We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Type | Share ISIN | Share Description |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Wood Group (john) Plc | LSE:WG. | London | Ordinary Share | GB00B5N0P849 | ORD 4 2/7P |
Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
-2.60 | -3.86% | 64.70 | 64.65 | 64.90 | 67.75 | 64.20 | 67.05 | 3,836,692 | 16:35:23 |
Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Engineering Services | 5.9B | 464M | 0.6707 | 0.96 | 465.61M |
Date | Subject | Author | Discuss |
---|---|---|---|
08/11/2024 07:05 | Good morning - | tomboyb | |
08/11/2024 06:26 | Kingston78 post* It takes two opposing views to make a market. Everyone can make money even on a down day. It all depends the timing. I expect the share to bounce back strongly from this level to 75 *Hilarious - absolutely clueless | mr bernard castle | |
08/11/2024 01:37 | Most of the Uk plc companies are doing fraud to fvuk general people... all these ftse listed companies nothing but ponzy scheme.. just to milk share holders nothing elseo | covid 19 deal | |
07/11/2024 23:58 | It takes two opposing views to make a market. Everyone can make money even on a down day. It all depends the timing. I expect the share to bounce back strongly from this level to 75 p. | kingston78 | |
07/11/2024 23:50 | The three day rule here is where everyone logs in and deramps the stock and then on day three they log out and log in with a new handle and pump the F out of it 😂 | knowing | |
07/11/2024 23:41 | For anyone who agrees with dealy, it is arguably a very quick way to the poorhouse. If you are unaware of that poster's posting history on AFVFN, then more fool you. | essentialinvestor | |
07/11/2024 22:01 | I agree with dealy. The bad news had already been flagged beforehand. A financial review might uncover some incorrect procedures or aggressive accounting policies, which may require prior year accounts to be re-stated. BUT this has no CASH effect. No cash has been lost or mis-stated; only an amount of profit or loss be adjusted usually. Unless serious fraud has been discovered (God forbids) I don't see what the fuss is about by driving down the share price by so much. I suspect that shorters are having a field day piling on the pressure. I expect that once people calm down and digest the issues, and maybe the shorts are closed, the share price will soon recover to the 75 p level. | kingston78 | |
07/11/2024 21:58 | Ouch, who is going to call tomorrow's low? 39p? | smraynot | |
07/11/2024 21:20 | So what are folks saying this continue down tomorrow? | mj19 | |
07/11/2024 21:01 | time it right and could bounce towards 75-100p in a few weeks a lot of negativity today | stockhunters | |
07/11/2024 20:00 | faz you have mail | pogue | |
07/11/2024 19:27 | Apologies maybe it's the dermaping 3-day rule you're referring to! | zen12 | |
07/11/2024 19:27 | What 3 day rule lol | zen12 | |
07/11/2024 18:51 | Stay in cash. | blueball | |
07/11/2024 18:35 | "Blakesmith" yes agree 3day rule. Another retrace tomorrow, who can predict the low point? My bet 39p be a good buy. Pay your money and take your chance. | smraynot | |
07/11/2024 18:18 | From that article is does not sound terminal does it - What say you. | tomboyb | |
07/11/2024 18:17 | FT article just out - John Wood shares slump 60% after announcing review of write-offs Engineering company says evaluation was prompted by ‘dialogue&rsqu Rachel Millard in London AN HOUR AGO John Wood Group shares fell 60 per cent on Thursday as the UK energy engineering company announced an independent review of one of its core divisions following multimillion dollar write-offs this year. Shares in the London-listed group, a subject of two failed takeover bids in the past 18 months, fell after it said had agreed to a review of its projects division “in response to dialogue with its auditor”. The division designs and procures for large engineering projects in sectors such as energy and mineral processing Aberdeen-based Wood said the evaluation, to be undertaken by Deloitte, would include looking at governance and determining if there was a need for previously reported information to be restated. It is a blow for Wood and chief executive Ken Gilmartin, who is under pressure to prove the company can implement a turnaround plan and succeed as an independent entity after a turbulent period. Wood announced write-offs of almost $1bn in August