Rpc Share Discussion Threads

[plootocrat] 11/1/2018 10:56

Agreed. I'm out (at a fraction above my entry point in May last year so could have been worse).

[redartbmud] 11/1/2018 10:54

Agreed. Disaster.

[swedeee] 11/1/2018 10:47

Theresa's war on plastic putting the pressure on here.. nightmare

[jeffian] 10/1/2018 15:34

I'm not a fan of buy-backs either.

It seems to be rather under the cosh from the current 'anti-plastic' movement. Next Trading Update is 1 Feb so let's hope they have plenty positive to say to stop the rot.

[builder bob] 05/1/2018 12:43

5.8 million shares bought back to date average cost £8.92 each. £51.8 million spent and only halfway through the buyback plan.Where does it end and to what purpose?
At this rate £100 million by July.Think of the interest saved on that if it went to pay off debt.

[kilgallp] 02/1/2018 16:08

I've got a couple of companies that have announced share buy backs. Like you Oli, I'd have preferred it if they'd reduced debt but there you go.

[oli12] 02/1/2018 15:49

A significant amount of short positions on RPC, underlines the negative sentiment towards RPC.

[phillis] 02/1/2018 15:03

no RPC support this pm?
EDIT: wrong

[swanseayellow] 02/1/2018 14:48

Ouch indeed! But have taken the opportunity to top up today , still have a lot of faith in this company

[swedeee] 02/1/2018 14:39

ex-div + all this news about china banning import of waste plastic from other nations? ouch

[oli12] 22/12/2017 13:01

I like this company however I eagerly await the next update and numbers to see that the acquisitions are delivering the desired growth and revenue. It’s suggested RPC have over paid for some assets and this has been masked by further acquisitions which makes drawing definitive conclusions / comparisons with numbers somewhat difficult, with regards to organic growth and the real return on invested capital. For me the share buy back is a fudge, we could and should use the money to pay down debt.

[phillis] 22/12/2017 12:27

RPC in the market daily supporting the price

[swanseayellow] 22/12/2017 07:54

I suspect Axa and maybe others are making the most of RPC’s share buybacks

[sogoesit] 21/12/2017 07:01

That’s the risk.

[jeffian] 20/12/2017 19:00

#1634,

Oh, yes, I'd forgotten that point, red. Like many companies, EIG bonuses were set by achieving certain 'Key Performance Indicators'. At the last AGM, I stood up and asked the Board why the KPI's had been reduced from 5 to 4 and why they had chosen to axe the one they did. General consternation all round. Much head scratching. Chairman asks "which one was that?". Answer "Total Shareholder Return" (which had been negative or flat for years)!

[cheshire pete] 20/12/2017 13:46

Sogoesit and Jeffian,
Thanks for your considered replies.....things are never as straight forward as they may seem.
I recall the demise of GEC and for years there had been criticism and pressure on the board for sitting on the huge cash pile that it had built up. Then there was a spending spree on acquisitions that turned out to be over priced, paid for mostly in cash rather than equity I think. It certainly got rid of the cash pile.

[redartbmud] 20/12/2017 10:05

jeffian

A man after my own heart.
Plus, enhanced EPS often benefits executive bonuses.

[jeffian] 20/12/2017 09:45

cheshire pete,

re #1630,

Because the company has no control over the share price; the market sets that. If the market only worked on simple mathematics, we'd all be millionaires! If a company spends £Xmillion buying its own shares then in the accounts the NAV and EPS rise and theoretically the share price should rise by an equivalent amount, but that is not necessarily so and, in some cases in my experience, dramatically so. Enterprise Inns (now Ei Group) (in)famously spent around £1Bn buying back their own shares in the run-up to 2007/8 at up to £8/share before the price slumped to 26p! The share price has recovered slightly and they are again spending up to £25m/year buying shares at c.60% discount to NAV which at least makes more sense but still doesn't 'benefit' shareholders if the market resolutely refuses to take the bait. Spending real free cashflow in this way rather than via a general dividend or return of capital is not 'returning value to shareholders', it is returning all the available cash to former shareholders! If 'surplus' cash is returned to all shareholders via dividend or return of capital, they still have the choice of reinvesting in that company's shares if they want to - or, importantly, decide to make alternative use of it - but buybacks remove that choice from them. As Sogoesit says, companies are not the best judges of their own value!

[sogoesit] 19/12/2017 20:38

Criticism tends to be for two reasons as far as I understand:
- institutions don't like the idea that a company has more cash than it can invest in its own business and prefers that cash to come directly back to the investors; and
- managements tend to be poor timers of value of their own businesses and aren't transparent about their buy-back conditions. All too many buy-back at the top of the market and thus deliver poor value to shareholders.
Next is one of the few good examples of a disciplined, economically logical, value driven buy-bock policy.

[cheshire pete] 19/12/2017 19:39

Jeffian,
Correct me if I'm wrong but surely if it is apparent to a company and its advisors that it is undervalued then buying back the shares at a discount to their real value is a reasonable step to take. When the shares are re-rated subsequently, the effect on the share price will be enhanced as there are fewer shares in issue. Have often seen criticism of share buy backs over the years and never really understood why.

[jeffian] 19/12/2017 00:21

I agree re she buybacks. I hate 'em. You are using real cash to purchase a theoretical gain. Yes, yes, I know the maths about less shares in issue = higher NAV/EPS but whether that gets reflected in the share price is purely at the whim of the market. If you have 'surplus cash' to return to shareholders, give it to them in the form of a dividend or return of capital.