[ADVERT]
Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Work Service S.a. LSE:WSE London Ordinary Share PLWRKSR00019 ORD BR PLN0.10
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  0.00 0.0% 55.00 10.00 100.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 0.00 00:00:00
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Equity Investment Instruments 0.0 0.1 0.4 137.5 10

Work Service Share Discussion Threads

Showing 776 to 800 of 1275 messages
Chat Pages: Latest  39  38  37  36  35  34  33  32  31  30  29  28  Older
DateSubjectAuthorDiscuss
05/1/2014
21:39
hxxp://fulltimeinvestors.com/Western-Selection/
smithie6
05/1/2014
21:39
360k of divi per year ...roughly 5% is 18k (should show up back in the accounts, no ?.....only if the auditor knows to go looking for it !...and no one is able to do a runner with it !)
smithie6
05/1/2014
21:09
Possibly not, Topvest. It would be interesting to know how many divs remain uncashed and what the secretaries do with that cash.
coolen
05/1/2014
21:08
Sorry gone back to WSE Annual Report notes. I estimate that by number 70% of shareholders are lost (approx. 400) but this only comes to 5% of the equity. Please ignore me.
russman
05/1/2014
19:47
What do you mean the share bases are "lost"? The dividend cheques get cashed do they not?
topvest
05/1/2014
19:44
btw one interesting point perhaps wrt Hartim is.... that Western paid 750k I recall for 50% of the shares in Hartim around 2 pnds per Hartim share. while the accounts report that the total amount of share capital ever raised for Hartim is 1.1M...approx. 400k of other capital apart from the 750k from Western. Noting that Hartim was created from zero just for the acquisition of Tudor Rose and TRHoldings. which imo infers perhaps that Mr Aird and Mr Gibson got their shares at a much lower price than Western....ie. 400k pnds for the other 1/2 of the company, (around 1 pnd per share) almost half the price per share that Western paid. thats my reading of it anyway. ---- if a large number of Hartim shares are sold/purchased , eg. at 2 pnds per share from departing MD to new directors.....as expected or happened would that create a material event as per VCT accounting rules.....that would change the value of Hartim in the Western accounts ? even if it went back to 10p as per previous years that would be 9p extra for the Western NAV which is significant % wrt the current price around 55p --- 'if' Mr Aird did buy his shares around 1pnd each and manages to sell for 2pnds per share...then he would be quite content I would assume ...noting he worked for Tudor Rose before the takeover..one assumes he a fair number of years of experience in the sector...perhaps Hartim should consider to have him as a non-exec. or an adviser......although maybe dont allow him to suggest any acqusitions, if the defunct Auz. acquisition was his idea/plan
smithie6
05/1/2014
19:33
If you wish to go off at a tangent, you could quote Langbar International. Please note that 30% of both LFI & WSE share bases are "lost". There may be an opportunity trading listings within these three.
russman
05/1/2014
17:58
Yes, Tudor Rose could be listed more easily with a new holding company, as it doesn't have the same issues as Hartim. I personally think it's unlikely though given Hartim has raised funds recently. I suspect they will be looking at floating off the back of the 2015 results, if at all. That way they have a better 2013, improving 2014 and 2015 track record. Of course, now the previous MD is out of the way things may have changed. I do agree that the WSE net asset value is understated as Hartim is worth considerably more than it's associate carrying value on any sensible valuation metric other than net asset value (which is what they use!).
topvest
05/1/2014
16:59
Topvest I dont want to bore you with different ideas/questions for corp. actions etc (you know much more than us other posters) ...just ignore if you prefer.... could Tudor Rose be listed..obtains new valuation.....feed new valauation into accounts of higher level holding companies..and then somehow fold the holding companies above it ? ---- if LFI makes offer for Western 'high adviser fees for related parties.' If LFI is not allowed to vote...since related party....would that not avoid the need for adviser fees on related party subjects ? --- Would it save money to move Hartim or Tudor Rose into Western shell one day or cheaper to just list it as a new company ? (ISDX is probably cheap, AIM is perhaps expensive) (if Western shareholders were given free shares in Hartim, pro rata to holdings in Western....it would give Hartim a public shareholder base, would that make listing easier/cheaper ?) if list using a company with existing public shareholders base and do not raise money ....then the listing should be cheap imo. (if raise money from the public then it costs money for producing a issue document and advisers to review it....to protect the public from people that want to steal their money with dodgy issues....although noting that the protection does not work in the UK !, was it Lamprell that claimed it had assets in Brasil...and turned out that they did not exist !...the floating brokers never checked....ouch !)
