Buy
Sell
Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Real Good Food Plc LSE:RGD London Ordinary Share GB0033572867 ORD 2P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  0.00 0.0% 4.75 4.50 5.00 4.75 4.75 4.75 66,049 08:00:00
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Food Producers 61.6 -26.1 -28.6 - 5

Real Good Food Share Discussion Threads

Showing 7076 to 7098 of 7375 messages
Chat Pages: 295  294  293  292  291  290  289  288  287  286  285  284  Older
DateSubjectAuthorDiscuss
24/2/2014
18:44
Err Haydens - a big user of sugar. Their costs will have just risen if they are supplied via Napier purchasing as you would expect. So the whole business will be affected imo. This really is a grubby little business. Totte only bolted all these other pieces onto his Haydens cake business I the hope that scale of purchase would bring down overall costs. He's never managed it. He couldn't organise a bun fight in a cake shop. Meanwhile, no matter what bull Totte keeps trucking out you see the sun shining out of his fat Scandinavian blow hole 140661. The names you called me for pointing out the things that were wrong here - don't you think I'm owed an apology? CR
cockneyrebel
24/2/2014
18:08
tiredoldbroker, for your benefit I have copied the third quarter trading update from January which comments on the improvements at Renshaws/Haydens and RW Scotts: "At Renshaw, the investment in sales and marketing is now beginning to pay dividends and we anticipate reporting a significant increase in EBITDA for the year. Sales growth has been experienced in UK retail while export initiatives are also showing positive signs with our business in Brussels now fully operational and the Renshaw brand launched in the US with a bespoke range of products. R&W Scott has now recruited a full commercial team and is ready to drive a series of added value product launches over the next 18 months. The first of these, a range of premium desert sauces, is now on sale in retail while a number of b2b opportunities have been identified across all product sectors. EBITDA will be similar to last year as the business absorbs the increase in overhead which is required to meet its long term ambitions. EBITDA at Haydens is anticipated to increase YOY as sales continue to grow and the remodeling of the bakery enables improved labour utilisation. The customer base continues to broaden and the commercial team has been expanded to reflect this." I accept this does not quantify the increase but I believe it will be substantial at Renshaws. In last years accounts the Renshaws business showed an ENITDA of £4.952m down from £5.56m the previous year so mu guess at £6m is only just up on the prior years performance. I know from speaking with PT that he is confident Renshaws is about to enter a phase of rapid growth hence my suggested £7m for the following year which I suspect could easily be understated. If as suggested by the trading update above the performance of Haydens is about to come through then EBITDA estimate of £1m is not in my opinion unreasonable. at Garrets the historic EBITDA figures have shown £2.1m and £2.7m so a £2m forecast for next year is unreasonable given a new experienced management team has just been recruited. We then come to the big unknown which is how the BS dispute will be resolved. Having completed the new sugar handling facility at Immningham I suggest its fair to assume RGD plan on importing much more sugar moving forward. I have seen figures suggesting BS might only be supplying a quarter of RGD;s sugar in two years. So longer term BS are less of a factor. In the short term there will be an impact and at this stage we don't know how significant. However, RGD have the support of Omnicane who have taken their shareholding from nothing two years ago to 27%. Omnicane invested in RGD as they saw strategic merit, a major part of which was supplying RGD with sugar. This opportunity is fast approaching and it will be Omnicane's interests for RGD to have a profitable sugar business. So even if BS are able to play dirty with RGD its unlikely to impact on RGD for more than a year. On the other hand, RGD believe they have a very strong case against BS and the recent fines in Europe show the Regulators will not stand for bad practices. In a scenario where RGD win their battle with BS we might then see a major fine for BS and a payment to RGD in compensation and a pricing structure moving forward which is attractive to RGD. Spacep has congratulated shareholders who have stuck with PT and he is right as when PT took over the CEO's role the share price was sub 5p so in 4 years he has done a great deal for shareholders. I don't call this failure but others might. In conclusion, none of us PI's knows whether RGD will win its battle with BS. If it does then shareholders should do extremely well over the next few years, if not the shares will under perform for a period but the outlook a year out will still be positive and the institutions who have been buying today will still do well. AIMHO.
140661
24/2/2014
17:30
A rather feeble rebound from last weeks sharp dip - I wouldn't be surprised to see more sellers taking advantage of this mini-recovery. Unless there's a significant change of performance or outlook, I could see this dipping to the mid to late 30s. I do admire the tenacity of some holders despite the continued failure of PT to deliver - they are clearly brave punters not averse to risk.
