Buy
Sell
Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Trinity Mirror LSE:TNI London Ordinary Share GB0009039941 ORD 10P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  +0.00p +0.00% 85.70p 85.00p 86.00p - - - 0 01:00:00
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Media 623.2 81.9 23.0 3.7 258.98

Trinity Mirror Share Discussion Threads

Showing 7301 to 7325 of 7575 messages
Chat Pages: 303  302  301  300  299  298  297  296  295  294  293  292  Older
DateSubjectAuthorDiscuss
11/12/2017
10:23
Hi Kazoom, Do you need to be urgent in your returns? I cultivate inactivity, can sleep well at night becasue I only buy at rock-bottom prices and almost never have a significant loser. The last time was about three years ago when I invested in a stock without the usual defensive characteristics I rely on. Lesson learnt. Actually re-learnt.... The main drawback to my style is that I miss out on a lot of opportunities that don't reach rock-bottom. So perhaps I don't maximise returns, but on the other hand I make a pretty decent average annual return. I don't need to do better. Currently, there aren't that many shares with the charactersitics I seek, so I'm about 50% cash, having taken profits on several. I don't believe I have the temperament for short-term trading; though as you know sometimes value investors are able to take profits speedily. So I'm impressed that you are successful.
cjohn
11/12/2017
10:00
15th December final update 😊
cityconindex
08/12/2017
09:54
haha. Let me rephrase that : It's unlikely I'll still invested here long enough to find out if we hit £2 again! ;-)
kazoom
08/12/2017
09:36
Anyway,Kazoom, I trust your last sentence will be proved incorrect !
gfrae
07/12/2017
18:00
kazoom everybody can say with hindsight should have sold and banked, but sods law if you had then the opposite would have happened and the price would have continued to rise. Its difficult at the best of times to bank and you are definitely not alone, but your honesty in sharing is appreciated,
cityconindex
07/12/2017
16:06
Probably a fair view gfrae - but with my value investing hat on I don't really want to be holding stocks that simply "don't look particularly expensive". Selling can be difficult unless you've set some pretty clear objectives (which I hadn't in this case) and in fact it would have been quite easy to sell at 130 in late 2013 and regret missing the chance to nearly double your money over the next few months. There are two many other opportunities out there though to have those regrets. It's unlikely I'll still around long enough to find out if we hit £2 again! (nor probably 1.70 tbh)
kazoom
07/12/2017
14:59
Sentiment is what it's all about constant sells today, the rise could indeed be rapid if the phone issue is finalised, and the takeover is on. The buyback has not given shareholders value yet. But personally the drop was to clear the stop losses. I think 1.70 is attainable if the finals don't reveal any nasties. Am holding on as the divi is the consolation prize.
cityconindex
07/12/2017
12:47
kazoom,even when they were £2 plus they did not look particularly expensive they were then on a multiple of 7 times odd with rapidly decreasing debt. The market then was not so concerned by pension fund deficits perhaps. With a share price below £1 the share price is surely discounting almost the worst possible scenario. I suppose it depends on whether you consider the share price at any particular time on it s merits at that particular time or whether you look on it relative to the price it was at some previous time.
gfrae
07/12/2017
11:08
I'm no chartist but it looks like we have a sharp triangle formation - rapid rise upwards or downwards? Hopefully it's upwards!!
foot in mouth
05/12/2017
21:27
LOL CJohn. "Proper" traders would no doubt tell you that 50% is fine, so long as you get the risk vs reward balance right. Personally I achieve much more than 50% hit rate on my short term trades, but only by extremely stretching the definition of "short term" ;-0 One of my current areas of focus is to try to put more "urgency" into my returns, so I'm looking to learn from all of my errors. In the case of TNI; I've said a few times before that I sold a lot of my shares much too soon on the journey upwards from prices in the 20s. A far bigger sin though was not selling ALL of my remaining shares when the price was above £2, I honestly cannot now remember why - so I clearly need to get much more organised! More recently, considering the drop below 90p as "super value" territory was also a mistake. Probably the recent prices in the high 60s was the true super value point, although there is still room for the market to take a dim view of the final S&N deal. My "heart" says that I wouldn't want to close out any of my current positions at less than £1 because that still looks to me cheap on value metrics, but I might now be tempted to be a bit more ruthless.
