Wednesday 30 March 2011

BP Woes!

Further headaches for BP, amidst its unwinding Arctic frontier ambitions, with the news that the company and certain managers (incl. former CEO Tony Hayward) could potentially face manslaughter charges with regard to the Deepwater Horizon explosion that killed 11 people.

Obviously it isn't possible for me to assess what actually happened, and I do think it right that if certain persons are to blame then they should be made accountable BUT, I always find it strange that the witch hunt headlines are always aimed at BP despite:

"An official White House report into the accident concluded that blame should be shared among many parties, including BP, Transocean and Halliburton, which was responsible for sealing the well with cement." (www.telegraph.co.uk: Gulf of Mexico lawsuit fears hit BP share price).

“The investigation report provides critical new information on the causes of this terrible accident. It is evident that a series of complex events, rather than a single mistake or failure, led to the tragedy. Multiple parties, including BP, Halliburton and Transocean, were involved.

“To put it simply, there was a bad cement job and a failure of the shoe track barrier at the bottom of the well, which let hydrocarbons from the reservoir into the production casing. The negative pressure test was accepted when it should not have been, there were failures in well control procedures and in the blow-out preventer; and the rig’s fire and gas system did not prevent ignition.

“Based on the report, it would appear unlikely that the well design contributed to the incident, as the investigation found that the hydrocarbons flowed up the production casing through the bottom of the well,” Hayward said."


Hmmm.



Putting my investor hat back on, I am also starting to feel really frustrated at BP's inate ability to court controversy at almost every turn which is leading me question why, and if, I should be holding the shares.


From a limited resource point of view, coupled with a growing global demand, the long term prospects must still be compelling but the constant legal headwinds that seem to swirl around the company suggest a fractured management team with an inconsistent strategy.


It may be that this is just an "annus horribilis" for the company and, as an investor,  I just happen to have entered into it. It could also be assumed that the enforced changes to the management team need time to bed in. Only time will tell.


What I do know is that I picked them as a long term hold into my Value and Income portfolio and having re-instated the dividend the company has started to repay that with the first dividend having dropped into my account today but the uncertainty is still unsettling.
Quality earnings and the maintaining of a strong, growing dividend policy would be enough for me as quality would eventually win out.
But, does BP still have that quality or is it living on a past reputation.
Does the uncertainty and the currently unimpressive performance of the management outweigh the company's long term prospects?
Again, only time will tell.

BP @ 458.45, -8.1 (-1.74%)

Related article links:

BP links:

Tuesday 29 March 2011

The controversial Zimbabwe company grab Act is now law!

The controversial Zimbabwe company grab Act is now law!

Also overnight (didn't sleep very well!), I caught a news report on the recently introduced company grab act which is now law in Zimbabwe.
Under this act foreign companies with net assets of more than $1 (initial proposal was $500,000) are required by law to divest a 51% controlling stake to members of the indigenous population.
The first sector being targeted is mining and the share prices of London Stock Exchange quoted Platinum miners: Impala Platinum and Aquarius Platinum have been hit as a deadline for their plans/proposals has passed.


Seems to be more of the same from Zimbabwe but wouldn't a straight forward tax on production or licensing agreement be easier and more palatable?

Again it raises questions about the wisdom of Neil Woodford's investment (albeit a relatively minor £55m) into such a volatile region (earlier post: Portfolio housekeeping and additions: Talk Talk, Invesco Perpetual, Vodaphone, and Tesco).

