Trafalgar Property Share Discussion Threads

[doodlebug4] 26/7/2013 09:29

dnair - I agree with you about the chairman/CEO statement in August which will be just as important reading as the figures on the balance sheet.

BillWeb - we do agree about some shares - AVO has been on my watchlist for quite some time now.I nearly bought some a few months ago, but decided to top-up on more COMS instead.

[billweb] 26/7/2013 09:10

Doodlebug, I am 100% in full support with you on COMS! I think that is a cracking little company. DB a great leader, exactly what you need. Just for your info I have no interest in buying TRAF shares, even if they do go down, so not looking to add any further comments on it. I just wanted to shares thoughts with fellow investors.
Take a look at AVO. interesting....

[dnair28] 26/7/2013 08:59

I welcome contrary opinions on this BB if they are based on facts and data, even though I am invested here. I do feel that we need the chairman/CEO statement in August to set the scene regarding results for previous financial year, ambitions, targets, etc.

What we do know is that Allenby Capital has access to Traf and it's projected valuation figures must, to some degree, reflect the company's potential.

[doodlebug4] 26/7/2013 08:02

barnsey, thank you for these posts - good reading.

[barnsey] 25/7/2013 23:53

While i am on a roll as a lot on here do not take any notice of important
posts concerning there investment you may like to look this site up and
you will see nearly one million shares traded today in TRAF which may or
may not surprise you.


www.isdx.com/forcompanies/ourcompanies/companydetail/Trade.aspx?securityid=10996

[barnsey] 25/7/2013 23:46

The Group benefits from availability of bank finance on competitive terms, Combe Bank Homes Ltd having established a strong asset base and income cover over cost of borrowing, a sound track record even during the exceptionally difficult market conditions following the 2008 financial crisis, and good relationships with a range of lenders. This is an advantage over many competitors who are unable to raise bank finance at all. The Chief Executive also has cash resources available to invest as required. The market listing of the shares may in due course be a further source of capital funding. The Group intends to capitalise upon its funding sources to acquire and develop prime new build land sites on a favourable cost base, where opportunities arise and it is prudent to do so

[barnsey] 25/7/2013 23:43

From my experience of reading these threads from 1999 Andre and BillWeb are
here to deramp with the sole intention of bringing the price down for there
own selfish gains and buying in at a cheaper price,best to filter them this
little co is in the right place at the right time,business is booming and the
UK Goverment are going all out to help building co's large and small.
The reason they only raised £280,000 and they could have raised more was because
the directors did not want to dilute there holdings and they have finance from
many sources available to them,fact!.If in any doubt here just study below,dyor.

After reading up on traf via website,broker research etc i have to say what
is not to like about this company,consider whats to come regarding profits
plus dividend payments, below from broker note and all very positive.

Exceptional value in attractive sector
Directors estimate that for the year ended March 2013 group PBT was not less than �575,000. In the financial year ended 31 March 2014 we are forecasting this to rise to �1.4m (EPS 0.48p), putting the shares on a current year PER of just 4.2x falling to 3.6x in the year to March 2015. The board also proposes to initiate the payment of a dividend in the financial year to March 2014 which we currently estimate at 0.065p rising to 0.075p for FY 2015 offering a yield of 3.3% and 3.8% respectively. We believe the group�s focus on the prime South East housing market, its preference for smaller developments normally unattractive to larger housebuilders, a de-risked business model and with a competitive valuation and yield suggests a fair value of 4.5p offering significant upside in the shares, even after allowing for a 25% size-related discount to its larger peer group.

[doodlebug4] 25/7/2013 21:34

NTOG & ORE - you are definitely having a laugh now - and you actually have the balls to appear on this thread to question why people have bought TRAF.

NTOG - according to the chart has dropped from O.66p to 0.43p in the last six months
ORE - according to the chart has dropped from 0.72p to 0.33p since September 2012

[andre] 25/7/2013 20:37

doodlebug4

I have informed opinions at least. Nope, I have no interest in OSU. It's your kind of stock. One you punt without a clue why or where it is going - up or down.

NTOG is where informed people are looking. That and ORE. The rises so far and those coming are backed up by fundamentals. You'll learn one day.

