RBD - Restaurant Brands [Archive] - Page 2

leanmeanfightingmachine

11-01-2007, 11:15 PM

Deev 8 i never said get out of telecom. don't own them, don't follow them. you must be thinking of another log in.

i have been saying get out of RBD ever since they were a 2$, had them, sold them, got out.
Also i know the full in's and outs of the company and they have gone no where since then.
Only down in price and over time, backwards in all areas of their business.

with a share market going up these would have to be the biggest dog listed. also no one is going to buy them out either because consumer eating patterns are high risk and along with their health. Even south auckland families and their kids are been educated to stop eating KFC chicken and they are the biggest consumer in nz of it.

you do the math sunshine.

All i know is i got out at 2$ and are never going back.

LMFM

quote:Originally posted by Deev8

quote:Originally posted by leanmeanfightingmachine

i would just like to say that i told everyone many a time to get out of this shocker of a company. i just hope some of you listened.

they are so screwed it's not funny.

Just for the record, were you also one of the people telling everyone to get out of Telecom at $4? - as I recall the feeling was that Telecom were also so screwed it wasn't funny.

Deev8

12-01-2007, 10:43 AM

quote:Originally posted by leanmeanfightingmachine

Deev 8 i never said get out of telecom.

OK - thanks for the clarification.

Steve

19-01-2007, 07:19 AM

Is this relevant to Starbucks in NZ?

Starbucks drops growth hormone (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/3/story.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10419814)
Starbucks is ending its use of milk products that contain an artificial growth hormone, starting in much of the Western US and New England.

Starbucks said it had begun buying only milk products without bovine growth hormone in those areas.

winner69

08-03-2007, 02:05 PM

Another exciting sales update today ..... based on this and the pretty dismal underlying trends and general performance I wonder what any prospective buyer would want to pay .... even if highly leveraged

BRICKS

08-03-2007, 02:14 PM

WHERE would we be without our KFC.. [8D]

Bling_Bling

09-03-2007, 11:51 AM

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

WHERE would we be without our KFC.. [8D]

We will have less obese people. :D

BRICKS

09-03-2007, 03:19 PM

quote:Originally posted by Bling_Bling

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

WHERE would we be without our KFC.. [8D]

We will have less obese people. :D

THAT`s not TRUE.. [8D]

Halebop

09-03-2007, 06:24 PM

quote:Originally posted by winner69

Another exciting sales update today ..... based on this and the pretty dismal underlying trends and general performance I wonder what any prospective buyer would want to pay .... even if highly leveraged

Some of the numbers weren't too bad but alas, this perennial laggard has once again proved it's pedigree. I'm not yet totally convinced by the KFC turnaround a line but it's a nice story. KFC has disaapointed for years. Pizza Hut seems to have no clear answer for competition. And Starbucks is just not very interestting - it doesn't deliver scale, profits or growth to any great degree. These guys need some new ideas... hopefully it isn't to buy something.

winner69

09-03-2007, 08:09 PM

quote:Originally posted by Halebop

quote:Originally posted by winner69

Another exciting sales update today ..... based on this and the pretty dismal underlying trends and general performance I wonder what any prospective buyer would want to pay .... even if highly leveraged

Some of the numbers weren't too bad but alas, this perennial laggard has once again proved it's pedigree. I'm not yet totally convinced by the KFC turnaround a line but it's a nice story. KFC has disaapointed for years. Pizza Hut seems to have no clear answer for competition. And Starbucks is just not very interestting - it doesn't deliver scale, profits or growth to any great degree. These guys need some new ideas... hopefully it isn't to buy something.

I know we should look forward instead of back but ....

..... annual KFC sales hit $182M .... great effort but jeez they were $177M at the turn of the century ..... not even 1% pa growth .... inspite of all the investment and hype

Thats even less than the rate of population growth and far less than the 8%pa growth in the cafe/restaurant/takeaways retail sector overall. The KFC offer is obviuosly becoming less attractive year after year to the broader market.

The current hype is alls fixed and only blue sky ahead from here ..... but can you see this really happening with current offer / management etc

BRICKS

09-03-2007, 08:49 PM

RBD is not the only retailer of food in NZ its very competitive it could be worse like Cob & Co next door it had NO customers today how do you think they feel, just like the car salesmen we meet this week when buying a new car they fall over getting to you so for RBD to t/o $185m it is GREAT.. [8D]

Halebop

10-03-2007, 10:48 AM

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

RBD is not the only retailer of food in NZ its very competitive it could be worse like Cob & Co next door it had NO customers today how do you think they feel, just like the car salesmen we meet this week when buying a new car they fall over getting to you so for RBD to t/o $185m it is GREAT.. [8D]

The thing with benchmarking is that it is only useful to benchmark against average and good performances. Benchmarking against bad performance makes anyone look like a genius. There are two things that are no good to me as a long term investor: Performance below average and negative growth.

Total reported takeaway sales for the last 10 quarters in New Zealand (Source: Retail Trade Survey Statistics New Zealand) have averaged roughly 11.1% growth on the same quarter in the prior year. In comparison, RBD has averaged -0.1% (that's minus) "Growth".

Here's a couple of charts you won't see in an RBD annual report...

http://img211.imageshack.us/img211/8599/rbdqrtlysalesfx4.jpg

http://img68.imageshack.us/img68/5763/rbdgrowthbq1.jpg

Steve

10-03-2007, 11:23 AM

Pretty pictures always make things easier to see. Perhaps things could be worse than bad for RBD?

Thanks HB

Phaedrus

10-03-2007, 11:33 AM

Here's another chart you won't see in RBD annual reports. This is a comparison between the average market performance and that of RBD expressed in terms of percentage gain or loss over the last 5 years.
http://h1.ripway.com/Phaedrus/RBDndx310001.gif

winner69

10-03-2007, 12:34 PM

Good stuff Lizard ..... easy for all to see what i was trying to say last night

Yes they do sell $300M of stuff every year but as your chart shows RBD going nowhere whereas NZers are going gangbusters spending more and more at takeaways etc .... ie RBD are getting a declining share of total spend

RBD are in a growth sector but they are doing badly relative to their competitors (not just pizza but chicken as well) .... thats what the big picture is showing

OK to some extent if RBD holding sales but were expanding margins through price, mix and efficiency gains .... but they are not even doing that

Good stuff Lizard

winner69

10-03-2007, 12:36 PM

Phaedrus - amazing chart

But you overlook the fantastic dividends over the years ...... opportunity cost doesn't come into it does it?

duncan macgregor

10-03-2007, 01:30 PM

quote:Originally posted by winner69

Phaedrus - amazing chart

But you overlook the fantastic dividends over the years ...... opportunity cost doesn't come into it does it?

Go to the top of the class for that one.:D:D:Dmacdunk

BRICKS

10-03-2007, 01:40 PM

AS RBD is on the NZX please tell me which other company can we BUY fast food shares in so we can compare charts and bar things where we can put our MONEY but only NZX.. [8D]

Halebop

10-03-2007, 02:13 PM

Well Bricks I'm not sure about your broker but mine can get me shares on other exchanges too. Perhaps the lack of NZ listed alternates is why RBD appears to be such a winner by your benchmarks?

I'm more interested in buying winners than specifically buying shares exposed to the takeaway retail segement in any case.

