We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Stock Type |
---|---|---|---|
Shawbrook | SHAW | London | Ordinary Share |
Open Price | Low Price | High Price | Close Price | Previous Close |
---|---|---|---|---|
339.50 | 339.50 |
Top Posts |
---|
Posted at 29/4/2017 11:16 by cc2014 IC VIEW from 2 days ago:We also think the offer undervalues the potential at Shawbrook, particularly considering the strength in recent trading. We recommend investors reject the offer. |
Posted at 08/4/2017 14:39 by cc2014 Shawbrook's (SHAW) largest shareholder, Pollen Street Capital, is not giving up. The asset manager has reasserted its bid for the challenger bank, as part of a consortium with private equity group BC Partners. However, the bidders have not increased their offer - which remains at 330p cash per share - but have instead opted for a takeover rather than scheme of arrangement. The former requires the consortium to secure more than 50 per cent acceptances and does not need the recommendation of the bank's board. The latter not only required board approval, but 75 per cent of acceptances of those voting.The Shawbrook board has once again rebuffed the offer. A bank spokesperson cited previous statements regarding negative feedback from other major shareholders, and that the deal's terms undervalued the business. Shawbrook management is confident in its ability to deliver on its own growth strategy*. The bidco's director, Lindsey McMurray, said the offer would provide "liquidity to those investors that seek it and create an ownership structure comprising long-term, supportive investors that will allow the company to adopt a more flexible approach to changing market dynamics". IC VIEW: The offer represents a 24 per cent premium to Shawbrook's closing price of 268p a share the day before the first offer. However, it also signifies just 9.7 times forecast earnings for 2017, or 1.6 times book value. We think this looks to be poor value for shareholders. For now, await documents. Last IC View: Hold, 314p, 9 Mar 2017 *The original version of this article referred to the bidco's strategy, rather than Shawbrook's. That has been clarified. |
Posted at 06/7/2016 20:54 by cc2014 Kames under pressure as below but not sure if their property investment would be in a different wrapper than SHAWThe fresh moves by fund companies to suspend redemptions Wednesday came after Standard Life Investments, Aviva Investors and M&G Investments suspended trading on U.K. property funds earlier this week, after a sharp rise in redemptions that followed the EU referendum on June 23. This means that half of the 10 largest U.K. property fund managers have now suspended trading temporarily. The Bank of England says open-ended property funds hold assets of GBP35 billion ($45.6 billion), amounting to about 7% of the commercial real estate in the U.K. The other five largest funds investing in U.K. commercial property are managed by Kames Capital, Aberdeen Asset Management, Legal & General Investment Management, F&C and Royal London Asset Management. Aberdeen, LGIM and Royal London all confirmed their funds are still trading. A spokeswoman for Royal London pointed to the fund's largely institutional client base and the fact that, unlike other funds in its class, it offers investors the change to withdraw cash only once a month. Kames and F&C didn't immediately respond to requests for comment. |
Posted at 12/3/2016 12:46 by nurdin Challengers are trading at rock bottom prices and I am tempted to selectively add one or two in my portfolio,SHAW among them. However it may prove prudent to wait until after the budget to see what that brings.Here is Hargreaves Landsdowne comment on the outlook:'But governments do love to tinker with housing rules. Further curbs to buy-to-let are possible, perhaps removing all mortgage interest relief. Restricting the reliefs available to buy-to-let investors is an easy saving for the Treasury. Paragon, a niche lender focused on the buy-to-let market could be impacted, whilst the builders themselves have been selling significant amounts of their properties to investors, rather than owner-occupiers. Berkeley Group probably has most to lose here, selling much of its output to investors.' |
Posted at 28/7/2015 18:03 by future financier jackthecat - SHAW are expanding fast and that will explain some of their XS costs - but your information about their interest rates is just plain wrong.They are typically 1% - 1.5% p.a. more than the high street (e.g. Lloyds and its subsidiaries) - IF the high street would be prepared to lend. But for instance in the BTL space many lenders restrict the number of BTL properties that the investor may own. This opens the doors for SHAW to charge a modest premium for making a (high quality) loan that others would decline for no rational reason. The same applies in other segments of their lending - you need to make sure you are comparing like with like! And I know for sure that on a like for like basis SHAW is very similarly priced to ALD. You are also wrong about their cost of funds. Yes they have VC shareholders - but this is now a listed company and whilst the VCs may be subject to a ? 12 month? lock-in it is the dynamics of the Stock Market that now determines their main cost of funds - although they did raise some £27m of subordinated debt on favourable terms in October 2013 (certainly paying a lot less than ALD paid for similar subordinated funds). I suspect that their overall cost of funds is very similar to many of the larger banks - who as I have already said and (almost without exception) are having to fund the costs of former misdemeanours. |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions