Sainsbury (j) Share Discussion Threads

[loganair] 12/9/2019 15:29

QIA buying 25% odd stake in Sainsbury's was not about getting hold of Sainsbury's property assets.

QIA have also bought stakes in El Corte Ingles and Mercadonna Supermarket groups in Spain.

[cjohn] 12/9/2019 15:23

loganair
12 Sep '19 - 13:50 - 20389 of 20390
Freehold supermarkets can easily be borrowed against and with sale and lease back the supermarket is left with a long term liability of paying for the lease.


They CAN be borrowed against. But it's not obligatory, you know.


The fact that Sainsbury's has several billions pounds worth of freeholds is obviously financially preferable than if those several billion pounds of property were leaseholds. For one thing, they don't have to pay rent.

You may remember that a few years back there was a take over approach to Sainsbury's motivated by the potential acquirer's desire to get hold of Sainsbury's property assets - at a considerable premium to the then much higher than now share price. Fancy that.

[cjohn] 12/9/2019 15:18

spob
12 Sep '19 - 13:41 - 20388 of 20389
0 0 0
freehold supermarkets are not liquid assets


Who said they were?

[loganair] 12/9/2019 13:50

It seems to me that Morrison's have a plan moving forward whereas the directors Sainsbury's seem to be just sitting on their hands.

Freehold supermarkets can easily be borrowed against and with sale and lease back the supermarket is left with a long term liability of paying for the lease.

[spob] 12/9/2019 13:41

freehold supermarkets are not liquid assets

[loganair] 12/9/2019 13:27

I understand that less than 50% of Sainsbury's supermarkets are Freehold, whereas around 70% of Morrisons are still Freehold.

[cjohn] 12/9/2019 13:12

The majority of Sainsbury's large property empire are freeholds.

This is not a source of financial weakness.

[loganair] 12/9/2019 08:37

Morrison interim results are out today, I like how they have a 6 point plan to try and move the company forward.

1. To be more competitive
2. To serve customers better
3. Find local solutions
4. Develop popular and useful services
5. To simplify and speed up the organisation
6. To make core supermarkets strong again

[rolo7] 11/9/2019 18:09

Poikka agree

[imperial3] 11/9/2019 14:53

If the contributor to the Stokopedia article thought his words would depress the share price,it is really pleasing to see that the reverse has taken place.

[loganair] 11/9/2019 11:39

Unlike with the smaller local in town supermarkets, with the large out of town supermarkets, they are really only any good as large out of town supermarkets therefore they're worth far less then what the supermarkets put down as there worth on their balance sheets.

If necessary a company can borrow against freehold property, which can not be said when it comes to leased property.

It is always better to own the hard asset rather then sell and lease back which leaves huge long term liabilities on the balance sheet.

[spob] 11/9/2019 11:08

"IF" Sainsbury's were to find itself in financial difficulties, who would be the buyer of £10 BILLION worth of supermarket property in double quick time.

Look at property companies like BLND and INTU. Their share prices have been slaughtered.

Property companies with retail exposure have been hit the hardest.

[loganair] 11/9/2019 10:52

Freehold property is a strong positive for any balance sheet. Compared to Morrison, both Sainsdbury's and Tesco have so few freeholds, most are sale and lease backs which leaves huge long term liabilities on their balance sheets.

[cjohn] 11/9/2019 10:27

Stockopedia article ridiculous.

The principle reason Sainsbury's liquid assets are a relatively small proportion of overall assets is because of the large amount of freehold property on the balance sheet.

All that freehold property is obviously a severe balance sheet weakness.

[dexdringle] 11/9/2019 08:08

I've never read such a load of old boll*cks as that Stokopedia article above.

I think Sainsburys should just wind itself up and return the £3.20 net tangible asset per share figure to the shareholders......

[ny boy] 10/9/2019 17:03

I did call the bottom 22 August, the technical signs were there.
Onwards & upwards

[neilyb675] 05/9/2019 12:18

201.50 - 201.60 (GBX) at 12:17:13
on Market (LSE)

[neilyb675] 30/8/2019 09:10

198.85 - 199.00 (GBX) at 09:09:33
on Market (LSE)

[alphorn] 22/8/2019 15:04

That is not true loganair. The Trust sold down its stake in GW and at one point even sold off almost £2bn worth.

[loganair] 22/8/2019 14:44

Also the Wellcome Trust didn't sell out, they got shares in Glaxo and use the Glaxo dividends to carry-on with their work.

The Wellcome Trust wouldn't have sold out to Private Equity only to another pharmaceutical company.

[alphorn] 22/8/2019 14:40

Depends upon what other investment possibilities that they may have. Something rather than nothing is always tempting.
(How much did Buffett lose on Tesco?)

[loganair] 22/8/2019 14:29

Bid difference was the price QIA paid for their shares, 600p and therefore will not wish to take a huge loss on their investment.

If a potential bidder came in lets say 300p, I would accept as I only paid an average of 262p for my shares, however would the QIA be wilingl to accept having paid 600p for their shares?

[alphorn] 22/8/2019 14:26

loganair - can also be a positive as Glaxo found out with the Wellcome Trust holding in Wellcome.