spaceparallax
24/2/2014
17:00
140661 there's a problem with your numbers. Apart from the fact that there's no solid basis for your suggestion of better EBITDA from the divisions of RGD other than Napier Brown, you're trying to suggest that the market cap looks modest by comparison, without first moving from EBITDA by division to the prospective pre tax for the group. If you look at the numbers for the 12mo to 31 Mar 2013 on RGD's own website, and add up the EBITDA by division, you get to £12.592m. But by the time that you get to Group EBITDA, it's just £10.466m, presumably because of central overheads. And after depreciation, pension costs and financing costs on £25m of net debt, a PBT of £6.765m. That's a lot of the EBITDA by division vanished by the time we get to where it matters. Group EBITDA in H1 of the current year was down 27% and net debt was I think £31.8m, and they clearly have some bigger issues to deal with in their sugar business than they were talking about just a few weeks ago. On 4 Feb they said they'd issue a trading update in April; by just 21 Feb they had to 'fess up about the sugar problem. They said: "The short term impact on Napier Brown's and Garrett Ingredients' results of this action by BS is significant and will inevitably be reflected in the Group's full year results for the year to 31 March 2014 and in the following financial year." My feeling is that this is not much more right now than a bet on British Sugar losing the case or climbing down, and that could take some time to be determined. A good case for investment can't be made by totting up an optimistic EBITDA forecast for the other parts of the group, and simply comparing that to the mkt cap without adjusting for all the other costs which need to be taken into account, and for the need to service debt and pensions without a contribution from Napier Brown. And in particular, your suggestion of £2m from Garrett looks shall we say, a bit toppy. In fact, a lot toppy.
tiredoldbroker
24/2/2014
13:02
Look, if you hold your hand out to a dog a number of times and it bites you are you really going to hold your hand out again and expect a lick you instead? I just love the fact that there's so many mug punters in the market will to throw money at the likes of RGD even when the place is on fire - just goes to show there's plenty of money about to transfer from the stupid to those with a modicum of sanity and savvy imo. CR
cockneyrebel
24/2/2014
12:53
video interview Real Good Food waits on pricing decision Pieter Totté, Chairman of Real Good Food Company (LON:RGF), tells Proactiveinvestors that the pricing dispute the company has with British Sugar is moving to the Competition Markets Authority and could well work out in RGF's favour. Other parts of the business continue to fare well. http://tinyurl.com/olpxebd
steffyloveshares
24/2/2014
12:16
I thought the company was saying not long ago that it wasn't reliant on any one supplier of sugar..... ? In which case, why the spat with ABF?
tiredoldbroker
24/2/2014
12:15
I spoke to PT on Friday and in total he had covered 80% of the shareholder base. In summary he made the following observations: 1. he was surprised BS had taken such an entrenched position as he and his advisors believe RGD have an excellent case and the costs to BS if they lose could be very substantial. However, having now taken this stance this represents an opportunity for RGD to put in place a sound pricing structure going forward which should be for the benefit of RGD moving forward. 2. the rest of the Group is performing well and he sees Renshaws in particular moving into a period of high growth. Renshaws is currently the main profit driver of the group at present. My read on recent events is that PT was very surprised and disappointed by BS actions and clearly this will have an impact on this years performance. However, having taken this stance, RGD intend to use this to achieve a long term deal which will secure them sensible margins moving forward. In addition, with Immingham now on stream and his deal with Omnicane coming ever closer the groups reliance on BS will diminish substantially over the next two years. Assuming Renshaws makes around £6m EBITDA this year increasing to £7m plus next year, Haydens moving into profitability in the current year and around £1m plus next year, Garrets historically achieving profits of £2m plust, hen the foundations for the group are strong. The one remaining battle they face is with BS and should they win they will have a highly profitable business. At today's price the group is valued at circa £32m, potentially very cheap. GLAH.
140661
24/2/2014
11:48
I am staggered the price is not weaker. There are enough people who hate this company anyway and this must be the last straw for many. Debt is horrible, the future is uncertain. What is odd is that PT must be doing the rounds now, reassuring his ( few) institutions. But that has been the one thing he has been rubbish at: actually talking to shareholders. But unless he is is explaining what this actually means, who on earth is buying and pushing the price back above 50p ??
graham1ty
24/2/2014
11:34
Typo I suspect the Company is now engaged in a political war with BS so they will be pushing the boat out on the detrimental impact on NB. The TS confirmed that the other parts of the group are doing well. The key business in terms of profitability is Renshaws and that it appears to be doing exceptionally well.
tonyfabrizi
24/2/2014
11:12
Does it matter if ABF are abusing their position or not? Even if they are it will take ages to settle, during which time the cash pressure at RGD will surely bite? Pricing dispute threatens city sugar firm A pricing dispute is threatening the existence of sugar distributor Napier Brown, its Liverpool-based parent company Real Good Food Company claimed today. hTTp://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/business/napier-browns-existence-under-threat-6730438 No mention of the new hub at Immingham coming to the rescue.
typo56
24/2/2014
10:54
I have just reread the T/S from Friday and feel posters here are being unfair on the Company. It seems ABF are abusing their dominant position and this is not only against RGD but also the consumer. I wish RGD luck in their battle. Does anyone know what is likely if RGD do win? Would BS have to pay RGD compensation?
tonyfabrizi
24/2/2014
10:14
Typo, I think you're right: "in addition to" - in which case, it goes beyond greed into a new category of its own!