Article links:

Budget Musings / NS&I Index linked savings

I personally haven't expected too much from the budget due to the parlous state of the country's finances but have taken note of a few things:

  • Income tax bands: personal allowance frozen at £7,475 for 2011/12  but there is a decrease of £2,400 in the basic rate limit, taking it to £35,000 (added to the personal allowance this is the starting point for the higher rate i.e £7,475 + £35,000). 
  • The 2010/11 personal allowance of £7,475 will increase to £8,105 in 2012/13, again with a corresponding decrease in the basic limit leaving the higher rate threshold unchanged at £42,475 (i.e. £8,105 + £34,370). Subsequent years will see the allowance increase by RPI at least, until the it reaches £10,000.
  • In 2011/12, personal allowances will reduce by 50p for every pound that income (incl. interest and dividends) is above £100k, so make use of pensions contributions, or other tax efficient investments to maximise your allowances
  • Indexation of direct taxes: the default indexation basis for all direct taxes incl. inheritance tax and capital gains tax will move to CPI from RPI from 2012/13
  • ISA limits: from April 2011/12 ISA limits will increase to £10,680, of which £5,340 can be saved in cash. Again, going forward, the default indexation for ISA limits will be CPI rather than RPI.
  • Pensions Tax relief: the annual limit will be £50,000 from 6 April 2011 but the lifetime limit will remain at £1.8m, reducing to £1.5m from April 2012 as previously announced. Unused annual allowances can be carried forward by up to 3 years.
  • Pensions annuitisation: the effective requirement for annuitisation will be moved to 77 (previously 75) from 6 April 2011. Savers, from the age of 75, can align multiple drawdown pension funds under the same scheme to enable consistent annual valuations.
  • Capital gains tax (CGT) annual exemption: rising in line with statutory indexation to £10,600. From April 2012 (as stated earlier), this will be in line with CPI not RPI
For business:
  • Corporation tax rates: set at: 20% (profits up to £300k); 27.5% (up to £1.5m); and 26% (over £1.5m) for the next year, following which the main rate of 26% will be cut by 1% per annum for the next 3 years to 23%
  • Bank Levy: will increase to negate any advantage from the reduction in corporation tax.
So, not too many brightspots. You can see that more people will steadily be brought into the higher rate tax threshold over the next few years. 
Most allowances will be indexed by the "Mickey Mouse" Consumer Prices Index (CPI), (no disrespect to Mickey Mouse intended), from the more realistic, and generally higher Retail Prices Index (RPI). Thanks again to Gordon Brown (the gift that keeps on giving) for bringing CPI in.

One bit of good news was the statement that National Savings Indexed Linked savings certificates are likely to resurrected in the coming year with a £2bn funding target being set by the government.
As ever there are terms and conditions but, in the past, these have proven a very useful investment tool for me, allowing me to balance my portfolio between cash investments and equities.
The investments are 100% government backed and have typically yielded a tax free RPI + 1% over a 3 or 5 year period. 
Maturing investments can also be rolled over without affecting any new issue take-up.
Until withdrawal, one could deposit up to £15,000 in each issue of the certificates.

Likely to be very popular, I just hope that they are left in place (rather than quickly withdrawn again) and subsequent issues made which, hopefully, will act as a competitive spur to the banks that they need to work harder to keep/raise funds.
We shall have to wait and see.

Random musings: Portugal; and BP


Portuguese woes!


Following on from last Wednesday's resignation by the Prime Minister of Portugal (due to rejection of his proposed austerity measures), I see that there is a tangible inevitability that Portugal will run out of money in the next few weeks to become the next domino in the line of failing sovereign states that need bailing out by the EU.
Overnight, 10 year Portuguese bonds have deteriorated to yield more than 8% as confidence leaks out of the country's finances (the face value goes down as the yield goes up as sellers try to offload them).

Markets seem to have got used to this sequence now though and seem to be less concerned than they are with other global events. I guess that with Ireland and Greece taking hand-outs there is now a survival formula....as long as the money tree keeps growing!
Other than that, speculators and ambulance chasers will again be looking at Spain or Italy as the next in line. 
There may be some short term knock to the recovery of banking and sales growth of life assurance companies which have sales in the Eurozone. I recall that many fell when Greece teetered on the brink of its own bailout.
There is probably also a sobering lesson to be learnt for the UK as well which had (until our own austerity measures were implemented) often been cited as the next most likely candidate after the "PIIGS": Portugal; Ireland; Italy; Greece; and Spain.
As an erstwhile former colleague of mine often remarks: 
"eventually somebody has to pay the piper!".