kazoom
04/12/2017
11:29
The déficit is the difference between very large assets and even larger liabilities. Pension payments add to the assets. So really, we're not talking either about principal re-payments or interest payments. However, the defcit, in wind up situtations, does function like debt: ie it gives a senior claim on assets. We all agree on the above I think I certainly wouldn't like to transfer a lump sum to the funds currently, because I see assets as over-valued. However, in the event of a significant correction, I think it would be beneficial financially to the company to raise cheap debt and pay into the pension funds. PS i had an excellent short-term trading record. 50% of the time I made money.
cjohn
01/12/2017
17:24
I think keeping the property on the company books and unencumbered, gives a degree of flexibility that would be lost if it's economic value were transferred to the PF. So for example if a particular investment was agreed by both the Company and the Trustees as being beneficial to the fund and the company, they could in principle use the property as security to raise funds - not saying that is likely, but it is a flexibility that I wouldn't want lose with good reason. Secondly if you make a lump sum 'payment' into the scheme and subsequent events transpire to reduce the deficit and in fact bring it in to surplus after the lump sum, it is no easy task for the company to recoup that money and the company bears, in one way or another, interest purely for the purposes of making that pre-payment. As it stands the company is due to make payments of c. £300m (including this years figure) and the expectation is that the shortfall in full will be "funded by a combination of asset outperformance and the deficit contributions currently scheduled to be paid by 2025. " So I don't think it is necessary for the interest rate fairy to eliminate the deficit in its entirety, but a more modest contribution from the fairy could allow the current payments plan to potentially be reduced. So as I say, I'm quite happy with Plan A for the moment and as the trustees also seem equally content I don't see the need to tinker. Incidentally, although I agree you can treat the deficit as similar to debt, but if you do so then I would argue there is no interest as such associated with that debt (sometimes the deficit will go up, sometimes it will go down and probably from here the long term direction is down). I don't therefore accept that payments into the fund can be compared to interest, if anything they are repayments of the "principle" and that's consistent with the balance sheet treatment. Meanwhile - it would be nice to think we might have no seen the shareprice low cleared out this week. Aside from my more patient money, I also have a (ahem) "short term" trading position.
kazoom
01/12/2017
17:02
Ok hands up whose been cornering the market, Loads of punters must have sold or stopped out. Some great posts and all trying to help people understand, the complexity of an irrational shuk system. Cheers
cityconindex
01/12/2017
16:00
I would suggest the Trustees accept TNI's property holdings in lieu of pension deficit contributions.Instead of an ongoing obligation to cover the pension deficit there will merely an obligation to pay rent.
davebowler
01/12/2017
12:31
Even if they made a one off payment,they would still have a liability in the event of conditions worsening. Whilst in the event of conditions improving the trustees might decide that a buffer was necessary. By paying annually they are keeping greater flexibility. It is in the pension funds interest that the company contributing to it's pensioners is in as good health as possible. It might also be a sign of goodwill if the pension fund demonstrated support by buying some shares !
