Print

Markets live transcript 17 Nov 2009

Markets live chat transcript for the chat ending at 12:23 on 17 Nov 2009. Participants in this chat were: Neil Hume, FT (NH) Miles Johnson, FT (MJ)

NH:
Good morning
NH:
It’s 11.03am
NH:
and time for another Markets Live
NH:
FT Alphaville’s daily markets chat
NH:
Miles is with me again today
MJ:
Morning
MJ:
So, do we have a picture of Murph in his Mets baseball jacket yet?
NH:
what the one that cost him $14,500
NH:
still in the post I think
NH:
the Madoff mets jacket
MJ:
I still think this will be a good investment
MJ:
10 years down the line, he could flog it to a museum or somthing
NH:
fair point
MJ:
Could go down as one of “the great trades”
NH:
but Murph doesn’t have a great track record where that’s concerned
NH:
although
NH:
his Caz story is very interesting today
MJ:
It is
NH:
apparently JP Morgan have been
NH:
taking a “flagship” cut of advisory fees before revenues were split 50/50 between the JV.
MJ:
That certaibly sheds new light on the JV
NH:
and the pricing of the deal
11:07AM
NH:
Right
NH:
let’s start with a small cap this morning
NH:
SquarePeg asks an interesting question on Minerva
NH:
what is the 29.9% shareholder Nathan Kirsch playing at in launching a hostile bid
MJ:
Yeah cash offer at 50p
MJ:
Big premium to last nights share price
NH:
this is very odd
NH:
because
NH:
as recently as last week
NH:
Minerva were telling people Kirsch was a long term shareholder
MJ:
ha
NH:
but if he is serious
NH:
why did he not raid the market today
NH:
and buy up another 10/20%
NH:
he would then be in the box seat
NH:
forced to a make a mandatory offer
NH:
I tried to call his advisers this morning
MJ:
What did they say?
NH:
dunno, they have phoned back
NH:
I suspect
NH:
Kirsch is trying to flush out another bidder
NH:
that’s my hunch here
NH:
and Hammerson were rumoured a while back
NH:
and remember
NH:
Minerva does have its attractions
MJ:
what like?
NH:
but luck rather than judgement it has the only big office developments in the City
NH:
that will come on stream in the next 18 months pretty much
NH:
they have timed the recovery well
MJ:
(Lorkan – my screen says Minerva has GBP700m long term debt)
MJ:
Shares are obviuosly up
MJ:
gained 12p to 49.9p
NH:
interesting
NH:
right on the offer price
NH:
I suspect there will be further twists in this one
NH:
by way of background
NH:
our prop reported Dan Thomas
NH:
was writting on Minerva today
NH:
Minerva bounces back

Minerva is now back in business having renegotiated its debt position. Walking past its Walbrook scheme in the City of London as it emerged from the ground without a tenant over the past two years has been a depressing experience.

It had appeared a classic example of mis-timing the property cycle – but suddenly it is one of the only large new buildings in the City following lettings elsewhere.

Although the leasing strategy has appeared odd in the past, the building is now well placed to be let on decent terms, something that would be very supportive of Minerva’s share price.

MJ:
Just across the river from us, Walbrook
NH:
yep
NH:
I quite like the building
NH:
Bryce doesn’t
NH:
anyway
NH:
from one speculative story
NH:
to another
11:12AM
MJ:
Just before we get to that
MJ:
Lets have a glance at the wider market
MJ:
Which is down
MJ:
FTSE off 21 points at 5362
NH:
So Cadbury
NH:
rumours of interest from Ferrero Rocher
NH:
this article in Il Solo kicked things off
NH:
CBRY management don’t have time to applaud themselves on their defence
so far of KFT’s hostile bid. Conscious of this, management are plotting
to put together a friendly alliance of financial and industrial
investors, including Ferrero. Roger Carr, chairman on CBRY, knows it is
not enough to simply call the KFT offer derisory and he needs to think
of a new strategy. Voices in the business community are more insistent
that CBRY could also be in the sight of NESN. Now a new option is being
considered that could scupper the plans of the two multinationals. It
would involve an alliance between financial investors, private equity
and indsutrial groups considered to be allied with the British, to whom
CBRY would open the doors for an important partership
NH:
Mediobanca is
advising Ferrero on the discussions. Argues this deal would be a smart
way for CBRY to scape from the hostile KFT move and it would allow
Ferrero an opporutnity for growth. It should be noted that founder
Michele Ferrero has always been against growth by acquisition. And his
opinion is what counts. Nonetheless, his sons Pietro and Giovani, the
CEOs of the group, know that this trasaction could be a decisive action
for the group. Despite being strong in many countries, is absent from
the UK. The game is now in Ferrero’s hands, stick to their prudent
approach or make a bold move for growth.
NH:
that’s a translation by the way
MJ:
So, this has caused a fair bit of excitment this morning
MJ:
but when I say excitement, I should add
MJ:
that compared with the skull crushingly boring
MJ:
stage-managed Kraft-Cadbury tango
MJ:
any bit of deal juice is interesting
NH:
indeed
NH:
So Il Sole 24 Ore followed the Telegraph market report in flagging this Ferrero tie up.
MJ:
They did. I have the relevant bits to hand
MJ:
Here is the Telegraph
NH:
ok
MJ:
Traders kept an eye on Cadbury amid speculation that Ferrero, the maker of Ferrero Rocher, has been working with bankers from NM Rothschild on a counter offer to Kraft’s takeover bid for the London-listed group.
It is unlikely Ferrero would be able to bid on its own for Cadbury but one theory is that Ferrero could team up with another party, such as Hershey or Nestlé, to mount a joint offer.
Reports have also suggested that Cadbury is considering formulating a “poison-pill” deal with Ferrero if Kraft comes back with an offer that proves more attractive to shareholders.
NH:
Didn’t we hear something about this idea last week? Sounded strange back then.
MJ:
We did
MJ:
It was an idea being entertained by the arb community
MJ:
if I recall correctly
NH:
Oh, yeah a poision pill
MJ:
But, people are probably thinking now
MJ:
in a no-smoke-without-fire sort of way
MJ:
that somthing could be going on here
MJ:
And the analyst reaction has been that a Ferrero-Cadbury love in
MJ:
would not be as insane as it might first appear
NH:
Yup. Nomura produced a quick note with some synergy calculations. They look to think that Cadbury could make a credible defence this way.
NH:
I thought it was bonkers initially
NH:
but not so anymore
MJ:
Can you post some up for the ROTR?
NH:
sure
NH:
Press reports of a Cadbury-Ferrero poison pill tie-up
NH:
Today, Italian publication Il Sole 24 Ore is suggesting that family-owned Ferrero may be considering an alliance with Cadbury. This follows speculation in the Daily Telegraph yesterday that Ferrero could be looking at a counter offer for Cadbury in combination with Nestle or Hershey. The press is also speculating that Ferrero has been approached by bankers NM Rothschild and Mediobanca.
NH:
Ferrero’s sales total EUR 6.2bn (£5.5bn), and so are slightly smaller than Cadbury’s (GBP 6bn). The scope for cost synergies with a Ferrero-Cadbury tie-up is likely to be lower than what Kraft could propose, in our view, as an overlap with Ferrero is mostly restricted to Europe. However, Germany, Italy and France dominate the Ferrero footprint (65% of sales), and these are three markets where Cadbury’s chocolate presence is limited and so makes the combination more attractive. We also note Cadbury’s ability to enhance further its more regional approach to production (ie, the Poland plant opening for lower cost production and supplying at a pan-European level).
NH:
Ferrero key brands include; Rocher, Nutella, Tic-Tac and Kinder Surprise/ Bueno.