BP @ 467.15p, - 9.95 (- 2.09%)

Elsewhere, BP continues to experience the fall-out of its Russian debacle with:
- rivals looking to take their place in the tie-up with Rosneft;
- major shareholders, such as Standard Life, voicing opposition to any share swap without the benefits of Arctic exploration
- Chevron also voicing concerns and threatening to pull out of its own venture with Rosneft in the Black Sea.

All in all, it seems like BP has yet another CEO, Bob Dudley, intent on blundering his way around. Brought in with a clear view to rebuilding the company's reputation in America (he is American), he  appears to have gone after one of those career defining deals and walked into another legal minefield.
In this case it is a particular concern that he has "previous" in Russia and with the same TNK-BP partners! 
Some are also suggesting that the Chairman of BP, Carl-Henric Svanberg, has also taken his eye off the ball in not sufficiently reviewing or questioning the possible legal implications of the company's existing contracts with TNK-BP.
Prior to the results and surprise Rosneft announcement on the 1 Feb, the shares had been consolidating their post Gulf of Mexico recovery at 484p (after peaking at 509p on the 18th Jan). 
And, initially well received and with endorsement from the UK and Russian Governments the deal looked to be opening a new avenue for the company until the injunction from BP's existing Russian partners.
Markets don't like uncertainty and the relatively new  Chairman and CEO appear to have led the company out of one situation into another. All this on top of the powder keg in the Middle East!

How long before another change at the top of BP?

Monday 28 March 2011

IG: Interim Management Statement.

Amidst the recent turmoils it almost slipped my mind to note that IG came back to the market with an Interim Management Statement on the 10th March (www.iggroup.com: Interim Management Statement).

Cautious but positive, the statement detailed that the recent increase in market volatility and a growth in client numbers helped it to increase quarterly group revenues to £76m (2010: £69m) to the end of Feb.
The interim results released on the 18th Jan (Post: Has the sun set on IG Index?) saw the share price fall significantly from 528p (6th Jan) to 423p (24th Feb), on the back of a significant downward revision of the prospects in its Japanese investment so it is no surprise that:
"The troublesome Japanese business saw revenue dive 11% to £4.5m from £5m, with both revenue per client and the number of active clients hitting the skids, after local leverage restrictions were introduced in August 2010 and January 2011." (Sharecast Thu. 10 Mar 2011).

...Unfortunately, recent events are likely to have impacted the Japanese operations further!

The company does caution that stronger comparatives will make improvements more difficult in the final quarter (Mar - May) of its financial year, but remain positive for the long term.

It appears that IG is a company that seems to thrive (from a sales perspective) when markets are volatile as the very volatility that seems to rock the confidence of investors, seems to be the attraction for clients of IG.
This does not always seem to come through in the share price at the time, which is a shame as it could have given the shares a defensive or counter strategic position in a portfolio.
Possibly it shows some misunderstanding of IG's business model but could therefore represent a buying opportunity in a contrarian strategy when markets are falling. Although recent setbacks (credit crunch bad debts, Japan etc) have possibly done more damage to investor confidence.

The increase in client numbers is good news and remains key to how investors view the company. But, with its Japanese prospects now being downgraded, growth must come from the US and its existing markets.
In the background it also has a market leading position and a track record of dividend growth; supported by no "net" debt, growing cash balances and good cash-flows which bodes well for the future.
Currently, IG is in the Growth portfolio, which I am still comfortable with, as recent setbacks seem to be priced in, but it will need keeping an eye on if growth slows rapidly and profit margins deteriorate.

Article links:

Previous posts:



Friday 25 March 2011

GE to defy F136 Stop order!

Not quite as dramatic as the headline being used might sound but, following recognition that it had received a stop order from the Pentagon for the development of the F136 (second engine option to the Joint Strike Fighter program), GE has stated its intention to self fund the work, through the 90 day stop work period, as it nears completion of the engine. 

