Tandem Share Discussion Threads

[graham1ty] 27/4/2012 15:08

David, just looking at relevant notes to accounts. The Casket pension scheme, with assets of c£2m paid out......£66,000. How many people is that ? Can only be a handful. As an aside, that payout is "covered" by the assets for c30 years using back-of-the-envelope numbers. Shows the sway actuaries have that they can still, this year, say there was a £175,000 shortfall on the fund !! Put another way, the Actuaries say that you need a pot of £2m to get a £66,000 pension.This scheme was altered in 1995, 17 years ago, so one could speculate as to the age profile of the beneficiaries.

The Tandem scheme paid out £535,000 in benefits. Again, that is not a vast number of beneficiaries. And the Actuaries say that, suddenly, there is a £2.1m shortfall.......

[cwa1] 27/4/2012 15:05

Thanks for that Graham, a step in the right direction at least!

[graham1ty] 27/4/2012 10:37

well, someone has taken note: accounts out today and Director's Remuneration fallen from £540,000 to £345,000 with no bonuses paid. Good.

[charo] 27/4/2012 08:26

if any shareholders are interested in forming an action group i would support.

[davidosh] 25/4/2012 16:27

What we need is a clear strategy and delivery on it !

We also need clear communication to investors. There are no broker notes, research or forecasts anywhere. The company does not do presentations and expects us to be thankful they hold an Agm. There is a history of under performance, high rewards and bonuses to directors, no revenue growth,lumpy profits and an activist investor who left the rest of us behind.

Maybe the serious shareholders that remain should should take note of who has gained from this company as it aint long term investors ? Directors should be paid less than the average on AIM but have very decent bonuses paid in a mix of cash and shares but wholly based on shareholder returns

[graham1ty] 25/4/2012 16:26

I would like an incentive scheme that gets the price back above 140p. The Board should be embarrassed by the 140p buy-in. The way to prove us wrong ( and AB) is to get the value of the company above that level and show that the buy in was justified. I wish.....

Currently Steve has about 150,000 options at an average price of about75p. At this level then, maybe worth £10,000. Incentive ???? I would prefer he had a million options at 140p. Then he would sweat to make it work

[castleford tiger] 25/4/2012 16:18

What we need is a JSOP with a trigger price of say 150/160 and then let them have a stake.

Maybe a cheap JSOP is on the cards!! Like EKT

[graham1ty] 25/4/2012 13:17

Compare and contrast:

Zytronic, a company I am looking closely at. Tandem revenue £29m, Zyt £20m, about the same size. Tandem 5 yr growth in rvenue -18%; Zyt +80%; Tandem growth in eps -19%, Zyt +140%; Tandem profit £820,000 Zyt £3.6m; Tandem market cap £3.5m, Zyt £45m

Tandem CEO £235,000
Zyt CEO.....£144,000
Tandem total board cost £540,000
Zyt total board cost £439,000

One profitable, fast growing, exciting, CEO gets no more than £144,000.
Tandem........are you reading this non-execs ?

But then we have not seen the Annual Report yet: maybe the total pay will have halved ???? I think not.

Anyone reading this, think these comments are not helpful: look in the mirror

[graham1ty] 25/4/2012 12:26

Well done Jim. A commitment to the shares at these levels.

Be nice if Steve did the same ? If nothing else, Steve will get a 3.15p divi, or £3150. Does not need that, on his salary. Why not actually take a meaningful stake in the company ?

[cwa1] 25/4/2012 07:08

The Company announces that Jim Shears has purchased through his SIPP 4,079 ordinary shares at a price of 82 pence per share, representing 0.09% of the Company's voting rights.



The shares will be held by Hargreaves Lansdown Nominees Limited and the beneficial owner of the shares will be the SIPP controlled by Jim Shears.



Including these shares, Jim Shears beneficially owns 29,500 ordinary shares representing 0.63% of the Company's voting rights.

[graham1ty] 19/4/2012 13:11

Des, lost yr number. If u are online give me a call before 3pm.

[18bt] 19/4/2012 10:11

Graham1TY: Agree with your there. It's a typical problem faced by companies with management which don't understand the market and don't have the charisma or will to communicate. They just end up doing nothing, because the can't raise enough debt and they are reluctant to issue shares. They don't buy back shares because that just makes them get smaller and they don't like paying dividends because they assume investors want capital gains. Management, listen, there is a way out of this conundrum and it involves communication plus something on dividend

[graham1ty] 19/4/2012 08:52

Not a share traded.........