gfrae
01/12/2017
11:55
Hi Kazoom, You may have made one of my points for me. The pension trustees do indeed have a lien on the freeholds in the event of a liquidation and hence significant influence on company strategy now in this area and others. This is undoubtedly a major negative for any company thinking of making a bid for TNI. I still think the manoeuvre makes sense financially and so for the trustees too. According to the Economist, GE are thinking of taking on a large amount of debt - taking advantage of current low inteest rates - to pay down their pension déficit. In the case of TNI, taking on debt to pay down the déficit doesn't, in my view, worsen the balance sheet, as you are replacing one liability - with a much higher implied inteest rate - by another. Either TNI's future cash flows are enough to pay off these liabilities or they aren't. Obviously, if you ara of the view that the pension déficit will vanish when interest rates rise a couple of per cent, then it would be best to cancel all payments into the fund and wait for the magic money tree to do its stuff. I guess the pension trustees - all-wise, all-knowing - have a slightly less primrose understanding of the range of possible scenarios. In particular, asset values to my mind look pretty inflated and we may wait many years for a major rise in interest rates. (And any major rise will certainly impact on inflated bond values and likely on inflated share prices.) However, just going on making the usual annual payments into the fund does seem an ok strategy as well.
cjohn
01/12/2017
11:41
Thanks Kazoom for your sensible comments with which I agree. It might show further confidence in the board if the pension fund were to buy shares in TNI. The quid pro quo might be that TNI makes no further buy backs unless agreed with the pension fund or perhaps the dividend is lowered ?
gfrae
01/12/2017
10:11
kazoom - I haven't considered the above in the same granular detail as you and CJohn have: I take a more simplistic view that a well run TNI is in the interest of all parties and slowly but surely the pension issue is being addressed. :-)
twixy
30/11/2017
19:25
And bang on time, here's me with my sunny (pensions) disposition! Actually probably a more neutral point in this instance. I would imagine that the PF trustees are already of the view that they effectively have a lein on the freeholds (in the extremis case of liquidation, but also probably with a current veto over any significant undertaking relating to it). So I don't actually think that either transferring the property or mortgaging it and transferring the cash to the the PF would really be of any benefit. It would make a material dent in the deficit on paper but make the company balance sheet look much poorer and therefore (imho) substantially increasing the risk of the company ceasing to exist. Bad for the PF and the company imho. I think you are right to say that the companies ability to satisfy the pension going forwards is one of the worries for investors, but it seems to me that the PF trustees are not quite so nervous. Whilst you can say that it is a bit of no-brainer for them to support activities that strengthen the business there is really no compunction on them to support 'frivolous' activities like Dividends and Buy-Backs - even allowing for the extra payments into the PF, the security of the company being able to fulfil it's pension obligations would be stronger if those activities were not happening and I'm pretty sure the Trustees have the power to block them. So whilst I am like others frustrated by the current share-price and in particular the impact it might have on the S&N deal. I think the pension scheme is being managed pretty sensibly so I wouldn't really want to make any material changes there. As it stands there appears (to an outsider) to be a healthy relationship between the company and the Trustees, with what seem to me be to fair and reasonable compromises as to what the company has to pay to the PF in order to develop the business (particularly acquisitions) and reward the shareholders (dividends and buybacks). SO imho it ain't broke so don't fix it (and as a change manager, that is rarely my point of view).
kazoom
30/11/2017
17:52
You'd have thought so, Twixy. But years ago when I was invested here, there was a suggestion that some unused property could be redeveloped residentially. Nothing ever happened. My impression is that they haven't really explored options here. Hi Snicker, Clearly a pension déficit and debt have points in common: ie they have a senior claim on the assets of the company and must both be serviced from cashflow. You are bang on the mark, however, when you point out the volatility of pension assets and liabilities and hence déficits. this makes it more difficult to plan a coherent response in the pension situation faced by TNI. Certainly, any attempt to pass a pension fund - even when it's in surplus - to third party providers is done at a significant premium for the thrid party. This makes common sense: as pension funds assets and liabilites are volatile and hence the third-party provider takes on risk. I don't want to go into any more detail as I've already had a very long debate on pension deficts/surpluses with Kazoom over on the SIXH board. Kazoom has a more positive attitude to pension funds than myself and sees the possilbity of surpluses coming back to companies. In the case of SIXH this is a very small but serious possibility. My view is that huge pension funds like those of TNI waste managment time, absorb cash and are a source of worry to investors. TNI would be an obvious take over candidate without the gargantuan pension funds.