The stop order comes on the back of the senate vote of the 17 Feb as referenced in an earlier post - BAE Results and R-R Update.


In justifying its intention the company states that:
"GE said its F136 engine was meeting or exceeding performance expectations and was nearly complete, while the primary F-35 engine built by Pratt & Whitney, a unit of United Technologies Corp UTX.N had amassed $3.4 billion in cost overruns and faces continued delays."

A response from United Technologies stated that $2.7bn of the overrun is due to Pentagon changes!

Likely to rumble on for some time (5 years so far!) and one that seems to have affected the share price of R-R significantly (off its lows but still down 54p from its 52 week high of 665p). Strangely, the affect on GE has been less significant.
Both companies are likely to have had impact from the "nuclear" fallout from Japan's woes also: GE having designed the reactors in question and R-R having a stake in the UK's potential nuclear future.

because of the uncertainty, I have thought for sometime now that it would seem right to discount the F136 from R-R prospects instead focussing on the large civil engine programs: Trent 900; Trent 1000 and Trent XWB.
The company retains a place on the JSF through its lift fan manufacture and, who knows, there may still be a bonus from the F136 in the future as, at 5 years and counting, the engine could well be completed before the program is ultimately cancelled.
Would the Pentagon, and the senate, then pass up the opportunity for the potential life cycle cost savings that competing engines could bring!


Related links:


Aviva: Middle East and Asia - Pacific exposure

Aviva @ 433.9, +2.3
- down 34p (-7.1%) against the recent 52 week high 477.9p achieved on the 9th March.
- 23rd March ex-dividend could account for 16p of the fall.


Noticed that one of the search criteria that a viewer had used to come through to this blog was a question about Aviva's exposure to the Middle East. 
I personally hadn't considered that being more concerned about its exposure to Japan, but the relevance is the same and it is a very valid question.


During times and events like these it is important to understand exposure and whether things have fundamentally changed to a company's prospects over a longer horizon.
I am purposely trying to avoid putting too much emphasis on short term events but that does not mean that it isn't unsettling when the tide of the markets appears to be going against you. It is only a myth but remember that the lemmings drown.
On the other hand by understanding exposure and assessing short term impacts as just that, then opportunities can arise in quality companies that you may have been watching for sometime but might have seemed too expensive.


Back to Aviva then and, as I said, I had already become concerned about insurers falling and wanted to get some feel of Aviva's business in Japan. 
In recent weeks, Aviva had been advancing quite promisingly but had juddered into reverse along with other insurers and re-insurers, and the wider markets!
I had initially started looking at the published geographical spread by turnover but this isn't easily extracted from the preliminary results (insurers do seem to like to complicate things!).
The 2010 Annual Report published yesterday seems to be clearer though.


On the face of it Aviva has no published exposure to the Middle East; and in the Asia - Pacific regions is focussed on India and China as the drivers for growth.


Headline statements:
- 2010 sales of £47.1bn with just 5% currently in the Asia - Pacific regions
- 2010 operating profit of £2.55bn with just 3% coming from the Asia - Pacific regions.


So only a small proportion of sales and profits currently. Of course, this is sales and profits and not exposure through potential liabilities.
But, barring one reference to "general insurance" in a statement on page 7 of the annual report:
"We operate across Asia Pacific through joint ventures and wholly-owned operations and provide more than 8 million customers with life, general and health insurance products."


...it appears that the majority of their business is in life and pensions and certainly that appears to be the company's focus for growth with the expanding wealth and populations in India and China.
Page 37 clarifies things further stating that in the Asia - Pacific regions Aviva, having exited Australia has operations in 9 countries: China; India; South Korea; Singapore; Hong Kong; Malaysia; Sri Lanka; Indonesia; and Taiwan (with Taiwan also due to be exited). 
So no direct Japanese exposure!


I assume that there could be some convoluted path of business transactions that might see some exposure to Japan and the Middle East through other regions (think Lloyds of London) but it is not immediately obvious.