Onthemoney

10-03-2007, 07:46 PM

Do you mean public or private BRICKS?

winner69

11-03-2007, 10:49 AM

So is Phaedrus's chart above telling us that $1.000 bucks 'invested' in RBD 5 years ago is now only worth $600

Suppose would have got those divies (say $250 worth at most .... based on 10 cents for each 500 shares bought at $2 in 2002)

So the $1,000 is worth say $850 now (maybe breakeven at $1,000 if the divies were reinvested)

But the $1000 in the NZX50 would be $2,000 now by the looks of the chart

So the opportunity cost (or the cost of waiting for a takeover that has yet to eventuate) has been a $1,000 for this beggar who had $1,000 to spend 5 years ago. At least he has not wiped out like putting into an another leading brand like feltex .... but would have better off if he had put it into the bank

Ru=ough numbers for a laugh on a Sunday morning

BRICKS

11-03-2007, 11:01 AM

quote:Originally posted by winner69

So is Phaedrus's chart above telling us that $1.000 bucks 'invested' in RBD 5 years ago is now only worth $600

Suppose would have got those divies (say $250 worth at most .... based on 10 cents for each 500 shares bought at $2 in 2002)

So the $1,000 is worth say $850 now (maybe breakeven at $1,000 if the divies were reinvested)

But the $1000 in the NZX50 would be $2,000 now by the looks of the chart

So the opportunity cost (or the cost of waiting for a takeover that has yet to eventuate) has been a $1,000 for this beggar who had $1,000 to spend 5 years ago. At least he has not wiped out like putting into an another leading brand like feltex .... but would have better off if he had put it into the bank

Ru=ough numbers for a laugh on a Sunday morning

THAT is the extreme worse case what about the people who bought @ 92 cents and had div`s as well they say YIPPIE.. [8D]

winner69

11-03-2007, 11:28 AM

Bricks ... the answer to that goes along the lines of the mantra of 'buy low sell high' or as macdunk and phaedrus say 'never hold a down trending stock'

BRICKS

11-03-2007, 11:36 AM

quote:Originally posted by winner69

Bricks ... the answer to that goes along the lines of the mantra of 'buy low sell high' or as macdunk and phaedrus say 'never hold a down trending stock'

TRY hard to be a winner all the time winner69.. [8D]

Halebop

11-03-2007, 11:55 AM

To have bought at 92 cents would have been either just 4 or 5 months ago or way back in '99 when it started to recover from it's first long fall. Assuming the later and the '99 entry price allowed you access to the full 10 cent dividend your returns have been...

Share Price Appreciation:
Now $1.10
Then $0.92
Gain $0.18

Dividends:
1999 $0.10
2000 $0.10
2001 $0.10
2002 $0.10
2003 $0.10
2004 $0.10
2005 $0.10
2006 $0.10
Gain $0.80

Total Gain (assuming nil marginal tax to pay): $0.98
Annual Gain: $0.98 / 8 Years = $0.1225
Percentage Gain Per Annum: 13.32%.... that doesn't sound too bad until you work out that over 8 years this is [u]8.26%</u> compounded...

Selling when Mr Diab briefly forced the price north of $2.00 in 2002 would have made this investment look OK. Holding an underperformer instead delivers a predictably below average result.

BRICKS

11-03-2007, 12:23 PM

BOUGHT 5 months ago plus div`s feels good to me but as you are another of those large non shareholders who love to talk and take the company down remember what the management has stated " This company RBD is NOT for sale." so back to eating KFC, CHEERS.. [8D]

Phaedrus

11-03-2007, 12:37 PM

I've never been able to understand how some people are able to focus so totally on relatively small dividends, as they make large capital losses.
Let's accept for a moment the argument that the NZSX50 is a hokey index that is useless as a benchmark. The chart below shows a selection of quite ordinary good sound stocks. You can see how easy it is to find stocks that have been outperforming the Index year after year. (In an attemt to avoid charges of "cherry-picking" I have purposely left out those that have really outperformed - RYM 520%, MFT 430%, TPW 370% to name but a few).
Plenty of stocks have equalled or out-performed the Index. It is not an unattainable goal by any means. Had you drawn this chart most anytime over the last few years, it would have looked much as it does now, with the same stocks beating the same Index back then too - with divvies on top as well! Nothing has changed. Good uptrends can last for literally years. Why waste time and money holding junk stocks? (and eating junk food come to that!)
http://h1.ripway.com/Phaedrus/COMP311002.gif

winner69

11-03-2007, 12:41 PM

Shareprices over time generally follow the long term performance of a company

Thus fundamental analysis does a place .... and I have done a ;ot of that on RBD over the years .... and made some good money on the few occassions I have been in RBD as well .... thats the reward for following the sentiment of the market.

If looking at RBD as a long term investment I always ask myself 'if i had $140M would i buy the company?'

The answer today is no.

One good analysis tool is one Du Pont came up with years ago .... express ROE as Profit Margin X Asset turns X leverage .... and looking at the 3 components see what is driving ROE increases or declines

In RBD case

Profit Margins have declined over the years from a high of 7% in 2000. This year likely to be a razor thin 2% with it picking up to 3% next year. This indicates a deteriorating market position, demand and poor cost control. Nothing on the horizon to give you the warn fuzzies that margins will improve in the next year or 2.

Asset turns are a lot higher than what they were before they started expanding the pizza business .... that is good. However the last few years it has drifted slightly. This indicates deteriorating operational management performance, declining sales and (as we know the real reason) increasing capital requirement (without the commensurate increase in sales). Looking forward RBD have a heavy capex program but will sales increases follow? ... to the degree needed I doubt it

Leverage has increased slightly over the past few years but to no great degree .... increasing leverage helps ROE (as long as risk s managed)

The end result is declining ROE in RBD and even when profits get back to more normal level hard to see it increasing much beyond 25% in the next few years or so.

Conclusion I wouldn't pay $140M/$150M ($1.10 a share plus debt) for RBD .... based on what the present management is delivering now .... and has in the past

Somebody else might if they felt they could turn the thing around and drive decent sales growth and margin increases .... might even be attractive if pretty highly leveraged .... but I would any prospective buyers would be concerned with RBD concepts position and performance in the overall market

BRICKS

11-03-2007, 12:55 PM

quote:Originally posted by winner69

Shareprices over time generally follow the long term performance of a company

Thus fundamental analysis does a place .... and I have done a ;ot of that on RBD over the years .... and made some good money on the few occassions I have been in RBD as well .... thats the reward for following the sentiment of the market.

If looking at RBD as a long term investment I always ask myself 'if i had $140M would i buy the company?'

The answer today is no.

One good analysis tool is one Du Pont came up with years ago .... express ROE as Profit Margin X Asset turns X leverage .... and looking at the 3 components see what is driving ROE increases or declines

In RBD case

Profit Margins have declined over the years from a high of 7% in 2000. This year likely to be a razor thin 2% with it picking up to 3% next year. This indicates a deteriorating market position, demand and poor cost control. Nothing on the horizon to give you the warn fuzzies that margins will improve in the next year or 2.

Asset turns are a lot higher than what they were before they started expanding the pizza business .... that is good. However the last few years it has drifted slightly. This indicates deteriorating operational management performance, declining sales and (as we know the real reason) increasing capital requirement (without the commensurate increase in sales). Looking forward RBD have a heavy capex program but will sales increases follow? ... to the degree needed I doubt it

Leverage has increased slightly over the past few years but to no great degree .... increasing leverage helps ROE (as long as risk s managed)

The end result is declining ROE in RBD and even when profits get back to more normal level hard to see it increasing much beyond 25% in the next few years or so.

Conclusion I wouldn't pay $140M/$150M ($1.10 a share plus debt) for RBD .... based on what the present management is delivering now .... and has in the past

Somebody else might if they felt they could turn the thing around and drive decent sales growth and margin increases .... might even be attractive if pretty highly leveraged .... but I would any prospective buyers would be concerned with RBD concepts position and performance in the overall market

RIGHT winner we will put you down as a NON holder.. [8D]

COLIN

11-03-2007, 02:38 PM

[quote]Originally posted by Phaedrus

I've never been able to understand how some people are able to focus so totally on relatively small dividends, as they make large capital losses.
Let's accept for a moment the argument that the NZSX50 is a hokey index that is useless as a benchmark. The chart below shows a selection of quite ordinary good sound stocks. You can see how easy it is to find stocks that have been outperforming the Index year after year. (In an attemt to avoid charges of "cherry-picking" I have purposely left out those that have really outperformed - RYM 520%, MFT 430%, TPW 370% to name but a few).
Plenty of stocks have equalled or out-performed the Index. It is not an unattainable goal by any means. Had you drawn this chart most anytime over the last few years, it would have looked much as it does now, with the same stocks beating the same Index back then too - with divvies on top as well! Nothing has changed. Good uptrends can last for literally years. Why waste time and money holding junk stocks?

Couldn't agree more, Phaedrus.
However, its a bit like my grandchildren - you can give them heaps of advice, built on a life-time of experience, but they think they know better; its a sad fact of life but they are going to have to learn by their own mistakes - one can only trust that they see the light before it is too late.

