ADVFN Logo ADVFN

We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.

Trending Now

Toplists

It looks like you aren't logged in.
Click the button below to log in and view your recent history.

Hot Features

Registration Strip Icon for default Register for Free to get streaming real-time quotes, interactive charts, live options flow, and more.

SDI Sdi Group Plc

56.00
1.00 (1.82%)
24 Apr 2024 - Closed
Delayed by 15 minutes
Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Sdi Group Plc LSE:SDI London Ordinary Share GB00B3FBWW43 ORD 1P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  1.00 1.82% 56.00 55.00 57.00 56.00 55.00 56.00 87,096 08:00:08
Industry Sector Turnover Profit EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap
Coml Physical, Biologcl Resh 67.58M 3.87M 0.0372 15.05 58.27M
Sdi Group Plc is listed in the Coml Physical, Biologcl Resh sector of the London Stock Exchange with ticker SDI. The last closing price for Sdi was 55p. Over the last year, Sdi shares have traded in a share price range of 55.00p to 179.50p.

Sdi currently has 104,050,044 shares in issue. The market capitalisation of Sdi is £58.27 million. Sdi has a price to earnings ratio (PE ratio) of 15.05.

Sdi Share Discussion Threads

Showing 2526 to 2550 of 4050 messages
Chat Pages: Latest  102  101  100  99  98  97  96  95  94  93  92  91  Older
DateSubjectAuthorDiscuss
21/7/2020
14:32
Adj diluted EPS is 3.43p so a PER of 17.2
purplepelmets
21/7/2020
14:02
Hastings - EPS was 2.56p.
It's Currently 58p on the Bid

58/2.56 = just shy of 23x earnings

At 100p it would be 39x earnings, which is a bit rich for a company with debt nearly half its annual sales, in the middle of a pandemic and with a global recession looming.

"and that may well prove conservative" - yes, and it also might be pie in the sky.

trident5
21/7/2020
13:27
Trident5 it's on a PER of 17 falling to 14 next year and that may well prove conservative.
hastings
21/7/2020
13:18
GTG - it's on about 25X earnings now - which is probably part of the reason why it's not 90p.
trident5
21/7/2020
11:10
This was going to 100p before the crash - a good stock dragged down!

There is no reason why it should not be at 90p right now and climb further over the years.

GLA

greg the grinch
21/7/2020
10:04
To clarify Glaws2's post, along with their 100p target price, Finncap now forecast revenues increasing to £26.7m this year, from £24.5m last year, adjusted PBT rising to £4.4m (from £4.3m), and EPS rising to 3.7p (from 3.4p).

I suspect that SDI are being conservative with their outlook as always. They could have said that the outlook was too uncertain at this stage etc etc, as most companies are doing, but instead they're already able to say that this year's figures will be "at least" in line with last year's, which instils in me a degree of confidence about how things are progressing.

rivaldo
21/7/2020
09:46
Finn valuation summary:

Valuation. We re-introduce a target price of 100p. At this level, the stock would trade
on FY 2021 EV/EBIT and P/E multiples of 21.0x, and 27.5x respectively, falling to
18.7x and 24.6x in FY 2022. This takes into account comparable valuations for both
Judges Scientific and the broader small & mid cap market included in the Slide Rule.
Underlying EPS growth in FY 2022 is forecast to be c.12%.

Finn's 3.7p eps for 2021 is 14% off their old 4.3p that they had back in February. So if this peaked at 90p back then that would give a 77p target for now plus c2.5p of cash generation.

This looks a bargain to me and by October they should also have the cash available to buy another Chell which by my calcs adds around 19% to eps.

alphabeta4
21/7/2020
09:17
The Finncap note has forecasts for next year of revenue growth and PBT flat on 2020.
glaws2
21/7/2020
09:08
Good results here I think, all things considered.

FWIW I see "revenue growth ... at least in line with FY20." as meaning that the first derivative of revenue with respect to time will be the same next year as this :-D. Whether that is what they actually intended to convey, I have no idea.