smithie6
05/1/2014
16:43
Tudor Rose "1.15M PBT if tax of say 300k tax then PAT = 850k If P/E of 10 then cap. value of Tudor Rose is perhaps 8.5M + 2M in P/L account gives a value of 10.5M....5.25M for Western. almost 30p per Western share. 18M shares." worth noting imo that the Hartim investment has in fact turned out to be a good one, despite the large except. loss of Auz. subsidiary. Western invested 750k for 50% and in 2012 the main operating subsidiary produced 1.15M PBT, ie. around 850k PAT. ie. around 425k PAT as Western part. 425k PAT, in 1 year, wrt to investment cost of 750k to Western. Thats a very good result. (even in my book !) ------ 'if' the Auz. adventure had worked out it would perhaps have been very beneficial to us shareholders.... worth noting that they lost 2.5M .....and Hartim is still alive and producing profit.....which is noteworthy I think in comparison to the small investment cost for 50% of 750k....again supports the idea that Hartim value is above 5M and not 180k ! for 50% as per the Western accounts. 180k, I could take it off their hands at that price !
smithie6
05/1/2014
11:11
Interesting thought on WSE acquiring LFI. Less likely in my view, but an interesting concept. I think it's more likely that LFI acquires WSE and moves to AIM, but as WSE is larger this would be a reverse takeover I suspect. Any deal should be reasonably easy to do through an all share merger, albeit the related party aspects would be costly in advisor fees. Tudor Rose could be separately listed with a new holding company put on top. It would be nice, but I suspect they will want to turn it around first.
topvest
04/1/2014
21:12
Could WSE take over LFI?
russman
04/1/2014
20:37
Profit and loss balance at Tudor Rose is +1.2M hopefully 0.7-1M higher now that 2013 year end has happened so maybe around 2M so it could pay a divi ! although I guess it wouldnt help much in current situation since it wouldnt be enough to move hartim profit/loss value into +ve terrority and Hartim to pay a divi....and it is Hartim that Western is directly linked to, not TRI (if floated TRI then the cash profit would fix the -ve profit/loss numbers at higher levels such as at Hartim) ---- 1.15M PBT if tax of say 300k tax then PAT = 850k If P/E of 10 then cap. value of Tudor Rose is perhaps 8.5M + 2M in P/L account gives a value of 10.5M....5.25M for Western. almost 30p per Western share. 18M shares....gives Western NAV around 94p +30p = 124p. Any thoughts on my scribbles ?
smithie6
04/1/2014
20:29
If LFI took over Western....then I assume it would stay listed on the main LSE, as LFI is I think. Could offer cash or shares or a mix. Problem is, as a Western shareholder, what price would you accept ? if Hartim is worth 25p then you get 118p NAV I think. If LFI paid full real NAV then it would be a bad deal for LFI shareholders imo.... since share price would then be 60% of the official NAV.....much lower... If paid mkt price of 57p then it would be a bad deal for Western holders....I assume they would say no. 70p ?, 80p, 90p ? There is of course a fairly obvious thing to do with the remaining empty Western Shell ! (Hartim !) (how to do. perhaps issue 1:1 shares to Westernholders of new subsidiary Western 2 from listed western. All assets moved to Western 2. LFI buys Western 2. Listed Western is now an empty shell. Convert the number of share in Western shell to be the same as the number of shares in Hartim. Move in Hartim by converting Hartim shares to Western shell shares 1:1. Western shareholders own around 1/2 of it. Perhaps issue 10% of new shares as part of the float if ISDX requires new shares to be issued.
smithie6
04/1/2014
20:06
Tudor Rose op. profit % was 4.6% vs 2.6% in 2011 (if excl. the except. in 2012) ie. excellent growth in profitability (TR op. profit excl. the except. in Auz, was 1.2M...page 2) again confirming imho that the 1p value for Hartim in Western accounts is way off reality. ---- ah, there is no auditor comment in the Tudor Rose accounts.....so if wanted to float that, then I assume it could happen (yes, I'd like them to float something !) Why is there no auditor comment about Auz in the accounts ??! ..was the Auz. venture not owned by TR. Internat ? perhaps not... TR Inter. accounts say that goodwill was written down....which infers imo that TR. Inter. "did" own the Auz venture. ..there is also a TR Holding co....perhaps it was that that owned the Auz venture and perhaps TRI as well....Ill keep digging..