BRICKS

11-03-2007, 05:01 PM

However, its a bit like my grandchildren - you can give them heaps of advice, built on a life-time of experience, but they think they know better; its a sad fact of life but they are going to have to learn by their own mistakes - one can only trust that they see the light before it is too late.
[/quote]

DEAR COLIN it is to late for WHAT.. [8D]

COLIN

11-03-2007, 11:44 PM

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

However, its a bit like my grandchildren - you can give them heaps of advice, built on a life-time of experience, but they think they know better; its a sad fact of life but they are going to have to learn by their own mistakes - one can only trust that they see the light before it is too late.

DEAR COLIN it is to late for WHAT.. [8D]
[/quote]

Well I hope its not Financial Disaster in your case, Mr. B.

BRICKS

12-03-2007, 09:18 AM

quote:Originally posted by hiawatha

[quote]I've never been able to understand how some people are able to focus so totally on relatively small dividends, as they make large capital losses.

Obviously no-one invests in a company if it's on the point of sustaining a large capital loss; but then, none of us owns a functioning crystal ball. Unfortunately RBD is not a company which has simply chugged along in an uneventful way, otherwise a shareprice trend may have been meaningful. It has invested in Australia, come a cropper, has almost been taken over and then had the takeover decision rescinded. It has taken over other companies (eg Eagle Boys) and has had to deal with a changing competitive situation. It has now announced its egress from Australia and has more recently been subject to speculation of further takeover offers. With all of that it is hardly surprising that its shareprice has experienced volatility.
hiawatha

[/quote ]

DEAR hiawatha you have the true grip on the situation on the real facts the way it is and the way to go its up to the company to push ahead..
The Victoria push was a disaster but should be fixed later this year then clear water we hope forget about a takeover to save the mug SHAREHOLDERS wanting nothing but a quick profits then NZX would become even SMALLER.. [8D]

duncan macgregor

12-03-2007, 10:44 AM

BRICKS, What a company has done in the past is a good indication of what they might do in the future. Did they make stupid decisions in the past?, or did they make wise decisions that boosted the bottom line. How the shareprice reacted to what is now in the past is always a good indication of how it will react in the future, unless they change tack. RBD made some of the most stupid decisions in the past, which reflected on the share price. The point being it is the future we invest in, not the past, so lets have a fresh look at prospects. They now rent the premises, not own, so in bad times they still have to cough up the rent. The great secret recipe is outdated, people are more aware of healthy food, boiled chook is no longer the in thing. They are doing up the landlords premises at a cost of $800000 a store to serve the same old tucker. The only hope is a take over coming from some one with new ideas and direction. That is the only way that share holders who are silly enough to hold, might get something back for a change. macdunk

duncan macgregor

12-03-2007, 11:35 AM

When you own property you can borrow from the bank against it cheaper than sell and lease back. That was very stupid as i said at the time. To get into a strange waters, it pays to dip your big toe in first MHI style to test the waters first. Why not try a couple of stores first, before spending up large and losing millions. See if the business plan works in a different country with different customs and life styles. They have squandered millions in the last few years, and learned nothing. Take over is the only hope with fresh management and new ideas, or the sp will keep on going down. Macdunk

BRICKS

12-03-2007, 12:31 PM

quote:Originally posted by hiawatha

There may have been structural reasons why they didn't just borrow from the bank, but I wouldn't just assume that sale and lease back was necessarily the wrong decision. As for "dipping their toe to test the market" I don't think this was an option at the time since I suspect thy were offered a lot of stores cheaply on a take it or leave it basis; besides which, their strategy of using one call centre to cover a lot of stores probably required that they take on a lot of stores.
hiawatha

DEAR hiawatha please don't stress yourself talking to the biggest in NZ non shareholder of RBD who has a broken needle and continues to repeat over & over on the subject he should be out there in AUS working on his capital gain TAX.. [8D]

BRICKS

12-03-2007, 12:43 PM

quote:Originally posted by hiawatha

quote:DEAR hiawatha please don't stress yourself talking to the biggest in NZ non shareholder of RBD who has a broken needle and continues to repeat over & over on the subject he should be out there in AUS working on his capital gain TAX..

Do you actually have to pay CGT on Australian shares if you are a NZ resident? I made a bit of profit on some Tesltra shares recently but no-one has asked me to pay CGT on them.
hiawatha

LUCKY YOU..

winner69

13-03-2007, 09:52 PM

quote:Originally posted by Halebop

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

RBD is not the only retailer of food in NZ its very competitive it could be worse like Cob & Co next door it had NO customers today how do you think they feel, just like the car salesmen we meet this week when buying a new car they fall over getting to you so for RBD to t/o $185m it is GREAT.. [8D]

The thing with benchmarking is that it is only useful to benchmark against average and good performances. Benchmarking against bad performance makes anyone look like a genius. There are two things that are no good to me as a long term investor: Performance below average and negative growth.

Total reported takeaway sales for the last 10 quarters in New Zealand (Source: Retail Trade Survey Statistics New Zealand) have averaged roughly 11.1% growth on the same quarter in the prior year. In comparison, RBD has averaged -0.1% (that's minus) "Growth".

Here's a couple of charts you won't see in an RBD annual report...

http://img211.imageshack.us/img211/8599/rbdqrtlysalesfx4.jpg

http://img68.imageshack.us/img68/5763/rbdgrowthbq1.jpg

A bit in the paper today re retail sales data -

The trend for takeaway food retailing has been increasing steadily for the past nine months.

This continues a longer-term sales trend in takeaway food retailing, which has increased by 88 per cent since mid 2002.

Pity RBD sales hadn't grown by 88% over the last 5 years

biker

13-03-2007, 11:48 PM

It's the next 5 years that count.

Halebop

14-03-2007, 12:26 AM

quote:Originally posted by biker

It's the next 5 years that count.

We've been hearing that for the last five years. :D

The issue is that performance is cultural. Unless you see an agent for cultural change, unless you see RBD using metrics that lead to meaningful process improvement and bottom line results, unless you see financial management appropriate to their business model, unless you see a focus on shareholder value rather than the institutional imperative (How many acquisitions and new business venture have resulted in nothing but lower profits?)... somebody else will in 5 years time still be suggesting that it's the next five years that count.

winner69

14-03-2007, 07:32 AM

quote:Originally posted by biker

It's the next 5 years that count.

..... so you expect Pizza Hut and KFC to start reclaiming some of that enormous lost share of the takeaways market?

Bling_Bling

14-03-2007, 08:46 AM

RBD needs a change of owner who has vision and can add value.

BRICKS

14-03-2007, 09:47 AM

quote:Originally posted by winner69

quote:Originally posted by biker

It's the next 5 years that count.

..... so you expect Pizza Hut and KFC to start reclaiming some of that enormous lost share of the takeaways market?

HOPE your around in five years time winner to check out who wins the BET.. [8D]

duncan macgregor

14-03-2007, 10:19 AM

Bricks, You hold the bets on the dogs. I can never understand why anyone would worry about what happens to companies on downtrends.
Surely there must be a company worth your investment dollar in an uptrend to invest in. Companies in prolonged downtrends like this is normally caused by bad decisions in the past. If nothing has changed, you would expect more downtrending in the future. The people that made all those bad decisions in the past are still making the decisions today, so my prediction is the downtrend will continue.
RBD is dog tucker, has been ever since they sold the kennel to take that working trip to Australia. They not only squandered the kennel money, but now rent them back and are spending $800000 each doing them up for the landlord.[:o)][:o)] macdunk

duncan macgregor

14-03-2007, 10:28 AM

Just announced VICKI SALMON has just resigned.
It might be the first little ray of hope for the company. Macdunk

Happy Camper

14-03-2007, 08:15 PM

This Happy Camper wonders whether the departure of V Salmon from RBD confirms that private equity interest in RBD from across the ditch has ground to a screaming halt?

Cheers

Halebop

14-03-2007, 10:24 PM

quote:Originally posted by duncan macgregor

Just announced VICKI SALMON has just resigned.
It might be the first little ray of hope for the company. Macdunk

Will the board be any better at selecting a replacement CEO who can deliver change and growth this time?

This company does not need a headline catching acquisition or "shareholder friendly" dividends. It needs attention to the small details and a commitment to benchmarked improvement, the kind of boring operational stuff that doesn't appeal to the average corporate climber more interested in PR and stock options ...and it needs to live within its means.

biker

14-03-2007, 10:45 PM

quote:Originally posted by Happy Camper

This Happy Camper wonders whether the departure of V Salmon from RBD confirms that private equity interest in RBD from across the ditch has ground to a screaming halt?