after deciding to exit certain types of work and recognise costs related to legacy acquisitions, pushing the company into an operating loss of $899mn in the six months to June. “This review will focus on reported positions on contracts in projects, accounting, governance and controls, including whether any prior year restatement may be required,” Wood said. “An update will be provided as appropriate following its conclusion.” Wood, which employs about 35,000 on engineering and consulting projects across the world, has been struggling to turn its fortunes around after a £2.2bn takeover of Amec Foster Wheeler in 2017 saddled it with high debts and legal liabilities. Earlier this year, the company was repeatedly pursued by Sidara, known as Dar Al-Handasah, in a bid that valued it at about £1.6bn. Dubai-based Sidara walked away in August, citing “geopolitical risks and financial uncertainty”. It was the second potential deal for Wood to collapse in just over a year. Private equity company Apollo Global decided in May 2023 against concluding a 240p-a-share bid that valued Wood at about £2.2bn at the time, including debt. Wood is now worth about £345mn after Thursday’s decline. The company has also come under pressure from some investors to move its listing from London, but Gilmartin rejected that and told the Financial Times in August that such a move would not solve the company’s problems. In Thursday’s trading update, Gilmartin said Wood had a “mixed quarter” in the three months to September despite strong growth in its operations division, which maintains and manages projects. The projects division had a disappointing quarter after it was “impacted by delayed awards in our chemicals business and our continued weakness in minerals and life sciences”, he said. Group revenue for the first nine months of the year fell about 3 per cent to $4.3bn, and the company reiterated a full-year guidance of “high single-digit growth”. Analysts at Citi said the trading update was “below market expectations” and they “would like to see improved operational delivery”.&nbs | tomboyb | |
07/11/2024 18:10 | Pogue et al: its been a terrible day for holders. While we dont know the audit issue I have some thoughts on the VAT matter reported by POgue. It's a long post so skip if you arent interested. I earn my living doing this stuff, although egg on the face is good for the complexion, I'd like to avoid it. My assumptions: contractors were advised by Wood not to charge VAT on their services when invoicing Wood; the VAT in question was for standard services; HMRC (or the Tribunal) ruled the contractors should have charged VAT, once they had deemed the services were delivered in the UK; Wood has accepted responsibility or has been deemed responsible for this; the issue dates back four years; contractors are being asked to submit the VAT on their services. The outcomes of this are likely to be: all the VAT once charged can be reclaimed (it is irrelevant what VAT you pay, you dont have a 'pot' of reclaimable VAT); the cost then is what penalties HMRC might levy on either the contractor or Wood Group. THe maximum penalty is the 100% of the VAT - that is if they can prove there was deliberate evasion. And that gives me pause for thought. It makes no sense that Wood would have insisted VAT was not charged, unless the customer for which Wood was delivering the overall service insisted Wood didnt charge UK VAT. Now what reasons would prompt that I dont know, but I cant think of any other explanation. Because the overall service would not be charged +VAT by Wood then any VAT incurred by Wood to deliver the service (eg charged by contractors) could not be recovered (that's the rule). Hence the refusal to accept VAT on invoices from contractors. Let's see how it pans out. | faz | |
07/11/2024 18:03 | surprised we've not seen more prints after hours | tsmith2 | |
07/11/2024 17:53 | hxxps://www.bnnbloom > “rising geopolitical risks and financial market uncertainty.” The above is not just the Wood group but most companies out there. If Brexit was not bad enough you have inherent Geopolitics that is likely to cause havoc - | tomboyb | |
07/11/2024 17:50 | every purchase of mine today has been a sh*tshow - However average down to just over 58p - Lets see what tomorrow brings as I think someone is clearing out - Just my opinion - | tomboyb |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions