Quindell Share Discussion Threads

[dt1010] 20/3/2015 12:03

the only one stinging is you EL, from your losses!

[eh9] 20/3/2015 11:59

Tech part pe s are 25 and Nasdaq-able. Prof services better with legal co ownership and then mobile doctors can be kept in the tech business too. Give QPP shareholders a share in each as per the insti request and its win win.

[juicin drumroll] 20/3/2015 11:49

That's no answer.

Explain why they would pay £640M + hundreds more in fees & where they would find the value to justify this hugely inflated price being bandied about by QPP.

We won't even broach the subject of where the money is coming form to pay this pie in the sky valuation.

[r_bedding] 20/3/2015 11:46

S&G Juicin?

[juicin drumroll] 20/3/2015 11:45

malvern,

Get real.

Why would anyone pay £640M + hundreds of millions more over time for businesses that only recently cost about £50M?

Would you pay nearly 13 x the acquisition cost + 4, 5, or 6 times more in after sales fees?

[r_bedding] 20/3/2015 11:44

Taking a punt I would guess that there will be a bit of late buying by those not wanting to be out if there is some press coverage this weekend. There must be at least an update next week.

[juicin drumroll] 20/3/2015 11:39

Are you serious?!?!

I think anyone who would still rely on that forecast when QPP missed their H2 cash targets by such a wide margin, are moving payroll dates, are flogging assets on the cheap & are selling files for £12M to keep afloat long enough to sell anything else of value deserves to be called daft!

If they have £100M coming in why are they selling ANYTHING?

[malvern1] 20/3/2015 11:38

Looking forward to the share price soon rising to a minimum of £1.45 just to reflect the sale of PSD

A) £640,000,000 likely offer

B) 440,946,623 shares in issue

Divide A by B to get £1.45.

Simples

[jazza] 20/3/2015 11:12

Hi JD,

Compare market cap (£500m) with previous cash forecast ("H1 £100m") and you've answered your own daft question.

ATB

[elcapital] 20/3/2015 11:07

Oh dear so Bellend is back I thought he would have learned that is you poke a stick in a wasps nest you are going to get stung.

[r_bedding] 20/3/2015 11:06

You obviously do not understand PWC's role.

[r_bedding] 20/3/2015 11:06

PWC late? No it's not. Mis-truth.

[r_bedding] 20/3/2015 11:05

"Cash generation still an issue" no it's not. Mis truth.

[r_bedding] 20/3/2015 11:04

Regurgitate so many times and it may come true.

[dasv] 20/3/2015 11:02

Henchard

"are bulls confident about a "man on the Clapham omnibus" interpretation of QPP's H1 cash flow guidance somewhere near £100m and maybe a bit more with NIHL upside -- or are you concerned that, in light of QPP's recent sale of its shares in NARS at a hefty discount to the market price, the cash flow situation may be worse than the Board has led the market to believe?"

If bulls are confident of cash flow guidance near £100m, they shouldn't be. There is no evidence to suggest that cash flow is anywhere near this.

The behaviour of the company indicates that cash flow is a major problem.

E.g. Selling NARS stake at a discount

RNS 8th Dec: "cash generation remains a key focus of the Group and initiatives to improve the working capital profile of the Group continue to be pursued. " -

interpretation: cash/working capital is tight (or negative) and cash conversion coming in behind expectations

RNS 2nd Jan""As stated on 8 December 2014, cash generation remains a key focus of the Group and initiatives to improve the working capital profile of the Group continue to be pursued. One such initiative was concluded on 31 December 2014. As part of this initiative, Quindell has entered into exclusivity arrangements with a third party in respect of the possible disposal of an operating division of the Group"

Cash generation still an issue (2nd Jan) and working capital tight/negative. Trying to sell some WiP or a part of the business to stave off the wolves (i.e. the lenders)

RNS 27 Feb"Quindell Plc (AIM: QPP.L) announces an update on the independent review of the Group's main accounting policies and expectations as to cash generation into 2015 being undertaken by PwC ("Independent Review") and certain strategic decisions." -

This RNS says it will be an update on cash generation into 2015 but the RNS contains no information on cash generation whatsoever unless you count SELLING divisions as cash generation. I think that's what the board now means because it has been unable to convert work in progress into cash, or generate cash from any other constituent businesses"

"The Board now expects that the Independent Review will be completed in the next few weeks and shareholders will be updated as appropriate as to its findings;"

The date of the RNS was the 27th Feb. Two weeks after the RNS was a WEEK AGO!