smithie6
04/1/2014
19:59
Any views on LFI taking over WSE as opposed to WSE taking over LFI. If the combine LFIWSE was listed on AIM with a divi it could create value & more liquidity.
russman
04/1/2014
19:56
Re-posting Topvests numbers for Hartim 2009 471K 2010 766K 2011 -119K after exceptionals 2012 873k before exceptionals (2008 was around 370k I think) 2007 was around 50k I think (gross profit in 2007 and 2008 were similar) SUMMARY that Hartim profitability has roughly doubled since bt. in 2007/8 and 100% cost around 3.5M incl bank debt. so, one could argue that the value is closer to 7M now, with its cost price as a way underpriced minimum, 3.5M (around 10p for Western stake, as it was in Western 2012 accounts) The gross profit has increased from around 2.6M in 2007/8 to just under 4M now. Not quite double. (And turnover is up) But profitability has increases in relative terms since costs has been reduced, such as lower lease costs. so, again I think around 15p is perhaps a fair value for the Western stake in Hartim, and easily move up if the results for 2013 turn out to be good. The Hartim year end has already happened. 15p is 14p higher than current valuation used in Western accounts. so, recent NAV calc. value of 94p (see post of 1-2 days ago) = 94+ 14 = 108p and imo you could cough and easily add another 10p to make 118p
smithie6
04/1/2014
19:46
Valuing Hartim ....bad news that it cant pay any divi, due to the rules, as Topvest pointed out but the value of it is imo still in the region of 20p...even though only 1p in Western accounts Hartim cost around 3.5M-4M to buy including bank debt...and that bank debt was paid off over the last few years around 1.3M -ve in the company level profit/loss account (due to except. 2.5M loss from Auz in 2012 accounts) but around 500k -ve a group level and made 1.25M op. profit in 2012 excl. the Auz. exceptional. so at group level when you add in the profit from 2013 --- If there was a corporate consolidation then the group profit/loss number would/could become the 'company' profit/loss number...even if doesnt happen. ...in that case, imo, the profit/loss number is "now" +ve at group level (adding annual PAT of around 500-600k to 2012 value of around 500k -ve at group level) ...so ...who knows we might be closer to a divi than we think --- Hartim cost around 3.5M -4M in 2007/8 and since then the profit number is well up, perhaps 70-100% up and the co. does not hold the bank debt that it had when it was bought, (bank debt was taken on by Hartim to help pay the cost for Tudor Rose, was it 1.4 or 1.8M). ....and some of the debt held now by Hartim or Tudor Rose is to provide working capital, which is now higher I assume since turnover is higher so...perhaps a valuation of 5.4M would be fair for Hartim, Western has half, 2.7M or 15p per share (18M shares) (noting that if reports growth (it has since 2007)....and then listed, its value listed (if only sell 10% of new shares) would perhaps be double its value for a private sale) Hartim should be in theory adding around 280-360k /year to Western assets, even if hidden within Hartim...which is approx. 2p per Western share....the same as the divi...around 4%...even though Hartim is officially only valued at 1p/share in Western accounts. ---- I note that the co. works for Unilever (eg. PG Tips) and Tesco.....so it has access to a lot of brands imo to try to sell BTW Hartim accounts give 25M as the turnover for 2012
smithie6
04/1/2014
19:16
"I do think the ISDX closure, if it happens, may force the issue though. Of course, they may just decide to re-list on AIM or stay as a private company." ...'if' moved back to AIM, 'if' ISDX were to close....then be two advantages imo - could then put into an ISA.....which would benefit some people wrt tax on divi perhaps - some investors might be willing to buy, who would not be willing to buy ISDX stocks ---- the spread officially 5p not 10p !.....worth noting imo that a lot of trades go thru well inside the spread.....the MM just marks a large spread 'cause it is so illiquid, he doesnt want to get stuck with a lot of stock himself, MMs normally dont want to hold stocks if not making trades with it and hence a weekly profit over last 2 months most trades went thru at 55-58p....3p spread....not so bad need to use a limit order.....even with 3p spread the MM makes a nice quick profit, 10k traded on 1 day, so the MM only had to hold for maybe 1/2 hour to make 5%.....same at many company shares, but I guess that someone has to pay the MM wages etc.