tiredoldbroker
24/2/2014
07:43
I don't think ABF's statement today reads well for RGD.
typo56
24/2/2014
00:08
So how will this impact the bottom line ? No numbers given in the update so another profit warning coming methinks Also the lack of forsight of the BOD in NOT sourcing alternatives BEFORE this reflects very badly upon them
buywell2
22/2/2014
11:15
Yes, it's definitely vague. I think I formed the view that it was inclusive by looking back at prior years, when the wording was different, and it looked to be inclusive then. It could be that it has become non-inclusive this year, and that's the reason for the poor/ambiguous wording. Who knows with RGD! Looking at the sugar pricing issue from British Sugar's point of view - NB are competing ever more aggressively for their customers and are also setting themselves up to increase sugar imports. So, why should BS guarantee them a 5% gross margin on UK grown sugar? It appears like NB are using BS as a fall-back for volumes not sourced elsewhere. Well presumably their agreements say they should, but have the changes in the European and UK sugar markets and regulation now made the historic rulings and agreements void? The fact that RGD haven't applied for an injunction (through law), suggests the case isn't clear cut, and they have to go back to the competition commission for an updated ruling. It will be interesting to see how this plays out, but potentially painful for shareholders. Given that Napier Brown's whole pitch to customers is about providing a reliable and independent source of sugar it makes this admission all the more ridiculous. It also exposes the nonsense on their rigorous back to back contract pricing. I thought it seemed strange when their new sugar MD said they weren't immediately sourcing against sales contracts, but speculating on falling prices.
briangeeee
22/2/2014
06:41
BrianGeeee, I'm not sure if you're correct in making that assumption. Perhaps you are. In section 12 of the Annual Report Totté is shown as receiving a remuneration for the y/e 2013 of £432k. This comprises short term employee benefits of £418k plus £14k share-based payments. Below there's a note below stating:- "Short term Employee Benefits include Salaries received as an officer of the Company. Separate to these payments, consultancy fees are paid to entities in which Directors hold a beneficial interest. These payments are disclosed as related party transactions in note 29." To me, "separate to these payments" means "in addition to". It depends whether the "payments" refer to the Employee Benefits, or just to the Salaries. It's a bit vague. Perhaps it's supposed to be!
typo56
21/2/2014
22:30
I think Totte's increase in salary/fees is scandalous, especially given the company's performance. However, when I looked at this issue a few month ago, I came to the view that the consultancy fees were included within the total remuneration. The company is in desperate need of a strong and experienced Chairman to sort out the shambles that is the current board. Unless the two main shareholder come to that view also, it's unlikely to happen.
briangeeee
21/2/2014
22:01
Tulip Trust? Is that Totté's Dutch sense of humour? From Wikipedia... "Tulip mania or tulipomania (Dutch names include: tulpenmanie, tulpomanie, tulpenwoede, tulpengekte and bollengekte) was a period in the Dutch Golden Age during which contract prices for bulbs of the recently introduced tulip reached extraordinarily high levels and then suddenly collapsed."
typo56
21/2/2014
20:18
TOB, check the Related Party Transactions statement in the 2013 Annual Report. Four of the directors had beneficial interests in companies that have been receiving "consultancy fees". The largest by far goes to Menton Investments (I assume Ltd as it is mentioned elsewhere as a holder of 1,925,000 shares). Menton Investments Ltd is wholly owned by the Tulip Trust, a discretionary trust, of which P W Totté and certain members of his family are discretionary beneficiaries. I think Menton Investments Ltd may be registered in the Isle of Man. In the 12 months ended 31 March 2013 Totté received a remuneration of £432k, plus consultancy fees paid to Menton of £366k. That's a combined average of £66.5k per month. In the 15 months to 31 March 2012 he received a remuneration of £461k, plus consultancy fees paid to Menton of £338k. That's a combined average of £53.3k per month. That means in 2013 his total increased by about 25% per month. Not a lot of austerity here. Does it mean times are good for RGD? More likely the opposite! How on earth can Totte justify charging the company consultancy fees at the same as the company are paying him a fat salary? It's impossible to know how much has been previously paid in consultancy fees becuase they've only been declared for the first time in the 2013 Annual Report, in spite of referring to fees paid in the y/e 2012. Why were these not declared at the time in the 2012 Annual Report?
typo56
21/2/2014
20:09
You sort of get that 'penny drop' feeling starting to happen imo. Who is brave enough to be holding these at the next results then? CR
cockneyrebel
21/2/2014
18:58
Possibly only £432,000 last year, but he has options on 5m shares at prices from 5.25p upwards, if memory serves.....
tiredoldbroker
21/2/2014
18:51
And who would ask him to leave? The ordinary private investors don't have any power, do they? Typical AIM structure!
typo56
Chat Pages: 295  294  293  292  291  290  289  288  287  286  285  284  Older
ADVFN Advertorial
Your Recent History
LSE
RGD
Real Good ..
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:20201124 04:35:19