So PWC update a week late already.

It looks really really bad to me, reviewing these old RNS's

[elcapital] 20/3/2015 10:53

Indeed it has, and the timescales have caught me out. Its been manipulated to survive, which I suppose you have to congratulate RT for, as it is my opinion that he is still pulling the strings. That said he caused the problems in the first place.

[juicin drumroll] 20/3/2015 10:51

Discuss.

Henchard
19 Mar'15 - 23:01 - 31367 of 31427 1 0

Leaving aside S&G for a minute, I've been having a think about QPP's H1 2015 prospects on the known facts:

QPP Q3 Trading Update: "H2 operating cash flow guidance of c.£30m to £40m, and H1 2015 guidance of up to £100m inflow without significant reliance on NIHL cases, with NIHL offering potential upside in H1 2015".

QPP missed H2 2014 guidance of c.£30m to £40m by a long way according to their 12 Jan update: "Operating cash inflow for H2 2014 (before exceptional items but including initiatives that concluded in the period) was approximately £13 million."

We also know that S&G (according to the Aussie company's half-year results) paid "an advance of GBP£12.1m to Quindell" during the period.

So, Quindell's cash flow miss was either £17m-£27m (if the S&G payment was an "exceptional item") or £29.1m-£39.1m (if the S&G payment was one of the "initiatives that concluded in the period"). Either way, it's a big undershoot of guidance, even leaving aside bear claims that QPP cash flow in the period was also boosted by one or more of a payroll date change, delays in paying creditors and share sales by QPP subsidiaries.

Yet, despite the big H2 2014 cash flow miss, and PwC reviewing, inter alia "expectations as to cash generation into 2015", QPP's Board has not revised its H1 2015 guidance of "up to £100m inflow without significant reliance on NIHL cases, with NIHL offering potential upside in H1 2015."

The Board, it seems, is happy with its prevailing guidance to the market of up to £100m cash inflow in H1 plus potential upside from NIHL.

I'm sure most of us would interpret "up to £100m" as somewhere fairly close to £100m and "potential upside" as taking cash inflow perhaps above £100m.

But does QPP's Board have a couple of get-outs? Namely, 1) any cash flow -- £1 say -- is, pedantically, "up to £100m" and 2) we were comfortable with our guidance, but did warn you that PwC were reviewing cash generation "expectations".

Looking at QPP as a going concern in its present state (if nothing comes of S&G discussions), are bulls confident about a "man on the Clapham omnibus" interpretation of QPP's H1 cash flow guidance -- i.e. somewhere near £100m and maybe a bit more with NIHL upside -- or are you concerned that, in light of QPP's recent sale of its shares in NARS at a hefty discount to the market price, the cash flow situation may be worse than the Board has led the market to believe?

[dasv] 20/3/2015 10:51

I guess you either go with the market as a weighing machine or a voting machine.

I.e. do you guess what participants will do or do you attempt to VALUE the company and assume share price will eventually reflect this value?

It's a time-frame argument: one is short term, the other is medium-long term

I think what I have learnt from shorting QPP in 2015 is that I guessed the time frame wrong (for starters). I never believed the situation would get strung out so long: e.g. I thought PWC would take a month not 4-5 months.

I also didn't predict SGH being interested in QLS, or Tosca buying the bounce. Also after Tosca bought, I didn't predict they'd dump so quick either!

It's been a proper soap opera.

[juicin drumroll] 20/3/2015 10:50

Discuss.

Henchard
19 Mar'15 - 23:01 - 31367 of 31427 1 0

Leaving aside S&G for a minute, I've been having a think about QPP's H1 2015 prospects on the known facts:

QPP Q3 Trading Update: "H2 operating cash flow guidance of c.£30m to £40m, and H1 2015 guidance of up to £100m inflow without significant reliance on NIHL cases, with NIHL offering potential upside in H1 2015".

QPP missed H2 2014 guidance of c.£30m to £40m by a long way according to their 12 Jan update: "Operating cash inflow for H2 2014 (before exceptional items but including initiatives that concluded in the period) was approximately £13 million."

We also know that S&G (according to the Aussie company's half-year results) paid "an advance of GBP£12.1m to Quindell" during the period.

So, Quindell's cash flow miss was either £17m-£27m (if the S&G payment was an "exceptional item") or £29.1m-£39.1m (if the S&G payment was one of the "initiatives that concluded in the period"). Either way, it's a big undershoot of guidance, even leaving aside bear claims that QPP cash flow in the period was also boosted by one or more of a payroll date change, delays in paying creditors and share sales by QPP subsidiaries.