[doodlebug4] 25/7/2013 19:43

Andre, hopefully you visited the OSU thread today when the share price had rocketed to over 300% and posted some of your valued opinions there.:-)

[andre] 25/7/2013 18:04

Not really much to respond to that. At least I ask or answer questions. I don't just try to dump on opinions that don't suit.

Didn't mean to upset your sensibilities. I hadn't realised it was a dampers only board.

[doodlebug4] 25/7/2013 17:28

BillWeb, re. the first sentence of your post 193 - the main reason I "pipe up" is that I have invested money in this share after doing some research. You are entitled to your opinion of course, but I wonder why you bother to post negative comments. Is it because you think you know more about buying shares than I do? I can think of loads of shares that are on the market at the moment that personally I wouldn't touch with a bargepole, but I don't spend my valuable time posting negative comments on the relative threads.

At least we are agreed about the future of COMS. :-)

[doodlebug4] 25/7/2013 17:16

Andre, I've been around these bulletin boards a long time and in my opinion your comment early this morning about everyone dumping and the MM's panicking was misleading and hardly "factual". Your latest comment that you have - "posted negatively on other stocks in the past and almost without exception they have bombed sometimes to the extintion of the company" - to put it mildly I am very sceptical about that. Do you regard yourself as some kind of expert or guru? I would have thought that your time would be better spent researching, investing and posting on shares that you think are going to make you money. I would be more interested to know how many - and which - shares you have posted positive comments on that have proved successful.

In my experience it is all very well being cautious, as you say you are, but isn't it is worth the risk occasionally to have a punt on a share like this - with the old catchphrase in mind " never gamble more than you can afford to lose". Out of small acorns big oak trees grow and TRAF could well prove to be a small acorn.

[billweb] 25/7/2013 17:16

Christopher Johnson holds 10 current appointment, has resigned from 31 companies and held appointments at 19 dissolved companies. Christopher began their first appointment at the age of 43 and their longest current appointment spans 17 years and 11 months at RAYFAIR LIMITED.

The combined cash at bank value for all of Christopher's current businesses is £1,092,108, with a combined assets value of £17,362,972 and liabilities of £6,264,432. Roles associated with Christopher Johnson within the recorded businesses include: Director, Company Secretary

[billweb] 25/7/2013 17:10

why is it that people on these sites have no problems when comments are; this is an undervalued stock, excellent growth potential in their opinion etc... but when others come along and share their opinions that the company is overvalued they pipe up.

Andre, I would never touch a company firstly that can only raise 280k when needing considerably more (especially in this market when there has been huge demand for house builders). Over 80% of shares are held by one individual. (that's is the reason why I think stock has rocketed) if there was 50% in the free float, there's no way this would be at this price.
Personally, I think the broker/nomad is to blame, promising the client that we can raise money, more importantly with capital raising down the line, but this will be virtually impossible. The company will soon realise that an AIM listing is a total waste of money and look to de-list.

I have looked into the previous also Andre, nothing at all gives me confidence. They are a decent family business and good at what they do I'm sure but never a public company. It's a shame, decent private companies ruin themselves by wanting to go public. WHY!?

[andre] 25/7/2013 16:44

doodlebug,

I post on a number of stocks that I research and follow. I set alerts and respond to comments, questions and clarifications that people post. That is what these boards are for, surely?

As for posting negative comments. I post factual comments and questions. As above.

When the first four trades of the day are sells on a very illiquid stock before 9am and the share price drops 10% following days of rapid rises, it is not unusual to raise a comment or two. There was nothing misleading about it, was there? A pattern (that didn't happen to continue) looked to be forming after all. If you hold the stock then I am glad it didn't continue as it happens. But that is just a personal opinion. I don't hold but do follow. BB postings are not restricted to holders as you know. Holders have more vested interests than non-holders.

I have occasionally posted negatively on other stocks in the past and almost without exception they have bombed sometimes to the extinction of the company. I would only ever post negative if I knew there were scallywags behind the company or there business model was horrible.

Other than that I tend to be optimistic and cautious by nature as the decks are stacked against the PI's as you know. If I don't understand something, I will ask and hence learn sometimes.

FYI - I have no financial interest here right now. Just incredulity about the handling of the launch and appreciation of those that got in early and multi-bagged the stock. Seriously, well done.

[doodlebug4] 25/7/2013 16:05

Andre, I'm not sure why you keep posting negative comments on this thread if you are not interested in buying this share. You say you don't know what this company is worth, so why keep banging on about it and why post such a misleading statement first thing this morning about "everyone dumping" this share? I can only think that you are trying to talk this down with a view to buying.