I added here recently and will do so again if the price remains at these IMO subdued levels, as I consider them a good medium/long term investment. I think management at SDI have shown themselves to be decent - the question going forward is whether they can successfully scale the business model as JDG have done over the years.

spann_703
21/7/2020
09:00
Absolutely Valhamos.
hastings
21/7/2020
08:56
Seems pretty clear to me - SDI expects to report revenue growth with profits at least in line with FY20. It does not say "the Group expects to report year on year revenue and profits growth at least in line with FY20” which is what would be necessary to support what some are saying. Where the word "growth" appears in the sentence is important for its meaning.

Good results and outlook despite the Covid uncertainty.

valhamos
21/7/2020
08:52
Very happy with the results and the forward statement, no issues for me.I'm speaking with Mike later so will add something.
hastings
21/7/2020
08:44
Yes I think you're right.To speculate at this juncture that profits and revenue will continue to grow at last years pace would be crystal ball gazing.
steeplejack
21/7/2020
08:43
Texas, as I said above, SDI will report revenue and profits "at least" in line with last year, i.e likely better than but at worst the same as. Most likely - SDI are just being typically prudent at this stage. Finncap are certainly already forecasting a degree of growth this year.
rivaldo
21/7/2020
08:41
Great results
nw99
21/7/2020
08:41
I still think its perfectly clear but DbyD's edit certainly aids clarity...

"For the financial year ending 30 April 2021 the Group expects to report year on year revenue growth WITH profits at least in line with FY20."

rather than

"For the financial year ending 30 April 2021 the Group expects to report year on year revenue growth and profits at least in line with FY20."

shanklin
21/7/2020
08:29
I guess if revenue and profits are the same in FY21 as FY20 then there is no "growth" as such ;-)

I did the same read/re-read again and still not 100% clear.

texas_caddy
21/7/2020
08:29
Finncap have introduced new forecasts and a very nice 100p target price.

They support the theory that SDI will report revenue and profits "at least" in line with last year, i.e likely better than but at worst the same as. They go for 3.7p EPS rising to 4.1p EPS next year - though of course SDI are flagging more acquisitions, which should enhance earnings further.

It's interesting to see JDG's trading statement, which is also out (conveniently) today. They seem much more downbeat than SDI, and seem to have lost out all round from the pandemic, whereas SDI have benefited from COVID-19 in a majority of their divisions and are actually thriving in some cases.

rivaldo
21/7/2020
08:25
It'll be clarified in due course.Ken Ford is an ex employee of Wedd Durlacher and was Head of Research of Morgan Grenfell investment bank back in the 1980s.I think he is saying that he believes profits will grow as strongly in this year as they did last.That's pretty bullish!
steeplejack
21/7/2020
08:22
Swap out 'and' for 'with'?DbD
death by donut
21/7/2020
08:19
Yes, wording, particularly with the term 'growth' in there can be interpreted differently. On first reading I assumed that it meant FY 21 revenue/profits are expected to be in line with FY 20 revenue/profits. I'd be comfortable with this given the backdrop and the fact that a lot of companies are withdrawing future guidance all together.
rp19
21/7/2020
08:14
"For the financial year ending 30 April 2021 the Group expects to report year on year revenue growth and profits at least in line with FY20"It's not that clear because of the use of the word "growth".If Mr Ford had written that he expected to maintain revenue and profits in the current year then all good and well but he hasn't written that.It could be taken as suggesting that the rate of "growth" (as reported today) will be SUSTAINED in the current year.
steeplejack
21/7/2020
08:09
I too found that sentence ambiguous, and had to read it twice when I first saw it. Still unsure which interpretation is right - but inclined towards the higher version. ;-)
grabster
21/7/2020
08:00
Must admit I thought it was very clearly worded as per spooky's interpretation
shanklin
21/7/2020
07:58
They should re-state / clarify that. It is very poorly worded.
paleje
Chat Pages: Latest  102  101  100  99  98  97  96  95  94  93  92  91  Older

Your Recent History

Delayed Upgrade Clock