Taylor Wimpey Share Discussion Threads

[aphrodites] 03/3/2011 12:35

Just back from a holiday in Antigua and have been watching the fun with TW.

As I posted before I left 40p is a very big figure hurdle to get over and this is truly proving to be the case.

It looks to me that we are in the 5th wave upwards in the cycle of 5 and with the trading good volume I fully expect to see this close above 40p either today or tomorrow.

45p will then be the next big hurdle but I shall be out well before it hits that level.

[sir rational] 03/3/2011 12:31

Yeah good thoughts Ima

[barf2] 03/3/2011 12:23

Wouldn't be surprised to see a sub 40p close.Looks as though the share price is being held below.

[aspers] 03/3/2011 12:20

OK I am betting on a finish at 40.5p, if so its onwards and upwards with 45p not too far away, what you reckon??

[the old dog] 03/3/2011 12:18

Thanks for that imatsu, good stuff

Woof

[jibba_jabba] 03/3/2011 11:56

SR i cant get it to work.. lot going on at the mo, no patience..

[imastu pidgitaswell] 03/3/2011 11:47

Spent quite a while going through the report while waiting for what was meant to be a half hour air and oil filter change on the car. Two hours later...Well at least we're above 40p - and no gap on the opening, which bodes well.

Some random thoughts:

We got taken to the cleaners on the refinancing. Twice - last time out in terms of cost and restrictions, and this time in terms of cost. I know why the management did it - future savings, operational flexibility and to correct the situation they had to agree to first time round when they were completely over a barrel. A truly staggering cost in terms of facilities provided and their length - we'll be back refinancing again soon if the TM thing doesn't go through. This time it was £31.7m in fees to lenders and advisers, on top of £44.8m in the year to 2009. Nearly £80m in fees - it's just unbelieveable. On top of that were the interest breakage costs of £83.4m, on top of £23.1m in 2009. Truly, the owners of this company (that's us) have paid a staggering price for banking facilities - £185m in two years all told, all bonusable for Rupert and co.

Pensions are still being sorted. A big credit came from the Government mandating the use of CPI rather than RPI for future assumptions. It doesn't mean anything in reality, the liabilities will be the liabilities as contracted - it's just a change in the accepted basis of making an estimate. On the bright side, it doesn't mean that there is a cash shortfall to be made good short term, and therefore any Taylor Morrison sale proceeds will not fo towards the pension deficit - they quote new figures for ongoing annual contributions to the deficit, which are broadly similar to previous ones.

The US business made an operating profit of £93.8m, and has net operating assets of £612.7m. Taken alone, with no underlying debt, I can see clearly why bidders are bidding above net asset value. They should be - those op profits are on low volumes, which will recover in due course. Then there's the US deferred tax that is not included in the net asset values. Per note 7, there are £268.8m of US losses and US tax legislation allows these to be carried forward for 20 years (there is no time limit in the UK). There is serious value in those DT assets, and a significant percentage of them should feature in a sale price.

(Also worth noting that there is a further £78.6m as yet unrecognised in the UK, plus £29.8m in Spain - although it's hard to see the Spain ones being worth much...)

Also quite liked a couple of items in the Statement of Comprehensive Income, which is the stuff not in the P&L that impacts the balance sheet (net assets) - £33.9m of exchange gains and £46.9m of actuarial gains (although these are the CPI/RPI adjustment noted above).

The pensions credits and charges and also the tax credits and charges do mask some of what is underlying. They have made a fair job of clarifying it, but to be honest, most of these results do include a lot of accounting tidying up. Essentially draw a line under 2010 and prior and we're looking at a clean balance sheet (no intangibles, credit facilities sorted, debt reduced).

The key facts to take are the operating profits, the underlying profit before tax and the net assets per share (57p).

[the old dog] 03/3/2011 11:32

THIS SHARE CANNOT GO OVER 40P. IT'S THE LAW. GET IT INTO YOUR HEADS

Woof

[wolterix] 03/3/2011 11:32

blimey, eps of 8p

under normal circumstances, we'd be over a £1...

[sir rational] 03/3/2011 11:30

I think it's simply our larger holders taking profits in stages on the way up, nothing sinister in it.

It just means share price goes up a penny a time, consolidates, falls back a bit then moves on again.

The important thing is the trend and the sound fundamentals backing up that trend

[barf2] 03/3/2011 11:26

......and back below 40p!

Why would anyone be insistent on selling every time it hits 40p? Why not let it run and sell for more?

Or is it all to do with hedge settings etc all automated to control the sp?

[slytherin] 03/3/2011 11:23

Almost new high for the day....can it break?

[sir rational] 03/3/2011 11:18

Jibba look at post 4 here

You right click on the graph to get the address and put that inside the brackets.

I put 3 in a row all inside separate brackets, then enter to come down a line and repeat 3 more.

Some like 2 instead so it fits better

[sir rational] 03/3/2011 11:15

OK, you know how to post an image with the '

damn that always happens - I will copy & paste something

[the old dog] 03/3/2011 11:14

Close over 40 today would be a monster result. Let's see what Twimps has got in the tank after 230pm

Woof

[slytherin] 03/3/2011 11:13

Back above 40p!

[jibba_jabba] 03/3/2011 11:05

SR i'm trying to do the header, talk me through how you do your charts..

[sir rational] 03/3/2011 10:58

Ta, let's hope that's terrible timing but nowt wrong with taking a profit

[ludl0w] 03/3/2011 10:53

thats enough for me ta, gl ed

[sir rational] 03/3/2011 10:52

Pretty good account from Pete Redfern

[fewdollarsmore] 03/3/2011 10:44

debt is not such a bad thing if it is managed properly and used for growth... TW. using debt to finance land is the right thing to do, the issues arise where they have paid too much for the land or the price of property falls and they cannot get the return on the capital outlay.