[andre] 25/7/2013 15:44

BillWeb

yes assets 'worth' £7.2M but loans of £8.4M and 'other long term finance' of £5M.


To clarify, I don't know what this company is worth. I would just be annoyed with my NOMAD if he said go to market and receive £280K for 10% of your stock when the current price suggests substantially more could have been raised.

From the look of the accounts, my opinion is that they need money and I would think this would have helped. Though accounts are historic by nature and don't reflect much on wherever they are today.

Did you check out the directors previous directorships BillWeb? How do they look to you? Would you back them on their record?

[dnair28] 25/7/2013 14:29

I for one will be interested to see who the 3%+ stakeholders are following the IPO. Surely one of the reasons for floating must have been to bring investment from vehicles other than PIs - that may also afford a clue as to the deal that was struck in terms of the 2p flotation price.

[doodlebug4] 25/7/2013 13:25

I've seen plenty of companies floated on AIM at a vastly inflated share prices and the shareholders get shafted very quickly when the share price drops. One minute you are saying that it is overpriced at 7p and the next minute you are saying that the float should have been priced much higher than 2p. I think it's reasonable to say that it is difficult to say how the market is going to react to a new admission until it actually starts trading.

It's obvious there are a lot of traders who have jumped on to the bandwaggon here while it was rolling for a few days and then sold out with a nice profit - good luck to them. I bought in at 3p originally and have topped up twice since then and I'm now going to wait and see what the final results say and what the outlook is for this company.

Andre, you are not the only poster who thinks 2p is fair value, but Panmure Gordon was saying TCG was worth 8p when the share price was over £1.20 - just one example of how difficult it is, even for the so-called experts, to assess a share price.

[billweb] 25/7/2013 13:21

hxxp://companycheck.co.uk/company/04340125/TRAFALGAR-NEW-HOMES-PUBLIC-LIMITED-COMPANY

[billweb] 25/7/2013 13:21

Trafalgar New Homes Plc is an Active business incorporated in England & Wales on 14th December 2001. Their business activity is recorded as Development Of Building Projects. Trafalgar New Homes Plc is run by 4 current members. and 1 company secretary. At least 20 shareholders own the total shares within the company. It is also part of a group.

The latest Annual Accounts submitted to Companies House for the year up to 31/03/2012 reported 'cash at bank' of £553,420, 'liabilities' worth £1,180,121, 'net worth' of £-1,378,014 and 'assets' worth £7,221,129. Trafalgar New Homes Plc's risk score was amended on 16/04/2013.

[andre] 25/7/2013 12:50

They raised £280K BEFORE EXPENSES because they priced it at 2p. The market currently prices it at 7p-ish. Which suggests that they should have priced it much higher thus 'costing the company millions in lost revenue'.

If I were a director of the company I would be livid with the NOMAD that priced this float.

Also what was the point in raising such a small amount other than to get the company onto AIM to be able to issue more stock later? It doesn't suggest that the company is going to be so cash rich that they don't need money to grow. Companies often go onto AIM because they need the revenue from further share issues.

Being on AIM is another level of accountability and set of rules to follow. You don't do that to your company unless there is a notable benefit and £280K before expenses isn't it. There was something about £1M to be raised also. But even that doesn't seem much for the aggravation.

It costs an average of 8-10% of funds raised to get a company onto AIM. However, this percentage is likely greater in the smaller listings. The average AIM company costs per year for being on AIM vary depending upon who you research with. However £250-£300K is what I would expect this to cost them annually. But the point is the these costs have to be met from profits or further fundraising.

Hence £280K or even the extra £1M before expenses wasn't much to gain for the cost and hassle. Now pricing this at 7p at the float would have raised something more interesting and worthwhile.

That was my point.

I am not negative on this stock (although it might look that way from my post). I am actually intrigued as to exactly what I am missing as the numbers don't stack up for me right now.

I am all for being educated though. Where is the value coming from?

[doodlebug4] 25/7/2013 12:14

Andre, the audited final results are due to be announced in August. The interesting part of final results, apart from the balance sheet obviously,is usually in the Chairman and/or CEO's statement. Where do you come up with "costing the company millions in lost revenue"? Is that a fact, or just your opinion?