However, if Cadbury were to put together a compelling defence case (with more details on cost-saving proposals and specifics on ‘mid-teen margin targets’) justifying its standalone value (which we value at 780p) and then add a value for synergies with Ferrero (we value at 140p a Cadbury share) over and above this base value, this could prove a very credible alternative to a raised KFT offer (the current offer is worth 725p).

NH:
The other attraction for Cadbury shareholders is they would continue to hold shares in a higher-growth-focused confectionery company (with a potentially retained UK listing) rather than being paid c.50% equity in a lower-growth US-listed conglomerate.

As an entirely family-controlled entity, it is very difficult to gauge Ferrero’s stance, motivation or its financing capacity (if not a merger). Being left on the sidelines of consolidation taking place around them is unlikely to be an attractive proposition (like Grolsch in beer, a link into one of the majors would be attractive sooner rather than later). However, the family has to consider whether it would be prepared to dilute its control and would Cadbury shareholders be prepared to own shares in an entity with a large family holding (potentially one-third to one half)?

NH:
We believe that if this scenario were proposed as a potential defence measure by Cadbury, the potential value the market might be prepared to award it would not be materially different to that of a revised Kraft offer (820p), but investors may have a preference to back this longer-term potentially more attractive story than sell now to one (currently) uncontested bidder.
NH:
Back-of-the-envelope cost and revenue synergy valuation scenario for a Ferrero-Cadbury combination
•We assume the combination could derive savings of GBP 350m, which amounts to 3% of combined sales.

•Revenue synergies are assumed at 3% of combined sales at a 60% contribution margin.

•Less restructuring charges of GBP 610m (1.75x cost savings).

•50% for Cadbury shareholders amounts to140p a share.

NH:
sorry
NH:
that’s so long
NH:
but Ferrero is a much bigger company
NH:
than we gave it credit for
NH:
and it makes more than just chocolates
NH:
Tic-Tacs
MJ:
As you can see
MJ:
FT Alpha is angling for a goodie bag from them
NH:
Thanks Monty
MJ:
So Nomura are taking this seriously
NH:
yes
NH:
but Monty isn’t
MJ:
Well
MJ:
As Monty says
MJ:
This could well haev been a bankers pitch
MJ:
or a advisory tactic to give Cadbury better leverage
MJ:
to show Kraft is not the only game in town
NH:
Or it could be utter rubbish.
MJ:
indeed
MJ:
But having taken a look at some of the numbers on this
MJ:
the two companies would compliment each other
MJ:
So al least there is some sense here, even if the story seems unlikely to happen
MJ:
Cadbury don’t have much going on in Germany, France and Italy
MJ:
Ferrero on the other hand do
MJ:
Thats the logic
NH:
Okay, we should move on
NH:
but not without putting up a share price
Cadbury (CBRY:LSE): Last: 781.00, down 0.5 (-0.06%), High: 783.50, Low: 780.00, Volume: 1.33m
NH:
thanks Miles
NH:
covered that subject well
11:23AM
NH:
Right some breaking news
NH:
from Lloyds
NH:
BISCHOFF BOUGHT 250,000 LLOYDS SHRS OF 25P/SHR AT 89.691P/SHR
NH:
(LYO – nothing to do with me that. My colleague)
Lloyds Banking Group (LLOY:LSE): Last: 90.50, up 0.01 (+0.01%), High: 90.91, Low: 89.25, Volume: 16.31m
NH:
jeepers
NH:
RAW everywhere this morning
RAW is market chatter – information that has not been formally tested through traditional journalistic channels (PRs etc). The story might be complete rubbish, but if we believe there is some substance to it we will say so. Either way, Reader Beware.
MJ:
Hmmm
NH:
this sounds unbelieveable
NH:
but still
NH:
Hearing a rumour of BP for Dana Petroleum at 1700p.
MJ:
Uh oh
NH:
Now, RWE makes more sense
NH:
but BP??
Dana Petroleum (DNX:LSE): Last: 1,269, up 2 (+0.16%), High: 1,270, Low: 1,253, Volume: 131.29k
MJ:
What was the other story you were going on about this morning?
NH:
well, it wasn’t Mead Johnson
NH:
had my fill of baby milk
NH:
it was International Power
NH:
loads of calls this morning
NH:
something going on etc
NH:
bid etc
MJ:
Well there was this stuff in the Mail this morning
NH:
what, the Warren Puffett stuff
MJ:
yeah – thats the one
MJ:
Not going away this story
NH:
no, the market seems to be convinced that he is stalking a UK utility company
NH:
ahead of the Ofwat pricing news
NH:
next week
MJ:
Here is the market report from the Mail, for those who havent seen it
MJ:
Legendary billionaire investor Warren Buffett has been in the news a lot recently. His proclamation last week that the ‘financial panic is over’ and that ‘the bottom has come in stocks’ excited the bulls and put stock markets on both sides of the Pond in the mood for a strong pre-Christmas run.
Those words came hard on the heels of his mega £16billion acquisition of the Burlington Northern Sante Fe railroad company, the septuagenarian’s biggest deal yet. Whispers now suggest that he is ready to go shopping in the UK’s utility sector.
Fingers were pointed at electricity generator International Power, which has in recent years often been mentioned in the same breath as French company Suez, US giant General Electric and Powergen owner Eon. Professional punters switched on to the shares, chasing them 3.2p higher to 269.4p.

