[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 01:00:00
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 951 to 972 of 1275 messages
Chat Pages: Latest  39  38  37  36  35  34  33  32  31  30  29  28  Older
DateSubjectAuthorDiscuss
04/10/2014
18:25
===== If pick different funds with diff. start dates.....you get the same results.... Western perf. is TERRIBLE compared to inv. funds operating a normal inv. policy. ie. moving between listed co. shares as they see fit....without needing to sit on the bod imho this is proof that the Western inv. policy DOES NOT WORK in comparison with a normal inv. policy. and hence the legal question is created as to whether the bod are breaking the Company Act by continuing with an inv. policy when they know that it underperforms compared to the std. investment fund strategy. Especially if the strategy is being chosen just to provide financial benefit to the family of the chairman via dirs. fees at the investee companies...and insider information. ISDX and the co. adviser have been asked to look at this point. If needed the FCA/police might be asked to look at it. ---- Also The possible financial benefits from insider information are much higher than the dirs. fees. Insider info can be used in diff. ways......such as a related party putting 50% of their portfolio in to 1 company rather than just putting in say 5%. The buyer can do so overseas, the Ms have links to various offshore tax havens. If the buyer is ever investigated and say they just used market information, almost impossible for anyone to prove otherwise. Someone sitting on a bod could explain to another person the significance of different number and text in diff. parts of the accounts which can make a massive difference to whether the listening puts 5% of their portfolio or 50%.
smithie6
04/10/2014
18:22
How does Western performance ...under Marshall control....compare with the competition ? 1) Black Rock 230p in Feb 2005 and around 760p now (Feb 2005 looks to be when the BR small co. fund started sp has gone X3 http://uk.advfn.com/cmn/chrt/chrt_wrap.php?epic=BRSC&name=&type=1&sprd=0&size=2&period=12&freq=1&date1_day=27&date1_month=10&;date1_year=1986&;date2_day=04&date2_month=10&date2_year=2014&ind_type1=0&ind1_1=&ind2_1=&ind_type2=0&ind1_2=&ind2_2=&ind_type3=0&ind1_3=&ind2_3= 2) Western for the same time period Western has gone....no where ! was 63p and basically the same now !! ie. share price is X1 Western. X1 Black Rock . X3 for the same time period. http://uk.advfn.com/cmn/chrt/chrt_wrap.php?epic=wse&name=&type=1&sprd=0&size=2&period=13&freq=4&date1_day=27&;date1_month=02&date1_year=2005&date2_day=04&date2_month=10&date2_year=2014&ind_type1=0&ind1_1=&ind2_1=&ind_type2=0&ind1_2=&ind2_2=&ind_type3=0&ind1_3=&ind2_3=
smithie6
04/10/2014
18:10
btw The Marshalls only own around 17% of Western...... 40% of LFI which owns 44% of Western... so there is no need to let them do whatever they want without some control or checking from the co. owners....the Western shareholders.... (maybe some of the other large holders in Western (or LFI !) would like their children to sit as directors at investee companies...and get the dirs. fees !!) one son got at least 900k imo ...by being dir. at City Grp for at least 10 years....which runs Western....while you wont find any mention of this yearly payment in any Western accounts !!...intentionally hidden from Western shareholders
smithie6
03/10/2014
20:32
I agree that their performance has been somewhat average. They have paid reasonable dividends though and are on a big discount. I wouldn't invest more in them, but am happy to hold. There are far worse investment companies around. I am hoping that they do a bit better in the future. The signs are encouraging.