Cheers

Or,... was one of the conditions for their further involvement?

BRICKS

15-03-2007, 10:36 AM

quote:Originally posted by Halebop

quote:Originally posted by duncan macgregor

Just announced VICKI SALMON has just resigned.
It might be the first little ray of hope for the company. Macdunk

Will the board be any better at selecting a replacement CEO who can deliver change and growth this time?

This company does not need a headline catching acquisition or "shareholder friendly" dividends. It needs attention to the small details and a commitment to benchmarked improvement, the kind of boring operational stuff that doesn't appeal to the average corporate climber more interested in PR and stock options ...and it needs to live within its means.

TRY buying some stock and then have a REAL say non holder.. [8D]

Halebop

15-03-2007, 11:47 AM

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

TRY buying some stock and then have a REAL say non holder.. [8D]

It appears you don't have a REAL rationale to counter anything I say. So I don't think throwing my good money after all that bad money is going to make any difference to what I think about this particular deep fried puppy.

Disclosure: Non Holder

BRICKS

15-03-2007, 12:06 PM

quote:Originally posted by Halebop

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

TRY buying some stock and then have a REAL say non holder.. [8D]

It appears you don't have a REAL rationale to counter anything I say. So I don't think throwing my good money after all that bad money is going to make any difference to what I think about this particular deep fried puppy.

Disclosure: Non Holder

AND WE ARE SICK OF YOUR MOANING.. [8D]

Bling_Bling

15-03-2007, 12:07 PM

The shareholders should hold the board fully responsible for the SP performance. The board has in the past made some very bad decisions that has cost RBD dearly. IT is now time for the board to stop what it's doing and continue with what is in the best interest of the shareholders. The best interest is to give the shareholders a way out at a premium.

BRICKS

15-03-2007, 12:10 PM

Bling_Bling

15-03-2007, 12:16 PM

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

quote:Originally posted by Bling_Bling

The shareholders should hold the board fully responsible for the SP performance. The board has in the past made some very bad decisions that has cost RBD dearly. IT is now time for the board to stop what it's doing and continue with what is in the best interest of the shareholders. The best interest is to give the shareholders a way out at a premium.

RBD IS NOT FOR SALE..[8D]

WHO SAYS? ;)

duncan macgregor

15-03-2007, 12:18 PM

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS
RBD IS NOT FOR SALE..[8D]

You really have to be as thick as a brick if thats what you think. The only hope shareholders who are silly enough to hold RBD have if some one buys the business and get back on track.
A secret recipe might do wonders or at least learn how to cook chook. :D:D:DMacdunk

winner69

15-03-2007, 12:18 PM

quote:Originally posted by Bling_Bling

The shareholders should hold the board fully responsible for the SP performance. The board has in the past made some very bad decisions that has cost RBD dearly. IT is now time for the board to stop what it's doing and continue with what is in the best interest of the shareholders. The best interest is to give the shareholders a way out at a premium.

RBD market cap 1997 was over $210M .... Vicki was a founding director

RBD marker cap today $106M and Vicki is on her way

Vicki presided over a 50% decline in the value of RBD ... all of $100M +

Not as good as Theresa's effort though .... maybe a hidden message in those stats

But looking forward .... maybe RBD market cap will one day reach $200M again ... and the new head honcho will be a hero

BRICKS

15-03-2007, 12:27 PM

quote:Originally posted by Bling_Bling

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

quote:Originally posted by Bling_Bling

The shareholders should hold the board fully responsible for the SP performance. The board has in the past made some very bad decisions that has cost RBD dearly. IT is now time for the board to stop what it's doing and continue with what is in the best interest of the shareholders. The best interest is to give the shareholders a way out at a premium.

RBD IS NOT FOR SALE..[8D]

WHO SAYS? ;)

The company confirms that at this stage, NO firm proposal has been
forthcoming from any of these parties following a period of discussions.
The Board of Directors will keep shareholders updated on any material developments should anything eventuate..

[not for sale last report dated 8 Mar 2007]

Deev8

15-03-2007, 01:21 PM

BRICKS

15-03-2007, 02:23 PM

quote:Originally posted by Deev8

quote:Originally posted by Halebop

quote:Originally posted by duncan macgregor

Just announced VICKI SALMON has just resigned.
It might be the first little ray of hope for the company. Macdunk

Will the board be any better at selecting a replacement CEO who can deliver change and growth this time?Well Theresa is available!

PLEASE write some thing funny next TIME.. [8D]

Bling_Bling

15-03-2007, 04:02 PM

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

quote:Originally posted by Bling_Bling

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

quote:Originally posted by Bling_Bling

The shareholders should hold the board fully responsible for the SP performance. The board has in the past made some very bad decisions that has cost RBD dearly. IT is now time for the board to stop what it's doing and continue with what is in the best interest of the shareholders. The best interest is to give the shareholders a way out at a premium.

RBD IS NOT FOR SALE..[8D]

WHO SAYS? ;)

The company confirms that at this stage, NO firm proposal has been
forthcoming from any of these parties following a period of discussions.
The Board of Directors will keep shareholders updated on any material developments should anything eventuate..

[not for sale last report dated 8 Mar 2007]

No sane company will make an offer when due diligence is not yet completed. Due diligence and negotiations on this size company takes many months.

BRICKS

15-03-2007, 04:09 PM

BLING get it in your head NOTHING is going ON.. [8D]

artemis

15-03-2007, 05:50 PM

quote:Originally posted by hiawatha

It was interesting that the item on TV1 News last night about obesity and junk food seemed to focus mainly on KFC. I would have thought that McDonald's and Burger King's stuff was junkier than KFC's which, after all, is mainly just chicken and would be no more "junk food" than chicken roasted at home in an oven.
It seems to be largely a matter of perception.
hiawatha

Wonder why they never mention white bread/flour and sugar - probably the two main items contributing to poor eating by volume consumed. Little or no nutritional value in either, except for people who just cannot get enough carbohydrate in their diet. (That's a joke BTW.) There would no doubt be an uproar if focus went on these. Fast food is an easy target. Don't have the nutrtional info in front of me but would not be surprised if KFC chicken is a better bet than Girl Guide biscuits. At least it has a good dose of protein.

.... Pause to check a packet of chocolate GG biscuits - 69% carbs, 20% fat (mmost of it is saturated).

Halebop

15-03-2007, 07:18 PM

quote:Originally posted by hiawatha

...after all, is mainly just chicken and would be no more "junk food" than chicken roasted at home in an oven.
It seems to be largely a matter of perception.

Not really.

The "F" in KFC stands for Fried rather than the roasted or wok sauteed kinds most healthy kiwis eat. I can roast a chicken using no more fat than the chicken itself provides. I can also then remove a lot of the fat remaining. The same cannot be said for KFC's chicken or it customers eating habits. I don't see them becoming Kentucky Poached Chicken any day soon.

Independant research a few years ago showed 16% of calories were from fat in a KFC chicken breast (5% saturated), although at least it provided half the amount of energy as say a MacDonalds Big Mac (also 16% of calories from fat, 6% saturated). Problem is consumers would eat 2 pieces of chicken for each burger consumed so they were left in much the same position. KFC chicken delivered the highest sodium hit of any fast food (matched only by KFC's stable mate, pizza). Those "secret herbs and spices" it seems must contain a fair wack of salt. Sodium itself isn't always the biggest problem though it has been linked to several lifestyle illnesses but of course consumers will wash it down with a fair dose of sugary soft drinks - which turns back into fat unless we run it off.