Also, it may not the best thing to hear as a consumer but the natural outcome of any "insurance event" is generally a raising of premiums in the post period to start to re-capitalise the business.


So on one or both points: 
- if Aviva has little or no exposure to recent events then the current 7% discount (or 3.8% excl. div.) to recently achieved highs is a general oversold situation directed at the sector but not the company, or:
- if it does have exposure then one can expect that the company (and the insurance sector) will take steps to re-capitalise the situation post settlement of liabilities. 


Aviva is a current holding of the portfolio which I continue to comfortable with and expect it to continue its recovery.


Related links:
http://www.aviva.com: Aviva 2010 Annual Report


Previous posts:
Arriba Aviva!

Disappointment for BP.

Disappointing for BP that the injunction blocking the completion of their £10bn share swap partnership with Rosneft has been upheld by a ruling under Swedish arbitration?

Not just sure where either party goes from here but the underlying commentary suggests that although potential solutions were on the table one or both parties were unwilling to proceed ahead of the ruling. So, you would expect that post ruling the solutions will be seriously considered and explored unless irreconcilable differences have now been created between either of the "four" interested parties: BP; Rosneft; TNK/BP; and the Russian state organisation.
My only amazement at all this is that the TNK-BP venture even still exists following the last spat, which seemed terminal, also involved BP's newly installed CEO Bob Dudley, and resulted in him fleeing Russia.

Anyway BP's shares are down in early trade this morning following a minor recovery over the last couple of days despite the budget announcement of a tax hike on North Sea oil to finance a 1p cut in the price of fuel. 
BP's North Sea interests amount to 11% of UK production.

BP @ 476p, - 4.9 (- 1.02%)

Related article links:

Wednesday 16 March 2011

Apple update: Ipad 2!

Apple @ $342.51, - $2.92 (-0.85%)


After recently announcing the 2nd version of its sector defining Ipad, the company has now enjoyed the first few days of its launch into the US market.
Almost 1 million Ipad 2's (I would prefer something more compelling than 2!) were sold in the first weekend with some stores selling out in minutes.
Such is the fervour surrounding new Apple products that:
- the very first purchaser had travelled from France for the privilege and promptly hopped on a plane home after acquiring one!
- a student was able to sell her place in the queue for almost twice the price of an Ipad 2!

Significantly, the numbers are:
- 3 times higher than initial sales of its predecessor
- approx. 2.5 times more than estimates.
- at $499 for the basic model thats almost $499m of sales (£310m). 
-  using Apple's group's profit margin of 29.19% (2010 accounts), that $140.668m of profit in a weekend (this is only indicative and the profit margin used is an average across all Apple products).

The profile of buyers (if correct), is also enlightening with 60% of purchases being made from existing Ipad owners.

Interesting that these sales have been achieved in a more competitive "Tablet" environment and are post Christmas when 7.3 million Ipad were sold (Oct - Dec 2010).

Not sure when, or if, "Apple fatigue" will set in, or its "coolness factor" dissipates but, for the moment the desirability appears strong so it will intriguing to see if this pattern continues across the series of global launches with the UK earmarked for the 25th March.
I write the date with a note of caution though, as I recall that, with last year's US launch numbers also being surprise, the UK launch date was pushed back until manufacturing caught up!


In light of recent events, the shares have pulled back with everything else. I am sure that sales in Japan would have also have been significant and the lack thereof could serve a significant dent to sales in the short term.

Finally, the health and future involvement of Steve Jobs continues to be a concern (he did premier the Ipad 2 though!), but for the time being the strategy appears to be rolling on.


At the last portfolio update (Feb 2011: Virtual Portfolio update. ), Apple represented 3.94% of the portfolio.


Article links:

Tuesday 15 March 2011

Don't Panic! (easier said than done!)

FTSE 100 @ 5695.28, -79.96 (-1.38%)
- also down 6.5% on the 33 month high of 6091 attained in February.
FTSE 100 Chart (courtesy of Digitallook)
Double click to enlarge then back button to return.