topvest
03/10/2014
20:14
1997 (last news item on advfn under wse ticker) "The new shares will be placed with two South African pension funds. Mine Employees Pension Fund will subscribe for 4,322,620 shares and Mine Officials Pension Fund will subscribe for 6,483,930 shares, at a placing price of 14p per share. The Company has entered into a Subscription Agreement with the two pension funds, which is conditional on the passing of the resolutions referred to below and the shares being admitted to trading on AIM. The Placing involves issuing 10,806,550 new shares in the Company which represents a 33.3 per cent increase in the Company's issued share capital." a 1 for 4 consolidation happened around 2005-2009. so it was around 2.7M shares....at 64p The current share price to sell in 2014 is 63p LOWER than the subscription price in 1996-7 !!! ie. the dirs. are NOT making money....NOT increasing the share price !! after almost 20 years ! ---- Topvest you may not agree....but do you see my point ...and agree it is a valid point ? Any support from anyone to put forward an agreed resolution at the AGM ? (change....to avoid another 20 yrs the same as the last 20 keep current strategic policy with existing investments....but no new strategic investments....unless agreed by shareholders for any specific case with no vote from the Marshalls and return of cash from sales)
smithie6
03/10/2014
19:59
Topvest in case of interest my own investment perf. goes off the roof if put on the Western chart ! and I am sure that your inv. perf. is much better than Westerns as well. ----- Can you name any investing companies that operate the strategic investment method and have a good record ? I think I can name various that have vanished or performed poorly. Spark (almost finished selling assets and returning cash to investors) . Arlington (finished selling assets and returning cash to investors) Then all the dot com ones, VoyagerIT. AsiaInvest (or whatever), Luke Johnsons one, .......Western !! LFI ! Can you name some that have done well and show that the concept can work if the managers are skilled ? (I can get a higher annual return than these guys (and get the dividends from the investments)...choosing my own investments....and without them getting rich from dirs. fees at investee companies from my money....paid to off-shore un named co. for David Marshall...so tax free I assume...)
smithie6
03/10/2014
19:41
Topvest here is the long term chart for Western http://uk.advfn.com/cmn/chrt/chrt_wrap.php?epic=WSE&name=&type=1&sprd=0&size=2&period=12&freq=4&date1_day=27&;date1_month=10&date1_year=1986&date2_day=03&date2_month=10&date2_year=2014&ind_type1=0&ind1_1=&ind2_1=&ind_type2=0&ind1_2=&ind2_2=&ind_type3=0&ind1_3=&ind2_3= (if doesnt load....enter ticker wse in basic chart page....for "all" time) imo this shows that they do not know what they are doing ! since the share price is the same as it was in the previous decade and at the end of the 90s ----- For comparison the charts for Blackrock smaller cos and Aretemis smllr cos and others.... shows a strong up trend over the last 20 years..X 3- X4 !!..while Western is SIDEWAYS !! (being in Western and not in Blackrock or Artemis has cost me a lot of possible money...while the Marshalls have got richer (I own more shares than you I think...and for longer I assume) --- if people wanted to invest in non-listed cos. or start ups.....then VCTs are probably the best.... but few of them are any good imo and that is with VCT mngrs using more staff and many more combined years of experience than Western has Western/LFI has only got experience of investing in a handful of strategic cos. over the last 10 years....whereas VCT funds have invested in tens of companies....so they have imo much more experience ---- I recall that Western had to raise money via the warrant units because it had been unable to grow.... 6M new shares whereas a successful listed co. would not need to do that and could not issue shares directly since the law prevents new shares below the nominal share value... THAT is proof of poor performance after having been around for decades !! ----- If the Company Act 2006 rules against continuing after a perf. review with any business plan to reward the Marshalls with a plan they know produces poor return to shareholders.....then the law is the law. ----- but each person to their own choice... to organise a resolution into the AGM agenda I think that 5% of votes is needed.....to put forward a resolution....
smithie6
03/10/2014
19:24
"Its new business model will be to take sizeable minority stakes in relatively small companies at a pre-IPO or IPO stage, and have directors in common through which they can provide advice and support for these growing companies." I understand that the IPO mkt is now largely dead....compared to 6 months ago... have the dirs. noticed ?....perhaps not... (the best time for IPOs was , of course, up to 6th April 2014) and the AIM index is down in 2014...
smithie6
01/10/2014
21:09
You are spending too much time on this. It's a Marshall company. Accept that or move on. I'm reasonably happy with how things are going.