Artemis New Zealand is a high per capita consumer of breads and flour. I think it's why so many kiwi guys and girls have big guts and bums! There is also more than one fast food company out there that brand names their bread with "bread sounding" names because their products are technically confectionary and they could not otherwise label their product as something even a casual consumer might find acceptable... kind of like wedging those double beef patties between two scoopings of jelly beans.

winner69

15-03-2007, 07:34 PM

KFC under pressure in OZ re use of trans fat and palm oils .... they use it in NZ as well .... some would say YUK not YUM but most wouldn't care

But one day public opinion will come home to roost .... like in NZ sales on takeaways going throught he roof but KFC not getting any of that increased 'discretionary' spend (See Lizards charts)

Health Minister a bit pissed off it seems

From SMH the other day
http://www.smh.com.au/text/articles/2007/03/12/1173548109827.html

ratkin

15-03-2007, 08:00 PM

Only people still eating KFC are the trailor trash types who care little about health. They the same people who smoke, beat their kids and drive noisy cars

ratkin

15-03-2007, 08:01 PM

Look at the queue if there is one, fat, badly dressed, screaming kids in tow. The only saving grace for restaurant brands is the country is still full of these scum
(yes i am in a bad mood)

Halebop

15-03-2007, 08:21 PM

quote:Originally posted by winner69

(See Lizards charts)

...they were my charts :( [sob sob]

winner69

15-03-2007, 08:33 PM

quote:Originally posted by Halebop

quote:Originally posted by winner69

(See Lizards charts)

...they were my charts :( [sob sob]

Sorry doubly sorry Halebop

Good charts though and so pertinent when assessing the future of RBD

Halebop

15-03-2007, 08:35 PM

;)

Bling_Bling

16-03-2007, 08:25 AM

The lower the SP for RBD the more Bling will buy. :D

BRICKS

16-03-2007, 10:22 AM

quote:Originally posted by ratkin

Only people still eating KFC are the trailor trash types who care little about health. They the same people who smoke, beat their kids and drive noisy cars

YOU are a SNOB.. [8D]

Bling_Bling

16-03-2007, 11:09 AM

quote:Originally posted by ratkin

Look at the queue if there is one, fat, badly dressed, screaming kids in tow. The only saving grace for restaurant brands is the country is still full of these scum
(yes i am in a bad mood)

You live in Pleasant Ville with the ideal family that looks like something out of Beverlyhills 90210? :D

Bling_Bling

16-03-2007, 11:13 AM

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

BLING get it in your head NOTHING is going ON.. [8D]

BRICKS is that you short selling RBD? :D

BRICKS

16-03-2007, 11:21 AM

quote:Originally posted by winner69

KFC under pressure in OZ re use of trans fat and palm oils .... they use it in NZ as well .... some would say YUK not YUM but most wouldn't care

But one day public opinion will come home to roost .... like in NZ sales on takeaways going throught he roof but KFC not getting any of that increased 'discretionary' spend (See Lizards charts)

Health Minister a bit pissed off it seems

From SMH the other day
http://www.smh.com.au/text/articles/2007/03/12/1173548109827.html

AS usual your WRONG 69 yet again, it was the PM.JH who called a meeting of vendors and ask them to change the oil and they "OK" and every thing was HAPPY.. [8D]

winner69

16-03-2007, 01:58 PM

Was only going what was in the paper and like what is on the internet it must be true ... and no mention of Johnny in the article ..... or was he having lunch with the porno king that day

KFC owner sticks by its cooking oil

A LEADING fast-food company has refused to bow to the Federal Government's demand it remove harmful fats from its products ......

BRICKS

16-03-2007, 04:54 PM

quote:Originally posted by winner69

Was only going what was in the paper and like what is on the internet it must be true ... and no mention of Johnny in the article ..... or was he having lunch with the porno king that day

KFC owner sticks by its cooking oil

A LEADING fast-food company has refused to bow to the Federal Government's demand it remove harmful fats from its products ......

HAD some KFC today was great and the shop was FULL.. [8D]

jonny5

16-03-2007, 05:09 PM

Here's a question (to all),

do you find yourself consciously or subconsciously supporting the stocks you hold?

i.e. BRICKS going to KFC or a T-Com holder specifically buying only T-Com products?

Just a random thought / rant

J5

BRICKS

16-03-2007, 05:20 PM

quote:Originally posted by jonny5

Here's a question (to all),

do you find yourself consciously or subconsciously supporting the stocks you hold?

i.e. BRICKS going to KFC or a T-Com holder specifically buying only T-Com products?

Just a random thought / rant

J5

YOU should think some where else you cant eat a T-Com.. [8D]

Deev8

16-03-2007, 06:09 PM

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

quote:Originally posted by Deev8

Well Theresa is available!

PLEASE write some thing funny next TIME.. If you don't consider Theresa to be funny you need a HUMOUR TRANSPLANT

winner69

16-03-2007, 06:37 PM

Good recovery in the share price late today after hitting 103 earlier ..... even so 103 doesn't indicate much confidence

BRICKS

16-03-2007, 08:10 PM

quote:Originally posted by Deev8

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

quote:Originally posted by Deev8

Well Theresa is available!

PLEASE write some thing funny next TIME.. If you don't consider Theresa to be funny you need a HUMOUR TRANSPLANT

SORRY you beat me to IT.. [8D]

winner69

17-03-2007, 08:10 AM

Herald been the one in fuelling the takeover story (every time they mention it the RBD share price goes up) .... but what the heck .... they are now talking fire sale

Can Restaurant Brands avoid a fast-food firesale?

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/3/story.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10429237

The most revealing piece in the article is that most on this thread are as perceptive as the doyen of NZ investing in Carmel Fisher .... she says "We look for companies that can double their earnings over three to five years and Restaurants Brands is never going to do that. It's competitive, it's low margin and it's a hard business."

winner69

17-03-2007, 08:16 AM

Herald certainly beating up RBD today .... yet another story

Salmon's exit takes bite out of sale talk
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/3/story.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10429236

Ends with ....... Long-suffering Restaurant Brands shareholders grimly holding on for a windfall from the sale might be facing a long and disappointing wait.

BRICKS

17-03-2007, 08:39 AM

quote:Originally posted by winner69

Herald certainly beating up RBD today .... yet another story

Salmon's exit takes bite out of sale talk
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/3/story.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10429236

Ends with ....... Long-suffering Restaurant Brands shareholders grimly holding on for a windfall from the sale might be facing a long and disappointing wait.

YOUR up early 69 keep it coming saves me having to look for the news, in this dull NZ market place of very few companies they have to write some thing just to keep in BIZ that's there JOB.. [8D]

Deev8

17-03-2007, 06:55 PM

Brian Gaynor has a few things to say about Restaurant Brands in the Weekend Herald as well.

Salmon lost her job on Wednesday when chairman Ted van Arkel announced that she had stepped down and would be replaced by acting chief executive Russel Creedy until an appropriate replacement had been identified ...

When van Arkel replaced Falconer in July 2006 he had one of two choices, he could either do nothing or take decisive action. He took the latter option without any apparent pressure from large shareholders.

Somebody had to be held responsible for Restaurant Brands' poor performance and Salmon was the obvious choice. But van Arkel's job is only half done as he now has to find a high quality replacement. This will not be an easy task as the fast food industry is extremely competitive and Salmon, along with her predecessor, Jim Collier, struggled to achieve acceptable shareholder returns ...

Chief executives of poorly performing companies often look for a takeover offer as a way to leave with their reputation intact. Rumour says that Vicki Salmon wanted to sell Restaurant Brands but her board of directors rejected this approach. If this is true then Ted van Arkel and his fellow directors should be congratulated for their decision to dismiss Salmon.

Brian Gaynor: Directors need a pro-active approach (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/3/story.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10429221)

BRICKS

18-03-2007, 10:14 AM

quote:Originally posted by Deev8

Brian Gaynor has a few things to say about Restaurant Brands in the Weekend Herald as well.

Salmon lost her job on Wednesday when chairman Ted van Arkel announced that she had stepped down and would be replaced by acting chief executive Russel Creedy until an appropriate replacement had been identified ...

When van Arkel replaced Falconer in July 2006 he had one of two choices, he could either do nothing or take decisive action. He took the latter option without any apparent pressure from large shareholders.

Somebody had to be held responsible for Restaurant Brands' poor performance and Salmon was the obvious choice. But van Arkel's job is only half done as he now has to find a high quality replacement. This will not be an easy task as the fast food industry is extremely competitive and Salmon, along with her predecessor, Jim Collier, struggled to achieve acceptable shareholder returns ...

Chief executives of poorly performing companies often look for a takeover offer as a way to leave with their reputation intact. Rumour says that Vicki Salmon wanted to sell Restaurant Brands but her board of directors rejected this approach. If this is true then Ted van Arkel and his fellow directors should be congratulated for their decision to dismiss Salmon.