Very unsettling times with turmoil in the Middle East and the tragedy that followed the Japanese earthquake last week. 
Markets have reacted much as expected with a lot of funds being withdrawn from the Nikkei which has seen the Japanese index fall 11% today and record its most dramatic 2 day fall since October 1987 as the expectation that Japan will relapse into recession crystallises.
Japanese companies, particularly insurers, are also assumed to be "repatriating" funds from foreign markets in anticipation of the rebuilding costs to come which have led to various estimates up to £116bn (Barclays Capital).
There is also fallout in the increasingly negative sentiment that surrounds many of the current and future Nuclear projects, and the alternative energy sector seems to be benefiting.
Its probable that alternative energy is still some way from being commercially viable on a large scale (and acceptable to the NIMBY's(Not In My Back Yard)), and that further lessons and solutions will be developed and built into new Nuclear projects.
It is something that I would feel better saying that we could do without but the reality is different.


Elsewhere:
- Oil prices go up - oil company shares go down;
- Oil prices go down - oil company shares go down!
a lose - lose situation if ever I saw one. I appreciate that the Middle East situation is a long way from being resolved but there seems to be no tolerance and accommodation of oil companies in the current climate. Will they really not be able to grow profits in the future!


Energy prices are also factored to rise sharply: as the Middle East unrest affects oil price and supply; and gas/LNG prices increase with expected auction bidding from Japan as it seeks to restore power in the wake of the escalating situation.


The interrupted supply of key consumer products from the Japanese export monster are also expected to affect the wider global economy in some way. In addition, global supply chains could also be impacted e.g Japan has increased its presence in Aerospace manufacturing in the last few years through MHI; KHI etc.


European sovereign debt has also raised its head again in the last week leading to further rule changes increasing available support from the EU bail out funds.


Following the tsunami, the loss of life is incredible as are the unimaginable human tragedies that  are revealed as stories unfold. 
More than half of a town's population of 17,000 missing, presumed dead! 
Even the relief at lives saved is tempered by the fact that families have been literally riven apart by the Tsunami waves. 
But, human nature being what it is, life will go on, things will improve and Japan will rebuild creating its own mini boom.


However much we may want them to, markets will not move up in a straight line. They don't always react with sympathy either but do reflect mass sentiment whether it be logical or illogical. 


The majority of shares are falling and some seem to be being unfairly punished having very little to link them to any of the issues identified thus demonstrating the fear that the majority are feeling stoked up by the media and other stakeholders in the short term here and now.


The bears and lemmings are ruling the markets at present but, the trend from the troughs of the credit crunch is still upwards and might benefit from some consolidation.
That being the case, I am not about to sell-out of anything in the virtual portfolio (unless it has already been short-listed e.g. Invesco Perpetual) instead, in the spirit of human resilience, I will keep taking the dividends (or the tablets), and keep an eye on a shortlist of shares that could present themselves as buying opportunities in the days and weeks ahead. 
Some shares do become oversold in these times of turmoil so it can be the right time to be selective and buy quality earnings (if you can find them!).
My objective is still to build a long term hold portfolio with gains and dividends that will accommodate these setbacks whilst delivering year on year returns!


Wish me luck!

Sunday 13 March 2011

Morrison's Preliminary Results: "Different and Better than Ever"?

Morrison (Wm) Supermarkets @ 286p yielding 3.4% with the current full year 9.6p per share.


Well, Morrisons managed to beat market expectations with its preliminary results for the year ending 2011, and managed to further surprise on the upside with announcements on new developments.