smithie6
04/1/2014
09:05
Yes, it's never been a trading stock and always a terrible spread of nearly 10p. Liquidity will get worse when ISDX closes! Personally, I think a 60p share price is about right. There is always going to be a big discount on this with the current arrangements in place, and no obvious trigger to unlock value. A merger with LFI would improve liquidity, but that's not really the Marshall's style unless they are forced into it. They like collecting companies! I do think the ISDX closure, if it happens, may force the issue though. Of course, they may just decide to re-list on AIM or stay as a private company.
topvest
03/1/2014
22:55
Judging by todays trades, share liquidity is also an issue.
russman
03/1/2014
18:30
I haven't got time to endlessly research this as it doesn't make any difference anyway, BUT looking at the WSE accounts; I think you will find that they are incorrect on page 20 and inconsistent with other parts of the accounts. At 30 June 2013 Hartim is held at £185k which means it must have had net assets of approx twice that or £370k. It had net assets of £557k at 31 December 2012 and so it made a small loss all other things being equal. The share of net assets number of £1,506k looks complete nonsense to me! It's impossible to try and quote an underlying profitability of Hartim with the information available, but £0.5m per annum looks about right to me. 2009 471K 2010 766K 2011 -119K after exceptionals 2012 873k before exceptionals
topvest
03/1/2014
13:45
although the writing off of loans and debts to Auz. subsidiary (50% owned) was 2.5M...and a big hit in 1 year I think it is worth noting that the op. profit was 1.25M !! before charging for deprectn. impairment and loss on disposal of fixed assets ref. note 18 on page 20 of Hartim annual report for 2012 (to Dec 2012, issued Sept 2013, slow)) ( 2.5M - 1.25M) Western paid 750k for 1/2 of Hartim ..... so it it is producing 1.25M op. profit..(that's around 600k as the Western part !) ...then it is surely shelling out a lot of cash relative to the investment cost even though all stays within Hartim, ...although 2.5M written off due to Auz. mess up. Western's part of op. profit is almost as big as its investment cost ! and the book value for Western of its investment is only 185k ! ----- From Western annual accounts to end June 2013. "Western holds 49.5% of Hartim, which has a 31st December year end, and which generated trading profits before exceptional items in the year to 30th June 2013 of £915,000." .....I can not understand how official Western accounts can say that Hartim has a Dec 31st year end for audited accounts....and then give data to 30th June 2013 !! ...surely the audited annual accounts of Western can only make use of the numbers from Hartim from its audited annual report, ie. to Dec 31st ?!! in any case, the numbers to 30th June 2013 say that trading profit was 915k (I assume this is probably before deprecn. etc)....almost double Topvests number of 500k. (915k is lower than the value to Dec 2013 of 1.25M but still a good number, numbers might go up and down depending on specific dates for contracts or deliveries)
smithie6
03/1/2014
13:38
2.5M was written of due to Auz write off....completely written off according to Hartim accounts .....all debts etc...even though the administrator wasnt called in till 3 months later.....(I assume that Western wanted it like that....a kitchen sink job I assume...and to get it booked ASAP....and out of the way.....so as not to hang over the accounts and perhaps affect business "they made a loss in H1 " the Hartim accounts actually said that trading well in H1...and that expected trade to be better since new customers and new routes to market... ---- op. profit was 1.25M !! before charging for deprecatn. impairment and loss on disposal of fixed assets ref. note 18 on page 20. ( 2.5M - 1.25M) ---- ...so ...I think the accounts differ a lot from what Topvest/you posted " I would guess underlying profitability is only £500k maximum."
smithie6
03/1/2014
13:03
They won't make much, if any, profit in 2013 as they made a loss in H1 I believe as all the Australian costs were not taken in the 2012 accounts if I remember correctly. I would guess underlying profitability is only £500k maximum. They could do a capital reduction. No chance of a dividend or float for a couple of years in my humble opinion.
topvest
Chat Pages: Latest  39  38  37  36  35  34  33  32  31  30  29  28  Older
ADVFN Advertorial
Your Recent History
LSE
WSE
Work Servi..
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:20211202 10:39:34