Brian Gaynor: Directors need a pro-active approach (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/3/story.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10429221)

SOMEONE has to run the boat we don't know do we until time moves on he mite only be temporary but they did say they would look for an replacement lets hope things will get BETTER and don't dwell on the PAST.. [8D]

duncan macgregor

18-03-2007, 12:47 PM

BRICKS, What a great opportunity to average down.:D:Dmacdunk

BRICKS

18-03-2007, 02:03 PM

quote:Originally posted by hiawatha

I thought perhaps you might apply for the job, macdunk. You seem to have a pretty good idea of how the show should be run. Or so you keep telling us.
hiawatha

NO worry hiawatha he is just upset because he was REJECTED.. [8D]

BRICKS

19-03-2007, 09:51 AM

THE new look KFC @ The Kent Terrace at Wellington is now open for BIZ come and have a look and try !!! Meanwhile back at Paraparaumu try,
Pete`s Pies @ Fries where Pete`s fries comes from Mr CHIP just like all of KFC fries, Nothing like a bag of CHIPPIES... [8D]

winner69

19-03-2007, 01:17 PM

quote:Originally posted by Bling_Bling

The lower the SP for RBD the more Bling will buy. :D

You being plenty today then Bling Bling

The NZ Herald moving the market again with all those sad stories .... but 102 is pretty low aint it

Don't buy too many mate ... you'll push the price up too fast

winner69

19-03-2007, 01:23 PM

Is RBD falling out of the NZX50 soon ..... again?

BRICKS

19-03-2007, 02:50 PM

quote:Originally posted by winner69

Is RBD falling out of the NZX50 soon ..... again?

GREAT who cares the index wont help the company make profits.. [8D]

Halebop

19-03-2007, 06:03 PM

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

GREAT who cares the index wont help the company make profits.. [8D]

Neither it seems, does their business plan. ...the index however will help ascribe a higher value to those profits as index based investors are forced to purchase. The reverse is true if they were ejected.

Halebop

19-03-2007, 06:27 PM

quote:Originally posted by hiawatha

I thought the index was based on the share price and that profits (and losses) were irrelevant in this context.
hiawatha

Profits and losses are only irrelevant in moments of euphoria.

If being in an index lifts demand so my PE rise to 15 from 14, profits are hardly irrelevant.

Halebop

19-03-2007, 09:45 PM

quote:Originally posted by hiawatha

The conclusion doesn't seem to follow from the premise.

Huh?

Halebop

20-03-2007, 01:04 AM

Could you see that share prices are based on profits (and/or prospects of profit growth)?

BRICKS

20-03-2007, 07:53 AM

quote:Originally posted by Halebop

Could you see that share prices are based on profits (and/or prospects of profit growth)?

THANKS for all your dribble again about nothing the word is KFC needs to hire a hero to fix things so HELP may be on the way in the meantime stop going on about the past and fill your portfolio with RBD that is if you have one,, let us in what you actually HOLD,, Regards.. [8D]

duncan macgregor

20-03-2007, 08:16 AM

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

quote:Originally posted by Halebop

Could you see that share prices are based on profits (and/or prospects of profit growth)?

THANKS for all your dribble again about nothing the word is KFC needs to hire a hero to fix things so HELP may be on the way in the meantime stop going on about the past and fill your portfolio with RBD that is if you have one,, let us in what you actually HOLD,, Regards.. [8D]
BRICKS lets all have a laugh what do you hold?.
I started the year with MCR, AGM, SMY, SMM, then bought IGO. The first down turn i sold half my portfolio the second day, and missed half the downtrend. On the third day the market started to right itself, so I bought more of SMM at $4-15 AUS. It is now $4-54 AUS. Half my portfolio is SMM with equal ammounts in the others. Look it all up and start to think for a change, not post dribble to everyone that dares to have a different position. LETS BE HAVING YOU BRICKS WHAT DO YOU HOLD. :D:D:Dmacdunk

BRICKS

20-03-2007, 08:57 AM

quote:Originally posted by duncan macgregor

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

quote:Originally posted by Halebop

Could you see that share prices are based on profits (and/or prospects of profit growth)?

THANKS for all your dribble again about nothing the word is KFC needs to hire a hero to fix things so HELP may be on the way in the meantime stop going on about the past and fill your portfolio with RBD that is if you have one,, let us in what you actually HOLD,, Regards.. [8D]

BRICKS lets all have a laugh what do you hold?.
I started the year with MCR, AGM, SMY, SMM, then bought IGO. The first down turn i sold half my portfolio the second day, and missed half the downtrend. On the third day the market started to right itself, so I bought more of SMM at $4-15 AUS. It is now $4-54 AUS. Half my portfolio is SMM with equal ammounts in the others. Look it all up and start to think for a change, not post dribble to everyone that dares to have a different position. LETS BE HAVING YOU BRICKS WHAT DO YOU HOLD. :D:D:Dmacdunk

BEN. BENDIGO BANK.. [8D][8D][8D]

duncan macgregor

20-03-2007, 09:19 AM

Rubbish bricks you told us all you had bought into it I presume in advance like I do?. What a pathetic little person you really are. Stick to your RBD the company needs people like you. macdunk

BRICKS

20-03-2007, 09:31 AM

quote:Originally posted by duncan macgregor

Rubbish bricks you told us all you had bought into it I presume in advance like I do?. What a pathetic little person you really are. Stick to your RBD the company needs people like you. macdunk

SLOB been in BEN some years below $4 and RBD @ 92 cents and still in front 18%
unlike you who has just found AUS a few weeks ago and now an expert on everything and not backwards of telling all in OZ you can FIND dill enough to listen to SCOT SLOBS who wish to lay in GUTTERS to drink all from your own MOUTH.. [8D][8D][8D][8D]

duncan macgregor

20-03-2007, 09:48 AM

BRICKS, People that revert to personal abuse to try and prove a point are normally thick as bricks. :D:D:D. Macdunk

BRICKS

20-03-2007, 10:00 AM

quote:Originally posted by duncan macgregor

BRICKS, People that revert to personal abuse to try and prove a point are normally thick as bricks. :D:D:D. Macdunk

YOU said all those things with your own mouth and you wanted a laugh so why ant you laughing and just back to repeating yourself again in other circles it would be called Burping in PUBLIC.. [8D][8D][8D][8D][8D]

Halebop

20-03-2007, 02:39 PM

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

THANKS for all your dribble...

BRICKS I consider you the sharetrader expert on dribble so will give your suggestion all the consideration it deserves.

BRICKS

20-03-2007, 03:25 PM

quote:Originally posted by Halebop

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

THANKS for all your dribble...

BRICKS I consider you the sharetrader expert on dribble so will give your suggestion all the consideration it deserves.

YOUR WELCOME.. [8D]

winner69

21-03-2007, 02:33 PM

Surely this couldn't go below the magical $1 mark again ... could it

Hell ... whats going on ..... a few years ago 3 RBD shares bought you a regular Hawaiian pizza ...and now you need 9 RBD shares

.... and then to get it delivered you need 6 more RBD shares

.... but then the company would prefer cash ... yes

etrader

21-03-2007, 03:56 PM

nil

Deev8

21-03-2007, 04:04 PM

quote:Originally posted by etrader

they bought out that they were talking to the "flavour of the month" Private Equity firms but nothing in concrete. Seems to have lost it's momentum.

Brian Gaynor's take on this in The Weekend Herald was that the board dumped Salmon because she wanted to sell out to private equity.

Chief executives of poorly performing companies often look for a takeover offer as a way to leave with their reputation intact. Rumour says that Vicki Salmon wanted to sell Restaurant Brands but her board of directors rejected this approach. If this is true then Ted van Arkel and his fellow directors should be congratulated for their decision to dismiss Salmon.

Brian Gaynor: Directors need a pro-active approach (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/3/story.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10429221)

etrader

21-03-2007, 04:39 PM

nil

BRICKS

21-03-2007, 05:00 PM

quote:Originally posted by Deev8

Brian Gaynor's take on this in The Weekend Herald was that the board dumped Salmon because she wanted to sell out to private equity.