International Power has a diversified portfolio of interests in over 40 power stations in more than 20 countries around the world. It recently sold its entire Czech business to Czech-Slovak investment firm J&T Group, banking a tasty £420million profit on the £619million sale.

NH:
hmmmm
NH:
not sure what to make of that
NH:
and I don’t know who would be a good fit for IPR
NH:
they have extensive operations in the US
NH:
and Australia
NH:
seems a little too international for Warren
NH:
not sure EDF would want it
NH:
which probably leaves an infrastructure fund
MJ:
Would be an uncharecteristic move
NH:
but could they afford it?
NH:
that said
NH:
it has underpeformed in the past six months
NH:
by 1.95%
11:30AM
MJ:
On a seperate note
MJ:
We were wondering where Monkey is
NH:
I think he posted
MJ:
I only ask
NH:
his UBSOFTD
MJ:
Beacuse he had a bit of a run in with Tracy around bank last night
NH:
really
NH:
what happened?
MJ:
Apparently, she saw him across the road, and yelled “MONKEY” , “MONEKY”
NH:
I bet he blanked her.
MJ:
And embarassed him a bit
MJ:
Is that true?
NH:
well
NH:
a woman
NH:
yelling Monkey down the street
NH:
could be a touch embarassing
MJ:
Glad to see he is here
NH:
right
NH:
Sorry Taxloss, that’s got to go
11:33AM
NH:
on that note
NH:
let’s move on
NH:
the FSA have fined another stockbroker
NH:
The Financial Services Authority (FSA) has today fined Mr Alexei Krilov-Harrison, a former stockbroker at Pacific Continental Securities UK Ltd (PCS), £24,000 for using inside information about an AIM-traded company to encourage his clients to buy its shares.
On 28 March 2007, Krilov-Harrison received inside information that Provexis Plc (Provexis), an AIM-traded company, had signed a major contract with an international food company. The announcement was due to be released to the market in two days and the company’s share price was expected to increase as a result.
Over the course of the next 24 hours, Krilov-Harrison made three calls to clients in which he disclosed that Provexis was going to announce a major contract shortly which would make its share price ‘jump up substantially’. Using the inside information, he encouraged some of his clients to buy Provexis shares.
NH:
On 30 March 2007, Provexis announced the new contract and its share price increased by 19.81% from the closing price on the previous day.
Krilov-Harrison committed market abuse by using inside information about the announcement and the likely impact on Provexis’ share price as part of his sales tactics for persuading clients to buy shares. The FSA found that Krilov-Harrison’s actions had been deliberate and been motivated by his desire to get a bonus.
MJ:
£24,000?
MJ:
How much did he make?
NH:
dunno
NH:
and the fine is not as big as the one imposed on Regal Pets
NH:
but then again
NH:
that was a much bigger case
11:34AM
MJ:
Oh yes
MJ:
What do we make of this Regal fine?
NH:
well
NH:
it’s a record fine for Aim
NH:
but is £600,000
NH:
and a public censure
NH:
enough to stop this happening again?
NH:
I mean shareholders lost millions because of these misleading statements
MJ:
maybe I should give Frank another ring, ask what he thinks?
NH:
well, here’s the strange thing
NH:
Frank was not mentioned in the report
NH:
not once
NH:
nor where Evolution
NH:
the company’s nomad at the time
NH:
and as Vintage says
NH:
shareholders are being punished again
NH:
for the acts of previous management
MJ:
Well, Frank is a big shareholder
MJ:
Not that that makes things any better
NH:
and why oh why
NH:
did the FSA wash its hands of the case
NH:
and give it to the Aim disicplinary Panel?
NH:
all very odd
MJ:
Does not look good
MJ:
Especially in these new tough action times
NH:
but the report does do one thing
NH:
it should serve as a reminder to investors
NH:
to take drilling reports
NH:
with a massive pinch salt
NH:
have a look at a couple of examples
NH:
from today’s report
NH:

On 25 April 2005, Regal announced a share placing raising almost £45 million. On the same day, Regal made an announcement regarding the progress of testing on the Kallirachi-2 well and stated that:

“The bottom prospective reservoir, a Dolomite formation, has been tested with light oil shows, good reservoir pressure and porosity but low permeability. Further testing of the upper three prospective reservoirs (including reservoirs corresponding to Prinos Group equivalent) continues.”

60.

The 25 April 2005 statement omitted the fact that eight DSTs had been completed and to that date evidenced non-commercial flow rates for the Kallirachi-2 well. The announcement conveyed the incorrect impression that the three higher level reservoirs which were yet to be tested were of the same importance as the Dolomitic zone. Having considered the available evidence, the ADC has concluded that after failure at the Dolomitic zone, Regal might reasonably have proceeded with tests at the three higher levels but would have been aware that the chances of success were diminishing. This risk of failure is not reflected in Regal’s announcement. It therefore conveyed a misleading impression as to the likelihood that testing of those three reservoirs would produce positive results.