topvest
01/10/2014
20:14
if the Western and LFI investment strategies are know to be bad/poor eg. look at the share price charts for 10-20 years then perhaps it is ILLEGAL for the bod to do a review of perf. and to choose to continue with the same strategy....especially if it is being done to provide financial return to certain people (Marshalls ?) via directors fees from investee companies......while KNOWINGLY producing a poor return to shareholders. Anyone with any legal knowledge reading ? (the Company Act 2006 is law....and cant be broken or ignored)
smithie6
01/10/2014
20:11
"New" Western would report its NAV at end of June it looks like NBI price was 520p... and 580p now I make that an increase in NAV to now of 6p if so..and if ignore other investments... then NAV increases from 102p to 108p now. selling price of 63p is 58% of that NAV value (SWL is showing signs it might move up.....& up around 10p since end of June perhaps Creston was doing well since end of June....but down today...) (with CRE and SWL increases NAV should be closer to 110p-112p but I dont want to calculate.....sp might fall tomorrow...since US mkts taking a pasting today...down maybe 2%)
smithie6
01/10/2014
19:26
Proposed Resolution for the AGM need I think 5% of the votes to get this on to the agenda. Any votes towards that 5% ? " To reject the Marshalls proposed new strategy of re-invest much/all of the funds of the General Portfolio (approx. 3M pnds) in to NEW unlisted strategic investments in the same way as Western and LFI have done in the past with Doctors Direct, Hartim and putting directors on to the boards of investee companies. This strategy has been shown over the last 10-15 years to produce random results with a high % of investee companies going in to admininstration. The return to shareholders has been poor with no return over 10-15 years. While the total income received by directors (such as Marshall family members ) having been large. It is noted that the Company Act requires the directors to review the past performance of the company and its strategy and to try to modify the strategy in order to obtain general benefits for all shareholders. Hence it would be illegal for the directors to intentionally choose a certain strategy when a review showed that it was a poor choice compared with other strategies, especially if that poor strategy was chosen in order to provide financial gains to specific persons, such as the Marshalls, while intentionally producing poor return to the general shareholders. Yes, to reject the new strategy. No, to accept the new strategy." ---- (so the proposed strategy may be breaking the law for Western bod to choose it...)
smithie6
01/10/2014
18:14
uh ? can you spell out what you mean ? wind up the co. ? ---- btw LFI shareholders look to be getting a terrible deal at present.... looks like admin. cost of 450k (which after remove inv. services income, such as producing FIF accounts...of around 200k..from total costs of 650k) 450k admin. cost.....to monitor 1 strategic investment (FIF) and 1 gen. portfolio...their stake in Western, I assume is easy for them to monitor ! 450k....that is terrible imo....
smithie6
01/10/2014
17:44
My Agenda has always been to extract the value from WSE (with or without the Marshalls).
russman
01/10/2014
17:42
"Our new business model will be to take sizeable minority stakes in relatively small companies at a pre-IPO or IPO stage, and have directors in common through which we can provide advice and support for these growing companies." I have posted many times about this subject before.... Western and LFI have proven over the last 20 years that they are UNABLE to produce - reliable or repeatable performance or - good performance and that the perf. achieved is RANDOM with a high % of investee companies going in to administration !!!!! There is I think no company that follows this strategy and has done well over the last 20 years. Numerous cos. have tried and failed. Numerous directors think they have the golden touch.....but over time I think that virtually all of them have proven that they DO NOT, hence inferring that the dirs. were over optimistic and egotistical in their own self belief (or knew they were lying all along and were just there to fill their pockets with high pay levels and bonuses) The perf. achieved by inv. funds following a strategy of investing in cos. without having dirs. on the co. boards have ALL done much better Blackrock small UK cos Artemis Aberforth etc etc There is a big risk that the Western strategy is DESIGNED to provide personal reward for the Marshalls rather than reward for Western shareholders, as it has over the last 20 years. If so, then shareholders MUST reject it. I propose that us shareholders REJECT the proposed new strategy and that it can only be used where specific investments are proposed to shareholders to vote on before agreed. ---- imo David C Marshall and Lloyd Marshall have proven that they do not know what they are doing. See 20 yr charts for Western and LFI. And recall that the following costs went into administration or were sold to reduce their debts - MWB - Doctors Direct - Sanctuary group while the following almost went into administration due to excessive debt levels (David Marshall seems to have a love of taking on massive amounts of debt !) - Finsbury food - Creston Western shareholders have been saved by just ONE investment. ONE !! Northbridge. Otherwise Western NAV and share price would be on the floor, despite having numerous cash raisings. --- Note that Western had to use tricks in order to raise money via the warrant units in 2007. The share price was below the nominal value of 40p...so the co. was prohibited by law by issuing new shares at less than 40p...and at above 40p I think that there would be no takers since the mkt price was cheaper. A LFI/Western adviser charged 200k pnds for Western to raise 600k nett from the warrant units. 200k ! For doing almost nothing. Disgraceful. Is it only the insiders that make money out of Western/LFI ? ---- Any opinions ? Anyone willing to vote in support of rejecting the accounts and the proposed investment in new non-listed cos ?
