-
21-03-2017, 09:02 AM
#1481
Originally Posted by Servaas
Have any of the many prominent names on FBU's board yet commented on this serious governance failure?
Their silence is palpable - and remarkable!
It's not individual board members' role to comment on "serious governance failures". That's the job of the CEO and Chairman. Other board members make their case within board meetings for or against an issue. If they don't like the outcome, their remedy is to resign.
-
21-03-2017, 09:06 AM
#1482
Originally Posted by macduffy
It's not individual board members' role to comment on "serious governance failures". That's the job of the CEO and Chairman. Other board members make their case within board meetings for or against an issue. If they don't like the outcome, their remedy is to resign.
And possibly Norris didn't know the gravity of the situation until last Thursday .....needs to get his head around the issues
“ At the top of every bubble, everyone is convinced it's not yet a bubble.”
-
21-03-2017, 09:22 AM
#1483
-
21-03-2017, 09:56 AM
#1484
Originally Posted by Joshuatree
Ive ahorrible feeling it is systemic throughout the industry .Too much money to be made and am i right that the companies themselves were left to monitor and check for quality and didn't or were very lax ; accepting the word of chinese and other exporters or a stamp on the steel as kosher etc.
Has FBU ever outperformed? 10 year chart shows a high before GFC of re $13 and since then its only got back over $10 in the latter half of 2016.
Classical cyclical then. There's an argument that at the peak of the cycle it should be trading on a PE of about 7. I wouldn't touch this company with a 40 foot barge pole.
Originally Posted by macduffy
Almost certain to be part of the problem as initial costing's were rejected by SKC so its clear FBU had to sharpen their pencil to a fine point.
Ecclesiastes 11:2: “Divide your portion to seven, or even to eight, for you do not know what misfortune may occur on the earth.”
Ben Graham - In the short run the market is a voting machine but in the long run the market is a weighing machine
-
21-03-2017, 10:09 AM
#1485
So someone has got a job done for a lot less than the real cost. I really hope it is a public job, for the NZ Government or some City amenity. Much prefer that than a private company enjoying the windfall.
-
23-03-2017, 09:23 AM
#1486
Some Christchurch Sharetraders will be pleased that Michele who was in charge of Fletcher EQR is now now CEO of Fletcher Construction
She must have done a a good job for Fletchers while in charge of EQR
https://www.nzx.com/companies/FBU/announcements/298711
Last edited by winner69; 23-03-2017 at 09:24 AM.
“ At the top of every bubble, everyone is convinced it's not yet a bubble.”
-
23-03-2017, 09:57 AM
#1487
Originally Posted by winner69
Reshuffling deck chairs?
----
"Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future" (Niels Bohr)
-
23-03-2017, 10:35 AM
#1488
Originally Posted by RTM
So someone has got a job done for a lot less than the real cost. I really hope it is a public job, for the NZ Government or some City amenity. Much prefer that than a private company enjoying the windfall.
negative corporate welfare makes a nice change lol
SKC may have opportunity to make some reval gains following completion?
For clarity, nothing I say is advice....
-
23-03-2017, 11:17 AM
#1489
Echoing comments about the serial underperformance of FBU - part of the reason I have elected not to invest in passive funds based on the NZX50 is that large components of the index are devoted to companies with largely mediocre management and boards with similar levels of performance such as FBU, WHS, CNU, SPK, TWR and SKT. The free float measure also means stocks likes Briscoes and MHI don't make the cut...
FWIW, I don't know if my own self-managed portfolio has done markedly better than the NZX overall but I don't think investing funds in some pretty mediocre stocks without a lot of growth potential because they happen to be large is necessarily a great criteria either.
-
23-03-2017, 11:25 AM
#1490
Originally Posted by Rep
Echoing comments about the serial underperformance of FBU - part of the reason I have elected not to invest in passive funds based on the NZX50 is that large components of the index are devoted to companies with largely mediocre management and boards with similar levels of performance such as FBU, WHS, CNU, SPK, TWR and SKT. The free float measure also means stocks likes Briscoes and MHI don't make the cut...
FWIW, I don't know if my own self-managed portfolio has done markedly better than the NZX overall but I don't think investing funds in some pretty mediocre stocks without a lot of growth potential because they happen to be large is necessarily a great criteria either.
great comment Rep. I'll give you some rep for that.
For clarity, nothing I say is advice....
Tags for this Thread
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|
Bookmarks