61.

In the circumstances, the ADC considers that Regal breached AIM Rule 9 by not taking reasonable care to ensure that all relevant matters regarding the testing of the Kallirachi-2 well were accurately and fully disclosed in the announcement on 25 April 2005.

NH:
27 February 2004 announcement

47.

On 27 February 2004, Regal made a further announcement which repeated the estimate of “up to 650MMstb (240 MMbbls recoverable)”. On the same day, Regal announced a placing raising £37.5 million.

48.

Regal failed to take reasonable care when making this announcement, in breach of AIM Rule 9. The 27 February 2004 announcement misleadingly focused on the upper estimate and failed to explain why this figure had increased from the previously reported estimates contained in the Kavala Evaluation Report. The announcement also omitted a description of the best and low prospective resource estimates of the Kallirachi Prospect.

49.

On 6 April 2004, Regal announced that there were “expected recoverable reserves of up to 240MMbbls in the Kallirachi oil discovery” and that “the discovery of the exciting Kallirachi prospect … has provided considerable upside to the potential of Regal becoming a leading hydrocarbon producer in the region”.

50.

This announcement was misleading and Regal failed to take reasonable care when making it, in breach of AIM Rule 9.

NH:
it goes on and on
NH:
in the report
NH:
loads of examples
MJ:
It really is a stunning case
MJ:
And should serve as a lesson to people punting in small cap oil explorers
MJ:
MJ:
you can get
MJ:
etc
NH:
indeed
NH:
of course
NH:
we should stress that all of this has nothing to do with Regal’s exisiting management
NH:
as Merrill notes
NH:
The LSE AIM Disciplinary Committee announced this morning of its decision to
impose a fine of GBP600k in respect of breaches of AIM Rules relating to Regal’s
notifications during the period from June 2003 to May 2005 regarding its Kallirachi
prospect in Greece. The announcement was expected and indicates the divorce
of the company from what may be regarded as its chequered past.
The result of the Kallarachi-1 exploration well was announced in November 2003
and was judged to be significant success, with initial logs interpreted to have
encountered a 61m net pay zone, consistent with the company’s pre-drill
resource estimate. In February 2004, management provided a further detailed
interpretation of the well results indicating the field to contain 240mb of
recoverable 2P oil reserves.
NH:
The Kalarachi-2 appraisal well was spudded in October 2004 with an objective of
testing a further significant upside case as-well as confirming the 240mb field
reserve estimate. The well result was announced in May 2005 as being effectively
a dry hole. Unsurprisingly this news astounded the market, with the shares falling
by c80% over the following weeks and the integrity of the then management team
being severely questioned by the UK investment community and press. The
announcement also led to a series of regulatory investigations into the company’s
behaviour by the UK FSA (now discontinued)
and AIM.
NH:
and a sector watcher
NH:

This morning the AIM disciplinary committee announced the resolution of the disciplinary case against RPT – over four years after the breaches of the code took place. It’s important to note that this sorry episode has nothing at all to do with current management, occurring well before David Greer and team took over Regal’s management. Furthermore, management has consistently told us that resolving this issue has been a high priority for them, and has been consistently open and honest about the ongoing disciplinary procedure.
NH:
This should have no impact on either your views on RPT nor on the price – I really can’t emphasise enough how irrelevant this is to the Regal story today. And I think it remains an extremely compelling story – we expect to see some serious operational progress in the next update from the company, and with the management team’s operational abilities, we are excited about the potential of the SV58 well flow from the B sands, news on progress on SV61, which we expect to be drilled in record time for these wells in Ukraine, news on the fishing in MEX-106 as well as announcement of the next well on the SV license. All in all, we BUY RPT at these levels.
Regal Petroleum (RPT:LSE): Last: 100.50, down 3 (-2.90%), High: 102.75, Low: 100.00, Volume: 1.21m
11:42AM
NH:
Actually while we are in the oily world
NH:
a couple of other things to look at
NH:
Dragon Oil
MJ:
Ah yes
MJ:
ENOC have called shareholders bluff
MJ:
Said they are not going to raise the offer
MJ:
and that is final
NH:
(Babcock, VTG. you overweight in this space Taxloss?)
NH:
well
NH:
this is probably not surprising
NH:
does the fractured DGo shareholder base
NH:
really have the muscle to block this
MJ:
I wouldnt think so
MJ:
Not big enough
MJ:
Especially not to joust with a 55 per cent holder
NH:
but
NH:
well
NH:
Evolution disagrees with our theory
NH:
they reckon it could be blocked
NH:
EVO TAKE – ENOC’s refusal to increase its offer price for Dragon comes as no surprise to us – after all, the delay between when the preliminary approach was made in June and when the 455p offer was issued earlier this month is widely believed to be a result of ENOC struggling to raise finance. Investors holding out for a higher price will be disappointed and it is becoming increasingly likely that the offer will be rebuffed.
NH:
DETAILS – ENOC has said it will not raise its offer above 455p and, in the event the offer is unsuccessful, will remain a committed long term holder. Separately Carmignac Gestion, a 0.58% holder, yesterday said it would reject the offer. This comes hard on the heels of rejections from Ballie Gifford and Noster Capital last week. 25% of the minority shareholders need to reject the offer for it not to be binding and we are now up to c10%. The remaining 15% could be achieved with just three shareholders.
NH:
VALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION – If the deal fails, Dragon’s lack of an exploration portfolio means it effectively becomes a play on the oil price. Not being bulls of the oil price, we see better opportunities elsewhere in the sector.
MJ:
All well and good. But another 15 per cent will be hard to come by
NH:
indeed
NH:
as the oil sector watcher notes
NH:
A lot of people asking our opinion on the merger arb here. Obviously the DGO Board is out this morning saying that the ENOC 455p offer is the final one, and that ENOC won’t raise it, despite opposition from Baillie Gifford and Carmignac. The maths here are simple: ENOC needs 75% acceptance from independent shareholders – so 25% x 49% = c.12.25% is the blocking number. BG controls 4.2% and Carmignac 0.6% – so whilst we agree that DGO is worth more than the offer price, we do not believe such a fractured shareholder base offers enough potential for the resistance to be successful – so we BUY DGO for the c.5% in the merger arb here.
MJ:
thanks for that
11:45AM
NH:
Right
NH:
response from Minerva
NH:
to hostile bid
NH:
just hit the tape
NH:
which Miles is just going to put up
MJ:
The Board of Minerva plc (“Minerva” or the “Company”) notes the unsolicited
offer announced this morning by KiFin Limited for the entire issued and to be
issued ordinary share capital of Minerva at 50 pence per share in cash (the
“Offer”). The Board met this morning to consider the terms of the Offer and has
concluded that this is an opportunistic and unwelcome attempt to acquire Minerva
at a price which significantly undervalues the Company and its future prospects.
The Board therefore rejects this proposal.