cjohn
30/11/2017
14:38
CJohn - Good post(s). I would like to think (perhaps wrongly) that the BoD and/or their advisors have visited the property option, since is does seem obvious.
twixy
30/11/2017
14:30
I presume the liability is £400 before tax and therefore about £320 net,still large,no point in paying more than they earn, in one go ,therefore.
gfrae
30/11/2017
13:05
I'm not sure that treating a pension deficit figure as debt is sufficient due to the volatility. When i last looked at it, i remember the figure quoted was that it would cost in the region of double the deficit to offload the liabilities. This would seem to be a prudent approach when making calculations?
smicker
30/11/2017
13:02
I should add I think it's better to take out a mortgage (mortgages) against the freehold property, rather than transferring ownership of the property to the pension funds. That way TNI wll be able eventually to benefit from any redevelopment of the property with a consequent uplift in its value.
cjohn
30/11/2017
11:35
DMGT's pension schemes are even more houmungus than TNI's with assets and liabilities both in excess of 2.5 bn sterling. So a 250m déficit is less significant at DMGT than at TNI ie it is a smaller percentage of assets; less than 10%. So they are in a considerably more comfortable position to TNI with regard to pension funding levels. And indeed only contribute 13m a year to their various pension schemes. (Possibly, at the next tri-annual valuation, that funding requirement will be reduced or eliminated.) Turnover and profitability at DMGT is also three times that of TNI; so in no way can the pension funds be considered a problem there - though, for reasons I've discussed ad nauseam with Kazoom, I still don't regard the DMGT schemes as a valuation plus. TNI's liabilities at present value are roughly 1.9bn with 1.5bn assets. (So the déficit is 25%+ of assets.) Assets rose over the previous year, but, that performance is unlikely to repeat this year. I think the lowly share price in part reflects investors' nervousness about whether future cash flows - in a declining business - can cover pension payments, residual hacking payments, restructuring and necessary acquisitions etc There were stories in the press a while ago about the Northern and Shell deal being delayed or falling through and what this would imply for the viability of the pension schemes. The share price decline followed on. My own feeling is that such worries are realistic but possibly marginally over-done. Treat the 400m déficit as debt. How long, on current free cash flow rates, would it take TNI to pay the déficit off entirely? Maybe 8 years at a pinch. But then free cash flow will almost certainly decline over those eight years, if new turnover and free cash flow aren't acquired from Northern and Shell (or other takeovers.) So the worries are understandable. Obviously, there has been a popular line on this BB that with rate rises, everything 'is gonna be alright". Rate rises may not happen as quickly as we'd like and asset values look pretty rich to me across US and UK stocks and may well fall back, increasing the deficit. Is there another solution? One possiblliity is with regard to TNI's property empire. Why not borrow 200m against this - the current rough value of the freeholds - and drop this into the pension fund. (Obviously, it would be better to do this when asset values - stocks and bonds - are not as high as now.) They could then ask for a waiving of yearly payments for x number of years. The extra free cash flow would be used to pay down this much cheaper new debt. The Company pays some 37m a year into the pension fund - more at the moment with the share buy back accompanying payments - It's a very expensive form of debt. Over 10% currently per annum. TNI would get a better mortgage rate than that. I remain in two minds about this share. It's a genuinely difficult valuation case, in my view, and I continue to pass to much simpler shares which my tiny brain can cope with. Good luck to holders; your optimism may well be rewarded. All the best CJohn
cjohn
Chat Pages: 303  302  301  300  299  298  297  296  295  294  293  292  Older
Your Recent History
LSE
TNI
Trinity Mi..
Register now to watch these stocks streaming on the ADVFN Monitor.

Monitor lets you view up to 110 of your favourite stocks at once and is completely free to use.

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

P: V: D:20190619 12:44:49