Highlights include:
- Sales up by 6.9% to £16.479bn (y/e 2010: £15.410bn)
- 15 new stores opened with agreements in place to acquire 16 Netto stores
- Post tax profits up by 5.7% to £632m (y/e 2010: £598m). Pre-tax profits were only up by 1.9% due to an exceptional credit of £91m in the y/e 2010?
- Cash-flow per share of 33.79p comfortably in excess of adjusted earnings per share of 23.00p (the general view is that earnings per share, due to accruals etc, can be more easily manipulated than cash-flow so a prospective investor should be worried about cash drying up if eps is higher than cash-flow per share. For me higher cash-flows enable companies to minimise short term borrowings, overdrafts etc which can only boost profits.)
- Full year dividend increase of 17% to 9.6p, covered 2.4 times
- Interest payments have fallen to £30m (y/e 2010: £49m) and are well covered by pre-tax profits of £904m.
- Net debt down to £817m (y/e 2010: £924m), even after capital investment of £592m.


Elsewhere, less impressive figures include:
- cash balances decreased by £17m to £228m
- profit margins dipped to 5.49% (y/e 2010: 5.89%) 
- Inventory has jumped by 10.6% to £638m (y/e 2010: £577m)
- Return on Capital Employed dipped to 12.71% (y/e 2010: 13.49%) 


The results, announced on Thursday, saw the shares go up against the market albeit by a less that exciting 5.5p by close of play Friday but, any gain should be gratefully taken against the volatile storm of conflict and disaster that has stalked the market this week. 
I wouldn't hold my breath if the market continued to fall next week though as any good news will be quickly forgotten.


The new Chief Executive: Dalton Philips, is now in place though, and in the words of the non-exec Chairman: Sir Ian Gibson:
"our new CEO, arrived early in the year and quickly began to make his mark. He has shaped his senior management team with a great blend of new and existing talent, and between them they have developed a clear plan to deliver the next stage of Morrisons growth, with a vision to be 'Different and Better than Ever'".


So what clues do we have? 
Well, rumours have been in place for some time that Morrisons would like to offer an online service and this has been addressed on 2 fronts:
- 1: the £70m acquisition of Kiddicare, a specialist retailer of baby and infant products that is already successful and has strong online technology in place.
- 2: the surprise announcement of a £32m investment in FreshDirect, a profitable and fast growing online grocer serving a 600,000 New York customer base. Morrisons investment will gain it a 10% stake and a seat on the board but, more importantly, enable Morrisons to install a team to "learn the ropes" so to speak. The underlying business has been established and grown over 12 years with like for like sales growing at 20%.


This seems quite an innovative but prudent approach to understanding and establishing its own online offering but it remains a challenging market (albeit one that is still in its infancy) and has yet to show significant profits for other supermarkets.
In another sign of wanting to catch up, Morrisons has also announced trial branches of its convenience store format to be launched in July.


Whilst both of these strategies sound exciting (and I applaud Morrisons approach), I am slightly less than inspired that Morrisons is choosing to play catch up and it remains a valid question whether an online operation can satisfactorily add to a supermarkets sales and more importantly for shareholders', its profits. 
Surely, it can only be a  luxury service at this stage adding to the convenience of some customers so, for me, it is essential that costs are recovered.
In addition, the convenience store format increases margins on a smaller range of items but at what point do these margins become profitable to the outlet when set against the initial outlay and ongoing staffing costs?


Elsewhere, Morrisons has also pledged to increase the dividend by at least 10% a year for the next 3 years. 
Well done, but in the last few years the dividend has seen respective increases of 20%; 20.83%; and 41.38%; prior to this years 17%, so is this a fanfare statement or just a lowering of expectations? 
If it is the latter, then a clearer, more explanatory link to capital investment and the challenging environment should be made.


The announcement of a share buyback of £1bn raises further concerns. 
My initial reaction was one of disappointment as I have rarely experienced a share buyback and seen the black and white benefits initially envisaged. 
In theory, the direct result of a share buyback is less shares in issue. Annual profits are therefore divided between less shares which increases the earnings per share figure. The salesman's pitch being that the share price "should" increase to the same rating it was prior to the buyback but on a higher eps figure.
In reality, market environments change and not all things are equal so the expected capital gain never seems to come through.
In general, I find it takes a more fundamental shift in perception of a company's prospects to achieve a re-rating but then it is questionable whether it is the change in perception or the buyback that achieves this.
At one stage BP was buying back shares with all earnings in excess of an oil price of $35 per barrel, which was a lot of money being spent with little to show for it!