Was there a single article anywhere ? IC ? GCI ? Any bike mag ? Anywhere ? Nothing on the back of Tandem's Olympics range ? on anyone famous riding a Tandem bike ?

In the absence of any specific good news, there is no desire to keep in the public eye, yet alone promote. If there is an acquisition in the pipeline ( please no......) how on earth will it be paid for ? With their size, the maximum they could borrow would be not much more than £3-5m, and if it was done for equity, with the current interest in the shares, even £2.5m of placing shares would dilute 50%. So, where are the institutuions lined up ? Where are the potential holders, in the wings, saying " we cannot buy in size now, but come to us with the right acquisition and we will be there close to the current price"

At current levels, the maximum acquisition they can be looking at is therefore only a couple of million: is that going to transform the prospects ? What can you get for a couple of million ? If the shareprice reflected a multiple of 10, or even 8, there would be some value to the paper. At these levels, Tandem paper has no worth as consideration, and any issue will be massively dilutive.

So, my point ? If there is going to be an acquisition, there has to be some self-promotion, to the city, to institutions, to us suffering shareholders, so that when the right deal does come along, the company is not stuck, unable to finance it.

[davidosh] 17/4/2012 16:46

Sir Chris Hoy reflects....His first bike was a Dawes girls bike handed down by a neighbour ...lol



OK I added a bit but just thinking would make a great story if it was !

How much to get Chris Hoy in as a non exec chairman ? We need some fresh ideas methinks...Surely he would like to see good old British bikes doing well in Olympic year !?

[graham1ty] 16/4/2012 18:21

David, I think that it really is a very old scheme, and probably predates this Board. I think the status of the pension funds was covered at one of the meetings.....may have been a few years ago though.

As the pension scheme position seems to rear its head so often, perhaps a few more words may be written in the Annual report to put them inmto persepctive, and give more background...........but suspect not, and sure it is already printed. A decent summary/explanation would stop boring people like us asking all the time !!

[mrshaungcm] 16/4/2012 17:11

These lot do not manufacture anything

[davidosh] 16/4/2012 16:38

Assets of £2m and only two beneficiaries !! That sounds very fishery rather than beneficiary ? Is that the directors scheme by any chance ?

[graham1ty] 16/4/2012 16:32

The pension schemes are from ages ago ( the Casket scheme only has assets of about £2m and if I recall only a couple of beneficiaries). the Tandem scheme is slightly larger, but not much.

My comment earlier still applies re the pension schemes, danger of the tail wagging the dog. They take up vast amounts of management time which could be better sped elsewhere. Regulation and Actuaries gone mad

[bobthetrader] 16/4/2012 15:59

Thanks guys...

So I guess there are a number of factors that can contribute to the deficit, therefore making it volatile. Very difficult to make a judgement, deficit could reduce rapidly also.

I would rather these small cap companies to not have pension schemes.

Thanks for all your input, very helpful!

[effortless cool] 16/4/2012 14:13

Lower discount rates due to flatter yield curves probably had a more material effect on the deficit than increased longevity.

The deficit should be a concern for shareholders, but not one that has immediate implications.

In the event of a takeover, the deficit would likely have a pound for pound impact on the price paid.

[amt] 16/4/2012 14:10

I would think the shortfall on the pension fund is also due to the performance of the stock market which has been dreadfull.

[bobthetrader] 16/4/2012 14:04

Graham...

So what you are saying is, the assumption now is that the life expectancy of current members will probably increase, and therefore they expect a £2.7 mil short fall?

Should shareholders worry about this with regards to their investment?

Also if a company wanted to buy-out Tandem how much of an impact would that have on the offer price.

Please excuse my accountning ignorance.

Thanks!

[graham1ty] 16/4/2012 13:31

Bob. very simply, this is all the fault of Actuaries. As the statement says, the schemes are closed to new members. However, all it takes is a change to the assumptions on life expectancy, the returns the market will make etc etc and suddenly they say the "pot" is no longer adequate, even though the size of the actual underlying fund has hardly changed.

These days, under accounting rules, rather than "smoothing out" the ups and dons of a fund, companies have to account for all the changes. Sadly, on a deficit, the company has to make it up: if that turns to surplus, they cannot recoup the surplus.....after Cap'n Bob, the surplus belongs to the pension members.,