The Board is focused on maximising the value of the Company’s existing portfolio
for Minerva’s shareholders. In particular, shareholders should be aware that the
Company has been in discussions with a number of parties with respect to a
disposal of its Wigmore Street, London W1 property and has received offers which
represent material premia to the book value as at 30 June 2009.

NH:
hmmm
NH:
what was Wigmore valued at
NH:
need to get the accounts out
NH:
stock above 50p on that
NH:
up 12.75p to 50p
MJ:
Right – have you got any comment on this from earlier?
NH:
I don’t think anyone follows the company anymore
NH:
I do have some comment on the British Land figures
NH:
which seemed to be in line
NH:
NAV rose etc
11:48AM
NH:
Let’s change tack for a moment
NH:
and look at some Macro stuff
MJ:
Why not
MJ:
UK Inflation data out
MJ:
UK CPI at 1.5 per cent
MJ:
And here is the FT take
NH:
oh
NH:
do paste that
MJ:
Inflation jumped in October as last year’s steep fall in petrol prices dropped out of the annual comparison, ending over a year of persistently falling inflation.
The consumer prices index was 1.5 per cent higher in October than a year earlier, compared with an equivalent CPI inflation rate of 1.1 per cent in September.
The rate of inflation, as measured by the retail price index, often seen as a better guide to the standard of living, was still in negative territory but also moved higher. RPI inflation increased to -0.8 per cent in October, having stood at -1.4 per cent in September.
The big monthly rise in inflation bore little relation to changes in prices this October, but resulted from the rapidly falling petrol prices last year as the world economy went into temporary meltdown.
MJ:
I think this
MJ:
is the key bit
MJ:
The big monthly rise in inflation bore little relation to changes in prices this October, but resulted from the rapidly falling petrol prices last year as the world economy went into temporary meltdown.
MJ:
There can be a illusion effect with this data
NH:
(Ta Henley)
NH:
any comment on the numbers?
MJ:
Ill have a dig around
MJ:
Sure I can pull somthing out
MJ:
Here is Howard Archer
MJ:
October’s spike up in inflation looks set to be the start of a relatively short, sharp rising trend as unfavourable base effects resulting from the plunge in oil prices a year ago and VAT changes exert upward pressure. However, while consumer price inflation is likely to reach 2.5% and could well go higher still in the early months of 2010, this spike up should prove temporary and inflation is likely to moderate thereafter given substantial excess capacity and likely muted recovery. The Bank of England has indicated that it will look through the near time spike up in inflation and will focus on price prospects over the longer-term. Consequently, interest rates still look set to stay down at 2.0% until at least late-2010. Further Quantitative Easing remains possible, but we suspect unlikely.
MJ:
Inflation spiked up in line with expectations in October, as it was pushed up primarily by unfavourable base effects resulting from the sharp fall in fuel and lubricants prices a year ago. The recent downward trend in food prices also came to an end in October, while higher second-hand car prices also had a significant upward impact on inflation.

There was little change in core inflation, which edged up to 1.8% in October from 1.7% in September, thereby staying in the 1.5-1.8% range that it has held since February. Interestingly, service sector inflation fell to a record low of 2.3% in October.

Consumer price inflation is likely to rise appreciably further over the next few months as it is pushed up by ongoing unfavourable base effects resulting from the substantial falling back in oil prices in the final months of 2008 and early months of 2009, as well as last December’s Value Added Tax cut from 17.5% to 15.0% dropping out of the calculation. Furthermore, VAT will rise back up to 17.5% in January. Sterling’s weakness is likely to have some further upward impact on inflation in the near term at least. Consequently, consumer price inflation looks set to rise above 2.0% before the end of this year and to reach 2.5% or higher in the first quarter of 2010.