The cynical investor in me always feels cheated at this "lost/wasted" money as opposed to a straight forward special dividend which tangibly returns cash to shareholders and is therefore easily measurable.
For larger shareholders, a special dividend could incur a tax liability so a buyback is often sold to them on the basis of having greater tax advantages.
More cynically of me still, I fully expect that Directors performance bonuses are measured on EPS so by "borrowing" and spending money to buyback shares the EPS goes up and bonuses are paid....but at what short term cost to the balance sheet. 
The change in management, and the many new faces, makes the potential manipulation of these measures a valid concern until capability, results and loyalty has been demonstrated.


Companies normally announce share buybacks when they no longer see opportunities to invest in and therefore have "excess" cash. In which case, it is normal to return cash to shareholders. My personal choice, for multiple reasons, would be the tangible one of a special dividend. 
However, in this case, rather than a buyback I would prefer the company kept the money to support cash flow, reduce borrowings etc. 
In this way it would continue its traditionally prudent approach and maintain its financial and balance sheet strength during the declared difficult times ahead.
In his Chairman's statement, Sir Ian Gibson states:

"We expect the economic backdrop to remain challenging in 2011, with higher taxes, government spending cuts, inflation and rising unemployment all continuing to weigh on consumer confidence and disposable incomes."


...this being the case, and considering that the company is also accelerating a store growth program along with investments in trial formats, it seems financially naive of the company's management to "borrow" money to fund a share buyback. 
In the short term, the increase in liabilities weakens the balance sheet and the increased payments reduce profits. There is also little, or no, guarantee of a shareholder benefit; and it makes it more difficult to differentiate between organic growth and redistributed profit from share buybacks.


Increasing store space, a differentiation from other supermarkets, and the intention of increasing efficiencies are positives, as are investments in profitable businesses. 
A commitment to the dividend is welcome.
The company also has a strong balance sheet with the majority of its estate on freehold and gearing of 15%, and it may be that it is too tempting not to take advantage of this and be more "efficient" financially by "gearing up".
However, I am highly sceptical as to both the reasoning and the benefits of the share buyback particularly in the current climate and during an expansion program. 
What I would have preferred to see is: cancel the planned fund raising and give shareholders a commitment of 15%-20% annual growth in the dividend for the next 3 years ahead of the questionable 2 year share buyback.


Morrison shares are already in the virtual portfolio and there are still plenty of brokers' buy recommendations (based upon the buyback boosting earnings) but for me, a mixed bag and very much a work in progress with some concerns to keep an eye on. 


Morrison (Wm) Supermarkets @ 286p, goes ex dividend on the 11 May paying 8.37p per share.


Sir Ken's sell off!


In other news, I see that Sir Ken Morrison (the company's Life President and youngest son of the founder) has run afoul of the FSA by failing to declare the run down of his personal holding in Morrison which, since September 2009, has fallen from 6.07% to just 0.9%. 
The sell off has occurred in 4 stages all of which should have triggered a declaration by Sir Ken.


It could just be poor judgement on Sir Ken's part but does raise a concern about his motives!
This being that, although, the wider Morrison family continues to retain a 9% stake in the company, is this sale based upon valid concerns about the company, a valid personal reason, or just sour grapes from Sir Ken at his failure to "eat the elephant" and the subsequent fall-out which saw him eventually step down from the Chairman's position.


Hmmm, another unanswered question hanging over Morrisons!


Previous related posts:
Supermarket Sweep: Tesco; Morrisons; or Sainsburys?
Looking Ahead to 2011.


Related articles:
www.sharecast.com: Broker snap: Morrison's space expansion impresses
www.sharecast.com: Sir Ken Morrison share deals to spark FSA probe