that the big pubcos continue to overcharge their licensees in inflated prices and higher rents and the only way to stop this unfair business practice is for the Government to step in." The surprise move was greeted with dismay by the pub industry, which raised concerns over how the statutory scheme would be funded. Industry figures stress it is not in their interests for their tenants to fail. A spokesman for Punch Taverns said: "We are disappointed that self-regulation was not given time to work but will now work with others in the sector to help ensure statutory regulation is as effective as possible." Enterprise Inns said: "We note the government's announcement and look forward to contributing to the consultation process in due course." The British Beer & Pub Association said the industry had "made considerable progress in establishing an effective system of self-regulation." |
Posted at 21/2/2011 16:27 by isis Here's why your Pub shares failed:-Pete Robinson: The British Pub - A thesis on it's decline and fall 16 February, 2011 By Pete Robinson 'James Cook is a 3rd year Business Student at Newcastle University, writing a dissertation on pub closures, and the reasons behind them. James was asking for opinions and observations in The Publican's forum. My own response became way too long once I'd slipped into rant mode. So here it is presented as a blog...' For 450 years British pubs and their smoking customers have enjoyed a mutually beneficial relationship that has survived essentially unchanged through wars, periods of extreme poverty and famine, riots, massive social change, the Industrial Revolution, the English Civil War, WW2 rationing, licencing and taxation, opening hour restrictions, many recessions, and a great deal more besides. Throughout that long and stormy history pubs have NEVER closed in the anything like the numbers they have since July 1st 2007, not even 100 or so years ago when magistrates pursued a policy of drastically reducing pub numbers by refusing to renew licences. There are pubs closing today that have been serving their communities for 400 years. Imagine the tales these iconic watering holes could tell but tragically they are lost to our culture forever. Yet we dismiss these closures because "some pubs deserve to close" apparently. I don't believe that. Even the urban community pubs on 'rough' estates and grotty back-street boozers had their place in their respective communities and were trading well enough before 2007. Yes, pubs have occasionally waned in popularity. In recent times the mass arrival of TV in the 1960s caused a temporary drop off, and there was some gradual erosion in trade throughout the 80's and 90's due at least in part to the plod's manic enforcement of the drink-drive laws along with newly introduced jail terms for offenders. However since the new millennium pubs had fought their way back to health and by 2006 were more popular than ever, with The Publican reporting overall turnover at a FIVE-YEAR-PEAK. We'd never had it so good, and things could only get better still. Smokers accounted for over HALF of that income. Then the trade went collectively mad and ushered in the blanket smoking ban with barely a murmur of protest. The majority of front-line publicans were intelligent enough to have grave concerns. But their voice was drowned out by those upper echelons of the industry, men-in-suits, who presume to speak for us. Driven by pure greed we were won over by a barrage of bogus statistics coming from ASH, CRUK and the DoH 'proving' that we'd keep our existing smoking customers who'd simply accept the ban as meekly as we had. The icing on the cake was to be the countless millions of 'new' non-smoking customers who were poised like a coiled spring, awaiting the starting pistol on July 1st 2007 to risk serious injury in the crush to pack our pubs to the rafters as they quaffed pint after pint in such quantities you would need to employ a team of cellarmen to support all the extra bar staff you'd need - and a SecuriCorps van to bank your takings. This better class of customer was termed 'NewBreed' and we were promised he'd set the tills ringing as soon as we'd driven out the riff-raff. The advice was to steam-clean, fumigate and redecorate throughout replacing curtains and fabrics wherever possible. At all costs we must completely eradicate any evidence that society's scum had ever been there. The 'New Breed' of customer wouldn't like that. So we built a few half-open cattle sheds in our pubs' back yards and banished the most loyal, better spending half of our customers out into the cold and rain expecting them to be grateful. After all the stats did say most smokers secretly wanted to quit and really we'd be doing 'em a favour! Of course NewBreed was merely a clever figment of the anti-smoking lobby's imagination, but even savvy pubco bosses bought it hook, line and sinker. Strong objections from organisations such as CAMRA evaporated in a wave of hysteric euphoria as it seemed everyone 'embraced' the new age of endless prosperity to come. From the day of the ban's inception pubs immediately began to shed customers, and haven't yet plugged the leak. We forgot that pubs were built by the pennies of the common man, yet we tried to move upmarket in a vain attempt to satisfy a demand that never existed. So far we've lost 8,000 - 10,000 pubs (the jury's still out on the exact figure) from a 2007 total pub stock of 56,000. Many more are skating on the edge of insolvency, just hanging on. I estimate that sometime in 2013 we'll pass the 25% mark and we'll likely see half of our pubs gone by 2017. Even those pubs that survive often aren't 'pubs' anymore, not as we know them. They've become dining halls no longer catering for the drinking classes. Here in the Midland huge numbers have been snapped up to reopen as Indian restaurants - although technically they are still 'pubs'. Those, like myself, who tried desperately to warn of the carnage to come were dismissed as conspiracy theorists, doomsayers and nicotine addicts - but time has proved us right. You may wonder why this industry remains in denial? Ask yourself, if you were a pubco director and you'd seen your share price plummet from £14 each to around 50p how would you explain your actions to your shareholders? Would you 'fess up and accept your part of the blame? Not likely. The loudest voices on The Publican's forum crying out to keep the blanket ban in it's present form come from obvious smoke haters. They'd have you believe theirs is the majority opinion although recent trade surveys clearly show 4 out of every 5 publicans want the law amending to allow separate, ventilated indoor smoking rooms. But when they genuinely are publicans so firmly opposed to their fellow publicans' CHOICE of introducing an indoor smoking room you will generally find they have well positioned pubs in fairly affluent areas less affected by the ban, or even benefiting from it as less fortunate pubs close down. That's why they're in the minority by four-to-one against. Hence you should ask this simple question. If they truly believe what they say, that this pub holocaust has little or nothing to do with the smoking ban, what possible objection could they have? After all, if they genuinely believe the ban made no difference to trade they must also believe the reinstatement of an indoor smoking room would similarly not advantage their competitors. The truth is they KNOW beyond any shadow of a doubt that their customers would simply migrate overnight to any neighbouring pub that offered a smoking room. They're terrified of choice in case it hits their takings but you can guarantee one thing. If the law actually were to be amended and choice restored they'd be the first ones rushing to put the ashtrays back out. If the ban had been good for pubs then I'd have backed it from the beginning. My one aim is to help save as many pubs as possible, it's the only reason I campaign for more fairness. OTOH they are only interested in the future of one pub - their own. There never was any demand for non-smoking pubs so the industry will never find it possible to replace it's dwindling customer base. Nor is there sufficient demand to support 40-odd thousand food-led pubs. It's market forces, plain as. So with the trade not even campaigning for any amendment to the law we'll see our once-great pub culture wither and die over the next 10 years. At best we'll be left with a few chains of managed, town-centre food pubs-come-coffee-hou Sure we'll attempt to rebuild and one day in the distant future new pubs will again be built and old one's converted back from flats, shops and Indian restaurants. But they'll just be bars and food halls, a mere parody of what once was, like those 'English Pubs' that litter the streets of Benedorm. We'll never recapture that quintessential time-honoured character that made British pubs unique - the envy of the world. Much of that's already gone, ever since we threw open our doors to the forces of political correctness. We lost something very special the day when we allowed the State behind the bar. It's one reason why the customers have been drifting away. Countless previous generations have cherished this trade before handing it safely down to the next. To our shame we may be the last generation to remember what a real pub was like. In years to come your own son may be writing a dissertation on how the Great British pub disappeared into the pages of history. |
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