MJ:
However, we expect inflation to ease back thereafter as base effects become less unfavourable and underlying pressures are largely contained by substantial excess capacity, muted recovery, wage moderation and an ongoing need for retailers to price competitively in the face of still limited consumer spending. We also expect sterling to firm to a limited extent in 2010.
NH:
what’s sterling doing on the back of that?
MJ:
Pound is at $1.6787 agianst the US dollar
MJ:
And a euro buys 0.8877GBP
NH:
thanks for that
11:53AM
NH:
Miles what are Legal & General doing?
MJ:
Down today
Legal and General Group (LGEN:LSE): Last: 85.15, down 2.15 (-2.46%), High: 87.70, Low: 85.10, Volume: 10.27m
NH:
that’s interesting
NH:
just been sent a note
NH:
on the back of the news from Moody’s
NH:
that in the next 2 days they will be changing the ratings on a number of hybrid and subordinate securities
MJ:
So what does that mean then?
NH:
will it is very bad news for Legals
MJ:
Downwards I presume?
NH:
because they have lots of hybrid paper
NH:
mainly bank stuff
NH:
if Moody’s go through with what they said in July
NH:
40% of this paper will go down one notch
MJ:
ooch
NH:
25% by 3-4 notches
NH:
and 10% by 5 or more
MJ:
ouch
MJ:
not nice
NH:
indeed
NH:
here’s a we bit of desk comment
NH:
from a leading investment bank
NH:
The downgrade implied above could see mark downs to the tune of 20-50% (potentially wiping out most of their free capital)…Clearly if the value of assets is falling sharply and policy-related liabilities are unchanged there is a strong chance they will need to raise. Furthermore, the company have repositioned themselves away from their key competancy of high margin bulk purchase products (given capital requirements) towards lower margin retail savings products. The issue here is that they have built out costly bulk purchase infrastructure, and the economics of pushing wafer thin profitability ISA type products down this pipe is questionable.
NH:
now L&G
NH:
has £900m of free capital
NH:
which the above thinks could be a risk
MJ:
And what does this mean for the bid rumours? The split and all that
NH:
not sure, but I guess they will be back around again.
11:56AM
NH:
Right
NH:
it is getting close to midday
NH:
and there are few more things we need to look at
MJ:
Yes, that Cable and Wireles demerger
MJ:
seems to have gone down well
Cable and Wireless (CW:LSE): Last: 141.90, up 3.6 (+2.60%), High: 143.60, Low: 136.40, Volume: 22.74m
NH:
was just flicking through the docs before we came on air
NH:
and a couple of things stick out
NH:
the pension fund trustees need to approve
NH:
and
NH:
also
NH:
this
NH:
There will be no automatic vesting on demerger of executive incentive plans, including the LTIP. Subject to shareholder approval, schemes will continue until their current maturity dates.

MJ:
Is that a concession? have they backed down?
NH:
not sure, but interesting though. This message is clear: this demerger is not all about getting John Pluthero
NH:
a huge payout
MJ:
Any comment on this?
NH:
yes, I have got a good note from Cazenove
NH:
which pulls together all the details from the doc
NH:
C&W – [CW.L CW LN] 138p Stock In-line Sector Overweight
C&W has announced further details of its proposed demerger. A conference call will follow today at 9am (+44207 162 0077, ID: 851489). The key points are as follows, see attached PDF for further details.

Separation to be effected by a demerger of Worldwide, aim to complete by 31 March 2010.

Balance sheet to be strengthened by £1.1bn of planned financing including a £200m convertible bond issue launched today. Around £700m of the £1.1bn equates to refinancing (including bonds maturing in 2012) with the remainder being an increase in cash and facilities. Worldwide’s cash and facilities increase by c. £300m to total £500m with CWI’s increased by c. $200m to total c. $800m once the 2012 bonds have been repaid in 2012 ($311m).

NH:
International to have 0.8x net debt to EBITDA (based on EBITDA guidance of $880-900m for 09/10). Worldwide to have gross cash of c. £200m with negligible net debt.
Richard Lapthorne to be Chairman of CWI, Tony Rice, CEO and Tim Pennington, CFO.

John Pluthero to be Chairman of Worldwide and Jim Marsh to be CEO. We do not expect John Pluthero’s day to day involvement to change.
Discussions with the pension trustees are ongoing and C&W expects that the pension assets and liabilities will be split equally between Worldwide and CWI. At its recent interim results, C&W announced an IAS 19 deficit of £305m with £75m of additional funding agreed.

NH:
There will be no automatic vesting on demerger of executive incentive plans, including the LTIP. Subject to shareholder approval, schemes will continue until their current maturity dates.

No details provided on future dividend policy at this stage although management highlights the 12% dividend growth (to 9.5p) expected for 09/10 as a sign of confidence in future prospects.