Brian Gaynor: Directors need a pro-active approach (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/3/story.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10429221)

Deev8 This is the second time your used the same paper talk down try to get new NEWS & etrader your facts are same that gets repeated which we all have heard before try getting real NEWS Thanks.. [8D]

WHILE we have your attention 69 your exaggerating again delivery has all ways been FREE... [8D][8D]

etrader

21-03-2007, 05:26 PM

[/quote]

Deev8 This is the second time your used the same paper talk down try to get new NEWS & etrader your facts are same that gets repeated which we all have heard before try getting real NEWS Thanks.. [8D]

WHILE we have your attention 69 your exaggerating again delivery has all ways been FREE... [8D][8D]
[/quote]

Brick I've deleted my posts on this topic, it's an open chat site, but you just reply two liners of nothing to other posters, i struggle in recent posts you've had not many new facts so i've deleted my posts to help free up room for you

winner69

21-03-2007, 05:58 PM

BRICKS .... shop on line and the best price (even on 2 big Hawaiian jobs) includes $6 delivery

BRICKS

21-03-2007, 06:26 PM

quote:Originally posted by winner69

BRICKS .... shop on line and the best price (even on 2 big Hawaiian jobs) includes $6 delivery

STILL the worse case, so go down and pick them up free will get you out of the house and away from the wife in your case.. and guessing you prob don't eat THEM.. [8D]

BRICKS

21-03-2007, 06:30 PM

etrader more dribble than facts.. [8D]

winner69

21-03-2007, 07:00 PM

Right on BRICKS .... prefer real pizza

Pomodoro .... great pizza even though eating in is a bit rustic

One Red Dog ..... another great pizza but a bit too noisy on a Friday night

Onthemoney

21-03-2007, 07:03 PM

Spagalimis is the go... if you want great pizza

winner69

21-03-2007, 07:12 PM

quote:Originally posted by Onthemoney

Spagalimis is the go... if you want great pizza

i'll give it a go when next in chch

winner69

24-03-2007, 05:02 PM

Disappointed that The Herald didn't have a few stories about private equity taking at RBD in the near future.

That would have balanced all the crap they produced last week ..... hell RBD needs all the help it can to get back over $1 ...

..... maybe the Sunday pepaers might help out

BRICKS

25-03-2007, 09:03 AM

THE latest news @ RBD its BIZ as normal against the rest, Yesterday
at KFC at Oxford Terrace WEL going gang busters full of happy faces it seems to have done wonders to that store but RBD is NZ wide and one of the largest chains and is under attack from every KIWI that has a tongue and/or a mouth to FEED.. [8D]

winner69

25-03-2007, 10:16 AM

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

....at KFC at Oxford Terrace WEL

.... probabaly meant the refurbed KENT Terrace one ..... 2 people in it at 7pm last night .... suppose that's gangbusters

One of those they sold at a 6-7% yield .... wonder what the rent is now?

BRICKS

25-03-2007, 10:39 AM

quote:Originally posted by winner69

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

....at KFC at Oxford Terrace WEL

.... probabaly meant the refurbed KENT Terrace one ..... 2 people in it at 7pm last night .... suppose that's gangbusters

One of those they sold at a 6-7% yield .... wonder what the rent is now?

YES Oxford yer right and was there at 7pm sorry you did not talk to me and the place was full, exaggerating will not get you to heaven and the big exchange in the sky think AGAIN.. [8D]

BRICKS

25-03-2007, 10:41 AM

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

quote:Originally posted by winner69

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

....at KFC at Oxford Terrace WEL

.... probabaly meant the refurbed KENT Terrace one ..... 2 people in it at 7pm last night .... suppose that's gangbusters

One of those they sold at a 6-7% yield .... wonder what the rent is now?

YES Kent yer right and was there at 7pm sorry you did not talk to me and the place was full, exaggerating will not get you to heaven and the big exchange in the sky think AGAIN.. [8D]

winner69

26-03-2007, 07:24 PM

Bricks ..... 1 person in Kent Tce KFC about 6pm tonite ........ 3 in Dominos across the road .... and the Adelaide Rd Pizza Hut empty (maybe everybody was paying the delivery fee) .... 3 in the pizza/takeaways place in Berhampore ...... and 2 in Hell in Island Bay

Then again Monday might not be the busiest for takeaways

Thought u might be interested

duncan macgregor

26-03-2007, 07:37 PM

quote:Originally posted by winner69

Bricks ..... 1 person in Kent Tce KFC about 6pm tonite ........ 3 in Dominos across the road .... and the Adelaide Rd Pizza Hut empty (maybe everybody was paying the delivery fee) .... 3 in the pizza/takeaways place in Berhampore ...... and 2 in Hell in Island Bay

Then again Monday might not be the busiest for takeaways

Thought u might be interested
The only interest that i have is Why do you find it interesting. I really dont give a sh*t myself.:D:D:Dmacdunk

winner69

26-03-2007, 07:59 PM

Macdunk .... always interesting to see how busy things are .... no bother to do this research for BRICKS as traffic lights at most of these places.

Main concern is giving BRICKS some idea as to whether he should start selling seeing that he is now only 5 cents up on his 92 cents buy price

And mate ... every time I see that KFC in Kent Tce I think of you and your little raves about them selling all the properties .... looks really good now after the refurb (HATE TO THINK HOW MUCH THIS ONE COST) but I reckon the rent will have gone up (or will go up)a bit since they sold this piece of prime real estate

Bling_Bling

27-03-2007, 07:33 AM

RBD pls come down to around 90 cents. Bling has buy orders waiting. :D

Keep up with all the negative talk, it is working in Blings favour. Thank you.

winner69

27-03-2007, 05:11 PM

Bling bling ..... 90 cents was never on the cards .... and now missed your opportunity to even get some at 95 cents

Back over 100 by weeks end

lager

30-03-2007, 11:24 PM

Bling Bling, 90cents is too high.
I would say 75cents best bet.

Bling_Bling

31-03-2007, 08:03 AM

quote:Originally posted by lager

Bling Bling, 90cents is too high.
I would say 75cents best bet.

You mean i can get it cheaper? fantastic. :D

Bling is cashed up, so bring it on.

BRICKS

31-03-2007, 08:28 AM

quote:Originally posted by lager

Bling Bling, 90cents is too high.
I would say 75cents best bet.

DO you have any to SELL will BUY them @ 75 if you have make sense LAD,

Bling all the negative talk has WON even 69 said they wont go to 90 cents and bugger me he was wrong the clown Scott has yet to play his record again and again, this is the bottom of pit take your life in your its a BUY one word of takeover and off it will go like a AIR 777 JET.. [8D]

duncan macgregor

31-03-2007, 12:57 PM

quote:Originally posted by Snoopy

Please all rise for this session of the Sharechat internet court, Judge Mick 100 presiding.

The defendent, Snoopy, is here to answer the following question

"Before you decide to hold or buy more shares in a company whose shareprice is plumetting in value - eg, restarant brands
Ask your self this question:"

"Is there a possibility that my decision making process is being affected by 'escaslation of commitment'?"

"So how about it Snoopy? Are you suffering from escalation of commitment?"

---------

A fair question Judge Mick. Now please allow me to present my evidence.

I am a foundation shareholder of RBD. I acquired my first shares in June 1997 at an effective $2.03. In March 1998 I purchased some more at an equivalent price of $1.29. I have made several purchases in subsequent periods, priced as follows: September 1998 62c (equivalent), February 2000 $1.20 (equivalent) and another batch at $1.18 (equivalent). More purchases were made in September 2000 at $1.14, March 2002 at $2.08, July 2002 at $1.71, September 2003 at $1.25, September 2004 at $1.26, December 2004 at $1.26, March 2005 at $1.29, July 2005 at $1.60, October 2005 at $1.30 and finally later in that same month at $1.24. My weighted average purchase price is $1.26. My weighted average share holding time is 2.5 years. (That's because most of my holding has been bought in the last couple of years, during the time RBD has suffered from the most derision on this forum.)

Based on a market price of $1.33 I have made an average capital gain of 2.5cps per year held. The current net yield is 10cps, or 12.5cps if we add the annualised capital gain. That gives a gross yield annual return of 13.8%. Now, I'm not going to claim that is a fantastic return, although it is double what you would earn in the bank. But I do see that return as more than satisfactory, given the conservative nature of the underlying investment.

Some people see successful investment, in the cricket analogy, as a process of hitting as many sixes as you can. Personally I prefer a technique which gets less headlines but over the long term can be just as rewarding if not more so (because you are taking less risks). I refer to the 'pushing for singles' method. Just go about your job quietly clocking up the runs and keeping the scoreboard ticking over.