Yet, despite the big H2 2014 cash flow miss, and PwC reviewing, inter alia "expectations as to cash generation into 2015", QPP's Board has not revised its H1 2015 guidance of "up to £100m inflow without significant reliance on NIHL cases, with NIHL offering potential upside in H1 2015."

The Board, it seems, is happy with its prevailing guidance to the market of up to £100m cash inflow in H1 plus potential upside from NIHL.

I'm sure most of us would interpret "up to £100m" as somewhere fairly close to £100m and "potential upside" as taking cash inflow perhaps above £100m.

But does QPP's Board have a couple of get-outs? Namely, 1) any cash flow -- £1 say -- is, pedantically, "up to £100m" and 2) we were comfortable with our guidance, but did warn you that PwC were reviewing cash generation "expectations".

Looking at QPP as a going concern in its present state (if nothing comes of S&G discussions), are bulls confident about a "man on the Clapham omnibus" interpretation of QPP's H1 cash flow guidance -- i.e. somewhere near £100m and maybe a bit more with NIHL upside -- or are you concerned that, in light of QPP's recent sale of its shares in NARS at a hefty discount to the market price, the cash flow situation may be worse than the Board has led the market to believe?

[juicin drumroll] 20/3/2015 10:48

Discuss.


Henchard
19 Mar'15 - 23:28 - 8876 of 8897 5 0

I posted the following on the "none of this moderated rubbish" thread, but perhaps it's more suitable for this "serious informed investors thread":

Leaving aside S&G for a minute, I've been having a think about QPP's H1 2015 prospects on the known facts:

QPP Q3 Trading Update: "H2 operating cash flow guidance of c.£30m to £40m, and H1 2015 guidance of up to £100m inflow without significant reliance on NIHL cases, with NIHL offering potential upside in H1 2015".

QPP missed H2 2014 guidance of c.£30m to £40m by a long way according to their 12 Jan update: "Operating cash inflow for H2 2014 (before exceptional items but including initiatives that concluded in the period) was approximately £13 million."

We also know that S&G (according to the Aussie company's half-year results) paid "an advance of GBP£12.1m to Quindell" during the period.

So, Quindell's cash flow miss was either £17m-£27m (if the S&G payment was an "exceptional item") or £29.1m-£39.1m (if the S&G payment was one of the "initiatives that concluded in the period"). Either way, it's a big undershoot of guidance, even leaving aside bear claims that QPP cash flow in the period was also boosted by one or more of a payroll date change, delays in paying creditors and share sales by QPP subsidiaries.

Yet, despite the big H2 2014 cash flow miss, and PwC reviewing, inter alia "expectations as to cash generation into 2015", QPP's Board has not revised its H1 2015 guidance of "up to £100m inflow without significant reliance on NIHL cases, with NIHL offering potential upside in H1 2015."

The Board, it seems, is happy with its prevailing guidance to the market of up to £100m cash inflow in H1 plus potential upside from NIHL.

I'm sure most of us would interpret "up to £100m" as somewhere fairly close to £100m and "potential upside" as taking cash inflow perhaps above £100m.

But does QPP's Board have a couple of get-outs? Namely, 1) any cash flow -- £1 say -- is, pedantically, "up to £100m" and 2) we were comfortable with our guidance, but did warn you that PwC were reviewing cash generation "expectations".

Looking at QPP as a going concern in its present state (if nothing comes of S&G discussions), are bulls confident about a "man on the Clapham omnibus" interpretation of QPP's H1 cash flow guidance -- i.e. somewhere near £100m and maybe a bit more with NIHL upside -- or are you concerned that, in light of QPP's recent sale of its shares in NARS at a hefty discount to the market price, the cash flow situation may be worse than the Board has led the market to believe?

[elcapital] 20/3/2015 10:43

Yes, anyone could. The variable being the spin that has been coming out of the company to push this share price higher, when things are only getting worse, not better.

Nothing has changed apart from selling files for a fraction of their value, a reduction in work being undertaken due to lack of funds, the sale of NARS for well under market price (all for stay alive working capital) and a few CCJs and winding up orders. Why on earth would I have wanted to be long of that!!! (without the benefit if hindsight)

[tonybaloni] 20/3/2015 10:39

You could have been long from 40p - wow