NH:
Initial conclusions
Positives, in our view, include the expected completion date and change to the vesting criteria on the incentive plans to ensure management’s interests remain aligned with shareholders.
Concerns are likely to focus on the scale of the refinancing planned, especially the issue of a bond that will convert into c. 5% of C&W’s share capital.
Pensions have still to be resolved but we suspect management must be sufficiently confident that an acceptable agreement can be reached to have come this far.
Management of each business as expected. We think it would be wrong to assume any change in the role of John Pluthero as Chairman of Worldwide.
NH:
Valuation
Today’s financing will lead to an increase in interest costs of c. £15m per annum, which equates to a c. 5% reduction in earnings for 2010/11E. Other than that our current estimates are broadly as we indicated at the recent results. We would highlight that EPS remains a very volatile number, affected by both LTIP charges and UK tax credits. EBITDA multiples (5.0x vs sector on 5.0x), PE (12x, sector 9.4x) and dividend yield (7.0%, sector 6.4%) look attractive given the growth being reported. However, equity free cashflow continues to lag the improvements seen at EBITDA. On a reported basis, we expect C&W’s free cash flow yield to be only 3% this year against 12% for the sector. Given the planned demerger, a sum-of-the-parts approach is clearly appropriate. We can now publish our revised sum-of-the-parts valuation of 160p compared to a range of 160-170p indicated on the day of the interim results. This is supported via DCF calculations and is illustrated below. Following today’s announcement in terms of capital structure and pensions and an estimated LTIP allocation, CWI’s equity is worth around 50p per share (£1.3bn) and Worldwide’s 110p (£2.8bn).
11:59AM
NH:
Right a couple of other announcements to catch up with
NH:
Wellstream
NH:
an old takeover favourite
NH:
big downgrades coming through on the back of today’s statement
NH:
here’s Caz again
NH:
Following today’s IMS we make the following changes to our 2010 earnings assumptions:
We reduce our throughput at the Newcastle plant from 200nkm/year to 150nkm/year at the
beginning of 2010, but leave our YE2010 assumption at 200nkm/year. The plant capacity is
300nkm/year. This reduces total throughput in 2010 from 200nkm to 175nkm and utilisation
from 67% to 58% on average for 2010.
On the back of lower utilisation we reduce our fabrication margin assumption for 2010 from
17% to 14%, compared to an estimated 21.5%, 26.5%, 17.0% in 20072009E.
On the back of these changes we cut our 2010 EPS by 26% from 36.6p to 26.9p. We see
consensus (Bloomberg) which is currently at 37.5p (range 23.0 – 46.2p) falling by a similar
amount.
A further 1% decline in our 2010 fabrication margin assumption cuts our 2010 EPS estimate by
a further 9%. Dropping our utilisation assumption at Newcastle from 58% to 50% cuts our 2010
EPS by estimate 7%.
MJ:
ouwwch
NH:
shares down 37p at 538p
12:01PM
MJ:
Lorkan – I think that is a good idea
MJ:
On the competion front, Nomura have offered us four pairs of free tickets to the varisityrugby match
MJ:
Which if members of the ROTL are interetsed in, we can give away as aa prize
NH:
at Twickenham
MJ:
So
MJ:
FTSE close onthis Friday
MJ:
guesses please
MJ:
Four nearest answers will get the tickets
NH:
and here is the prize
NH:
Nomura International plc cordially invites you to the
Nomura Varsity Match
Oxford and Cambridge go head to head at Twickenham
Thursday 10 December 2009
12.00 Pre-match hospitality
14.00 Kick off
15.30 Post-match hospitality
RSVP by Tuesday 1 December 2009
MJ:
NH:
so that’s guess the FTSE 100
NH:
by Friday’s close
NH:
and no
NH:
the Squid is not being auctioned at the moment
MJ:
(@Ross: shhsss)
MJ:
Wow, lots of numbers on the right
NH:
no cash alternative on offer
NH:
just the tickets
NH:
whether you can make it or not
NH:
and please don’t tout them outside the ground
MJ:
FT Alphaville reserves the right to indescriminatly disqualify contestants
NH:
yes
MJ:
etc
NH:
we are arbitary
NH:
in all our decisions
12:06PM
NH:
Market wise
NH:
people wanted some views on Enterprise Inns
NH:
seems
NH:
the disappointment is due to the tail end pubs
NH:
which just aren’t stabilising
NH:
here’s Citigroup
NH:
We continue to be cautious on Enterprise Inns. Trading remains under pressure
and we think there is 5-7% downside risk to our forecasts following FY09 results.
Management is confident that the group’s bank debt facility can be refinanced
during FY10, but we expect higher interest costs even if a refinancing is achieved.
FY 09 results disappoint. EBITDA was £445m -1% below our forecast of £450m.
PBT was £208m -2% below our forecast of £213m. Fully diluted EPS was 30.6p
-1% below our forecast of 30.8p.
NH:
Current trading continues to be tough. FY09 LFL EBITDA per pub was -11% – in
line with H1. No numbers on current trading were given other than the statement
that 2010 will be equally challenging. We currently forecast -5% LFL profits for
2010 and we see downside risks to this number. For comparison Punch reported
a continuation of its -11% performance in FY10.
Debt reduction less than expected. A net 364 pubs were sold in the year taking the
estate to 7,399 pubs and raising a net £106m – slightly ahead of book value. Net
debt was lower by only £142m, compared to our forecast of a £178m net debt
reduction. The estate value was written down by -7% in the year – this is in line
with previous management comments.
NH:
Management confident of refinancing. There is no material update on the group’s
refinancing other than the statement that the company has had detailed
discussions with its banks in October. The board remains confident that adequate
facilities will be available at the time of the refinancing – the group’s £1bn bank
facility needs to be refinanced by May 2011 – at which time we think drawings on
the facility will be nearer £600m-£650m.
NH:
Downgrades likely. We currently forecast EBITDA of £434m for FY10 and see
downside risks to this number. After allowing for the lower-than-expected FY09
performance, the loss of £9m EBITDA from disposed assets, and a likely 5-7%
LFL profit decline, we think EBITDA for FY10 could be in the range of £405m-
£410m. After allowing for lower interest costs from cash raised on disposals we
think overall PBT forecasts could be 5-7% lower than our current £201m forecast.
Enterprise Inns (ETI:LSE): Last: 122.30, down 11.3 (-8.46%), High: 131.40, Low: 120.30, Volume: 2.51m
12:08PM
NH:
And finally
NH:
no ML
NH:
would be complete
NH:
without a bit on the miners
NH:
so here goes
NH:
further rumours
NH:
this time from Down Under
NH:
that the Rio/BHP iron venture will not go through
NH:
and BHP will bid again
NH:
this is from the AFR
NH:
Next week the UK’s Takeover Panel moratorium on BHP Billiton making
another hostile tilt at Rio Tinto comes to an end and there will be no
official reason why BHP could not morph from friendly joint venture
partner to predatory stalker once again. Ask most fund managers and they
will tell you there is no good reason for BHP to turn hostile on RIO,
when it is already gaining most of the synergies that a takeover would
offer for a fraction of the price through the Pilbara iron ore joint
venture.
NH:
Further, they argue, the competition regulators would stand in the way
of any attempt to join the two companies wholesale.

But the iron ore joint venture is a long way from completion. It has its
own gauntlet to run with the European, Chinese and Japanese competition
authorities, and rumours are rife that the two sides are finding it hard
to nut out the details of a deal.

NH:
At the same time, improving iron ore markets and sentiment towards the
beleaguered RIO are making the deal look increasingly lopsided in favour
of BHP, putting pressure on RIO to try to negotiate a better outcome for
its shareholders.

Under the current terms, BHP will pay USD5.8bn to RIO (once all
expansion spending during the negotiation period have been netted out)
to create a joint venture of two equal partners, sharing mines,
infrastructure and product mix, but each marketing their own half of the
total production. Both sides are publicly standing firm behind the joint
venture but each has the ability to upset the deal (which is due to be
formalised into a binding agreement by December 5) for its own ends.