smithie6
01/10/2014
17:28
and btw I think that shareholders needs to be aware of the risks of the bod taking too much risk in order to try to achieve the perf. targets for the share bonus scheme around 600k western shares I think I recall his part of that is a big carrot imo for the MD of City Group I would assume that his part is 1-2 yrs salary it could be that the Hartim adventure was because of that.....and that without the big carrot of the scheme... that the Western/City grp dirs. at Hartim would have otherwise voted against the adventure and tried to stop it taking place... cost to "us" was half of 3M pnds lost...1.5M pnds...almost 10p per Western share
smithie6
01/10/2014
16:17
Can I interest anyone in voting NO to all AGM resolutions ? I will be for example.....what the co. is doing or what the plans are......we have been told nothing not even the NAV is given in the accounts !!
smithie6
01/10/2014
16:08
Russman "I have already stated my Agenda". Can you remind us what is your agenda ?
smithie6
01/10/2014
16:07
"If you WSEL shareholders were to back the Marshall ventures directly you would be showered with tax incentives". fair point and the dividends ....by investing in shares via Western we have been partly paying Mr David Marshalls directors fees at Finsbury, Creston, MWB etc. David Marshall pocketted around 400k over 10 yrs.t from Creston !!..while the Western investment in Creston has produced a loss compared to inflation and benefits to at least one son..... directors fees at City group....which runs Western ... a dir. for at least 10 years I think...over 900k pnds imo... and one assumes expenses as well these are some of the reasons why I think Western shareholders need to be organise and flex their combined muscle to force improvements.... (the Marshalls are getting their benefits from LFI and Western....but what about the co. owners ??...us !!) and also to decide the future strategy of the co. (I have repeatedly posted that I think that the Artemis or Blackrock strategy produces better results.......invest in listed cos. and sell and buy as preferred....and dont have anyone on the board (since limits selling/buying) the charts for last 20 years show that I am right all UK small cap. invest. cos. blow Western perf. into the weeds ---- btw I converted some warrants at 64p.....was it in 2006/7 a fair number if I sold now I would get 63p..... so I am not too impressed with the perf. achieved by the Marshalls !
smithie6
01/10/2014
15:54
"we" have 56% of the company the Marshalls only have 44% changes can be voted through if needed.....or pressure applied to achieve what the co. owners want, without neccesarily needing a vote or of course the popular UK tradition of apathy can be followed ! (as you might guess Im not a supporter of that !)
smithie6
01/10/2014
15:51
Topvest btw I reckon that the bank debt (3-5M) for the recent acquisn. can be paid off by end of Dec if NBI holds back on new expenditure....which it could do if it wanted since it has acquired new kit in the acquisition (has to keep increasing fleet size to produce growth to justify the growth P/E rating) and then say 7.5M-8.5 cash generation in H1 next year and 2.5M I think to pay to NZ sellers.....leaving a good few M for new acquisitions or more hire equipt. the cash generation is impressive..... as long as NBI can keep its margins up and keep its occupancy rates for kit....and find profitable ways to re-invest its cash generated....then the NBI EPS growth could/should keep going WHile for shares...there are always risks.
smithie6
01/10/2014
00:07
If you WSEL shareholders were to back the Marshall ventures directly you would be showered with tax incentives. Backing them via WSEL, you lose them all.
coolen
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:20211028 15:40:28