Taylor Wimpey Share Discussion Threads

[barf2] 19/11/2010 08:41

pretty random wolt?

ho-bo [house-builder?]

[scars] 19/11/2010 08:38

Agreed spenny, people like to feel the security of owning their own property. It is built into the British way of life, and as we have such little land available and such tight restrictions, there is only one direction property can go over the longer period.

[spennysimmo] 18/11/2010 23:02

smurfy, property recovers, it always does, you know that.

[smurfy2001] 18/11/2010 22:56

....but but look at the share price?

:-(

[spennysimmo] 18/11/2010 22:45

I think he has. share price at 4p and £1.5bn debt compared to now? You could say he was at the helm when they got to that situation but who could see this recession coming to the extent it did? The whole world was taking on debt to expand. A lot of big companies have gone out of business while TW. has come out the other side with less debt as a leaner machine and are slowly recovering with stronger results and new finances well on the way to being in place. I think he has done a pretty good job.

[smurfy2001] 18/11/2010 21:55

Hmmm, start with Redfern, he's not done a good enough job IMHO.

[hiq] 18/11/2010 20:51

You could also dump over 50% of the staff, that would make more sense

[racg] 18/11/2010 20:49

Mind you, you could pay a premium and still get the land bank for a large discount to purchasing it on the open market, along with the staff and infrastructure required to gear up production.

[racg] 18/11/2010 20:47

When Barratt shares are 56p, I will very likely a/ go mad b/ buy a whole lot more. Seriously though putting two lowly rated builders together probably not a great idea, better a strong and weak one or wait for things to improve. Any smell of a bid and trust me the target will not be depressed as these two are today.

[hiq] 18/11/2010 20:39

Strikes me that TW. do not need to buy anybody to ramp up sales by (say) 50% when the mkt improves.

Buying a peer (for a bid premium) and hoping for synergies etc is simply riskier than organic expansion - where all it takes is land bank and replication of tried & tested formulae.

[sequoia] 18/11/2010 20:03

When Barratt`s shares are 56p will you be glad to accept £1/share?
seq

[racg] 18/11/2010 19:46

I will sell Barrats but not for 75p. We are a five star builder and stuff......

[sequoia] 18/11/2010 19:42

keep it a local business sell US operations,buy Barratt`s should get that for a song!




hiq - 17 Nov'10 - 07:29 - 5183 of 5233

TAYLOR Wimpey will look to sell its US operations when market conditions improve, it emerged yesterday as the housebuilder predicted profits would hit the top end of City forecasts.


Chief executive Peter Redfern said they did not expect to be "long-term holders" of the North American business but there would be "no imminent change".

Sources said the firm believed housebuilding worked best as a local business, with few cost-cutting and other benefits arising from being international in scope.

Wimpey is close to completing a £950 million debt refinancing featuring new agreements with its banks giving more flexibility, provided the group can raise £350 million from the bond markets.
seq

[fewdollarsmore] 18/11/2010 19:32

Scars - am I missing something do not understand what you are saying esp last point about trying to lock the shorts out.

Looks like all buying and selling is being absorbed, expect some movement in the morning!

Scars - 18 Nov'10 - 15:57 - 5232 of 5233


Could be trying to lock the shorts out.

[lyntwyn] 18/11/2010 16:49

I see nothing wrong with 95% ltv, that was not the problem. The issue was poor credit risk assessment, bankers who are trained only to ask the computer rather than use their own brain and skills! A £500k mortgage application was assessed by an office junior. Even 100% mortgage is fine if lent to the right people. Self certification was the worst problem though. Most repossessions I know of are self employed, usually cases where even the layman wondered how a small trader with a white van could afford such a grand house! Of course he couldn't but banks just wanted to lend,lend,lend....
Not that the builders were innocent, negotiating deals with individual banks promising them all the mortgage business from house sales at a specific site provided that they didn't reject any applications. And the bank would be greedy enough to fall for it.

[scars] 18/11/2010 15:57

Could be trying to lock the shorts out.

[scars] 18/11/2010 15:31

Looks like all buying and selling is being absorbed, expect some movement in the morning!

[spennysimmo] 18/11/2010 14:16

95% mortgage availability would kick start the recovery. It isn't rocket science. Lend to those who clearly have the affordability.

[scars] 18/11/2010 14:12

80% ltv is way below the long term average, 90% is reasonable without having punative interest rates. Tell that to the banks though.

[smurfy2001] 18/11/2010 13:15

Sister Mary - take inflation of say %3.2 over three years, the actaul rise is %5.4 excluding VAT. Given inflation will possibly hit %4 during 2011, l wouldn't exactly say it's ripping people off. Blame the goverment for stealing our wealth with high inflation.

[smurfy2001] 18/11/2010 13:12

NewKid - i think %80 LTV is suffice. %100 was crazy IMHO but even more crazy were those subprime mortgages.

[smurfy2001] 18/11/2010 13:10

hiq,


I think property is really only a clear winner if you are lucky or clever enough to buy when prices are at a cyclical lowish point.


I bought my third property (which is my house) December 2002. I recall prices getting out of reach and felt if l did not buy then l could not buy later. It was a dauting prospect since the mortgage was more than the two commercial property values combined. Then in 2007 l was looking at another house. It was double what l paid for my house in 2002. I felt the price was too high, the rental yield would not cover the mortgage, and then l was hearing about capital problems and banks borrowing billions overnight temporairily (it was Barclays, the big bank as they use to refer themselves in the adverts). No problems they said and before l knew it, the market crashed.

I look back and think that was a good call not to buy. The lady at the estate agent was pestering me to buy and l did not budge.

So do you think that was luck?

Maybe l was lucky or the nerves made me think twice.

FYI: I was not an investor in the stock market till late 2008 so l had no idea of markets in general (house price index, charts etc) that l do today.

[scars] 18/11/2010 13:01

agreed new kid, although if you bought for £2700, you can't be that new.

The problem and probably only issue now is that your £700 probably does not allow much for capital repayment. Depending on where and what you buy!

I bought my first property in 1993 for 49K, now valued at about 200k, and my second at the start of 2003 for 200k, now valued at 300k.

Even in 2003 I was considering things getting a little bit expensive though so can understand why people do not want to commit.