The threat of another hostile bid by BHP may be enough to stop RIO
pushing for a higher equalisation payment, particularly when you
consider the damage caused to the reputation of its board by the 2008
BHP tilt.

Rio Tinto (RIO:LSE): Last: 3,250, down 55 (-1.66%), High: 3,305, Low: 3,219, Volume: 2.04m
BHP Billiton (BLT:LSE): Last: 1,865, down 1 (-0.05%), High: 1,872, Low: 1,841, Volume: 3.14m
12:09PM
MJ:
Just to be clear – guessing on the FTSE is for this Friday.
NH:
and here’s a note from Liberum
NH:
looking at whether BHP might bid again
NH:
BHP walked away from its bid for Rio Tinto on 27th November 2008. With the first anniversary coming up next week, BHP can re-bid for Rio Tinto at a lower offer price, we take this opportunity to revisit the BHP-RIO merger investment case and a potential bid price. In short, we think the probability of a re-bid is low, but not immaterial (up to 30%?).
NH:
Were it to happen, the upside is clearly in RIO – with the old offer of 3.4 BHPB for 1 RIO on a rights adjusted basis now equivalent to a ratio of 2.2 (vs current ratio 1.77), a re-bid on the ‘same’ terms would imply a RIO share price of £41.60 (26% upside). For BHPB such a deal would still be accretive post synergies (6% to proforma EPS) and would be unquestionably a transformational deal at a good price.
NH:
By way to alternatives we estimate it would take a $24bn buy-back by BHPB to get the same EPS growth but for no strategic gain. The issue on a re-bid is on the RIO side – they were not for the deal on those terms then and probably wouldn’t be now – even with their new pragmatic Chair. Whatever the outcome, we see RIO as still having good value as a stand alone play here and would urge investors stay overweight the stock. In the short term at least, it along with expectations if another mega deal will be a factor which continues to weigh on BHPB’s relative valuation – though again on absolute valuation metrics it remains attractive.

NH:
A sub-30% chance of a re-bid?
With these considerations in mind we a sub 30% probability of BHP re-bidding for Rio in the next 12 months. We are unable to rule out BHP coming back for Rio as the company is currently loaded with cash of $10.8bn which potentially be used to sweeten the offer and / or repay Rio’s debt after the merger and; Rio Tinto remains the best target by far for BHPB on account of its transformational scale; its incomparable asset quality and compelling fit by geography, commodity and culture.

NH:
Running the numbers show the deal makes sense at the ‘old’ 3.4:1 terms
We have re-run BHPB’s old all share offers based on the newly re-based RIO share price that reflects their deeply discounted rights issue in the summer. As such a 3.0 and then 3.4 shares (before rights) for each Rio Tinto share offer implies 2.0 and 2.2 BHP shares respectively in current metrics. Figure 1 shows that if BHP were to offer the same value ratios to Rio Tinto’s shareholders as it did during the two phases of the last bid they would imply bid premia of 11% and 26% to the current RIO share price respectively. Were BHPB to re-bid we feel they would have great difficulty advocating a higher ratio than the one they could have closed on this time last year – so we feel the old offer (at 2.2:1 in ‘new’ RIO currency) is a maximum share offer for RIO.
12:10PM
NH:
Daddy
NH:
that’s a cheap shot
NH:
we were offered these tickets yesterday
NH:
we could have taken them for ourselves
NH:
but no
MJ:
Its not like we get paid by the comment or anything…
NH:
we decided to give them to you
NH:
our readers
MJ:
Anyways
MJ:
Are we done?
NH:
a couple more things
NH:
this
NH:
last night a HUGE clip of extreme crash puts traded in SPX: the Dec’11 250 put traded a HUGE notional value of $8.5bn, for the TINY cost of about 10bps of notional….
NH:
which I thought was kinda interesting
NH:
and some Euro RAW
MJ:
That is interetsing
MJ:
The bit before
MJ:
People should take that into account maybe when making their guesses
MJ:
But, what is this EuroRAW?
NH:
MicroSoft for SAP

- Hearings strength being attributed to vauge, renewed takeover chatter
- Rumor states that MSFT interested party @ €42
- Reminder: On Nov 11 -SAP.GE: CEO: Does not see company as takeover target -
Die Welt

NH:
hang on
NH:
those S&P puts are 250
NH:
no one thinks it is going to that
NH:
do they
MJ:
Surely not?
NH:
if we are trading at that by 2011
NH:
it won’t be the stock market we are worrying about
NH:
ah
NH:
a suggestion has arrived about that trade
NH:
might have been a buy to cover from a put spread that someone put on a while back ( i.e when we were trading at ~700 someone bought a 500 put and sold the 250 to cheapen)… and are now covering it

NH:
that might explain
NH:
(Taxloss VTG stuff on its way)
MJ:
Right
MJ:
Lunch beckons
NH:
it does
NH:
i am off to Roast
MJ:
I am going to Table
NH:
Table?
NH:
where’s that?
MJ:
Just near the office – does good pasta etc
NH:
what, the sort of place you would take a contact?
MJ:
More a social call really
MJ:
What about you?
NH:
oh, me talking to some oil guys
NH:
who made a packet load selling their company a while back
NH:
and have a new vehicle
NH:
which I think could be interesting
MJ:
Well, enjoy
NH:
and no
NH:
it is not Dave Lennigas
NH:
don’t think he would come south of the river
NH:
his style is more St James’s’
MJ:
Right – thanks for all the comments. I will go through the various FTSE Friday close estimates a bit later
MJ:
Good luck
NH:
right
NH:
I had better dash
NH:
last chance to enter the
NH:
AV Varsity comp
NH:
all you have to do
NH:
is guess the FTSE 100 close on Friday
MJ:
Or should we leave it open for tomorrows session?
NH:
no, that’s not fair
NH:
they would have an advantage
MJ:
true
NH:
right
NH:
i must go
NH:
thanks for all the comments
NH:
and see you tomorrow
MJ:
Seeya
NH:
bye
Print