Being an investor in RBD won't score you many bonus swoons at cocktail parties. But it's a great investment to put your mother into. That's because my quoted returns are IMO, quite sustainable - even if the business doesn't grow at all! That's why RBD should be a core holding of any income based portfolio. For this whole century, RBD has had a consistent dividend income record that puts *all* the listed property trusts to shame.

As for the 'plummeting share price', there has been no long term plummet since 1998, since the inital fall from grace after the IPO. The share price today is more or less what it was in 1998. Since RBD have paid out nearly all of their profits as dividends since then, this is to be expected.

The case for investment, since 1998 has always been based on dividend yield. Investing in this company from a dividend perspective makes as much sense in 2006 as it did in 1998 and virtually every year in between. Therefore I reject the 'escalation of commitment' argument. If you look at 'new' investment in RBD in 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006 it has made huge sense every year, for eight different annually discrete reasons.

RBD, highly profitable, highly reliable and proven as a sound investment for every year of this century. Judge Mick, I rest my case.

SNOOPY

discl: hold RBD, and very satisfied with the investment performance.
I wonder if SNOOPY is still averaging down now that those lovely div

BRICKS

31-03-2007, 01:51 PM

[quote]quote:Originally posted by duncan macgregor

[quote]quote:Originally posted by Snoopy

Please all rise for this session of the Sharechat internet court, Judge Mick 100 presiding.

The defendent, Snoopy, is here to answer the following question

"Before you decide to hold or buy more shares in a company whose shareprice is plumetting in value - eg, restarant brands
Ask your self this question:"

"Is there a possibility that my decision making process is being affected by 'escaslation of commitment'?"

"So how about it Snoopy? Are you suffering from escalation of commitment?"

---------

A fair question Judge Mick. Now please allow me to present my evidence.

I am a foundation shareholder of RBD. I acquired my first shares in June 1997 at an effective $2.03. In March 1998 I purchased some more at an equivalent price of $1.29. I have made several purchases in subsequent periods, priced as follows: September 1998 62c (equivalent), February 2000 $1.20 (equivalent) and another batch at $1.18 (equivalent). More purchases were made in September 2000 at $1.14, March 2002 at $2.08, July 2002 at $1.71, September 2003 at $1.25, September 2004 at $1.26, December 2004 at $1.26, March 2005 at $1.29, July 2005 at $1.60, October 2005 at $1.30 and finally later in that same month at $1.24. My weighted average purchase price is $1.26. My weighted average share holding time is 2.5 years. (That's because most of my holding has been bought in the last couple of years, during the time RBD has suffered from the most derision on this forum.)

Based on a market price of $1.33 I have made an average capital gain of 2.5cps per year held. The current net yield is 10cps, or 12.5cps if we add the annualised capital gain. That gives a gross yield annual return of 13.8%. Now, I'm not going to claim that is a fantastic return, although it is double what you would earn in the bank. But I do see that return as more than satisfactory, given the conservative nature of the underlying investment.

Some people see successful investment, in the cricket analogy, as a process of hitting as many sixes as you can. Personally I prefer a technique which gets less headlines but over the long term can be just as rewarding if not more so (because you are taking less risks). I refer to the 'pushing for singles' method. Just go about your job quietly clocking up the runs and keeping the scoreboard ticking over.

Being an investor in RBD won't score you many bonus swoons at cocktail parties. But it's a great investment to put your mother into. That's because my quoted returns are IMO, quite sustainable - even if the business doesn't grow at all! That's why RBD should be a core holding of any income based portfolio. For this whole century, RBD has had a consistent dividend income record that puts *all* the listed property trusts to shame.

As for the 'plummeting share price', there has been no long term plummet since 1998, since the inital fall from grace after the IPO. The share price today is more or less what it was in 1998. Since RBD have paid out nearly all of their profits as dividends since then, this is to be expected.

The case for investment, since 1998 has always been based on dividend yield. Investing in this company from a dividend perspective makes as much sense in 2006 as it did in 1998 and virtually every year in between. Therefore I reject the 'escalation of commitment' argument. If you look at 'new' investment in RBD in 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006 it has made huge sense every year, for eight different annually discrete reasons.

RBD, highly profitable, highly reliable and proven as a sound investment for every year of this century. Judge Mick, I rest my case.

SNOOPY

discl: hold RBD, and very satisfied with

duncan macgregor

31-03-2007, 03:44 PM

BRICKS, They have very little to sell. They sold the roof over their head for that overseas trip remember. They then spent what was left doing up the landlords premises. What is left to sell other than a few pots and pans, and a name. The writing is on the wall giving great opportunities to average down.:D:Dmacdunk

duncan macgregor

31-03-2007, 08:11 PM

Hiawatha, we all know that. The business now has very little to sell it costs more to run paying rent. The family silver is gone, not very much worth buying at a fire sale. The opposition can now squeeze them out, why buy them out.macdunk

Halebop

01-04-2007, 12:45 AM

With the benefit of hindsight RBD perhaps made the wrong move selling their real estate. However, they received around $52m for the property at a time their debt levels stood at almost $80m. Given RBD wanted to maintain their dividend, the bankers were probably uncomfortable with this level of debt on top of an $8.5m annual dividend overhead.

The real problem was not real estate divestments, but capital management, poor acquisition policy and operational decline. I suspect if dividends had have been modest, the real estate could have been maintained and would probably now be worth closer to $100m. All those investors excited about the dividend yield and willing to overlook capital loss and operational shortcomings, were in fact just swapping non taxable capital for taxable dividend income.

In the time RBD has been listed, they have made about $43m in acquisitions and grossed $52m from real estate sales (By my reckoning they have netted +$9.299m from this process). Alas the acquisitions comprised Pizza Hut Victoria and Pizza Haven. These investments have doubtless not met management projections.

Over the same period, depreciation expensed has been $85.878m but Capex expended has been $124.802m. This means they have reinvested an extra $38.924m back into the business - on Pizza "delcos", a national call centre, upgraded KFC stores and greenfield Starbuck sites. If you include the pizza acquisitions, $82m has been invested for growth. Meanwhile, the $52m in property divestments has essentially maintained the $55m+ in dividends since 2002.

If I'd have invested $82m over almost a decade, I'd have expected that investment to yield results above what the previous version of the business could achieve, not below it. Allowing for the time value of money at a 15% return, RBD has so far destroyed $150m in shareholder value on their new investments alone, not counting the reduced performance of historical assets and missed profits on the property portfolio. This is the "real" value of those dividends.

When you add in reduced flexibility and higher leverage & risk those dividends contributed, it is difficult to see how investors could expect only the CEO to fall on her sword?

BRICKS

01-04-2007, 09:04 AM

quote:Originally posted by Halebop

With the benefit of hindsight RBD perhaps made the wrong move selling their real estate. However, they received around $52m for the property at a time their debt levels stood at almost $80m. Given RBD wanted to maintain their dividend, the bankers were probably uncomfortable with this level of debt on top of an $8.5m annual dividend overhead.

The real problem was not real estate divestments, but capital management, poor acquisition policy and operational decline. I suspect if dividends had have been modest, the real estate could have been maintained and would probably now be worth closer to $100m. All those investors excited about the dividend yield and willing to overlook capital loss and operational shortcomings, were in fact just swapping non taxable capital for taxable dividend income.

In the time RBD has been listed, they have made about $43m in acquisitions and grossed $52m from real estate sales (By my reckoning they have netted +$9.299m from this process). Alas the acquisitions comprised Pizza Hut Victoria and Pizza Haven. These investments have doubtless not met management projections.

Over the same period, depreciation expensed has been $85.878m but Capex expended has been $124.802m. This means they have reinvested an extra $38.924m back into the business - on Pizza "delcos", a national call centre, upgraded KFC stores and greenfield Starbuck sites. If you include the pizza acquisitions, $82m has been invested for growth. Meanwhile, the $52m in property divestments has essentially maintained the $55m+ in dividends since 2002.

If I'd have invested $82m over almost a decade, I'd have expected that investment to yield results above what the previous version of the business could achieve, not below it. Allowing for the time value of money at a 15% return, RBD has so far destroyed $150m in shareholder value on their new investments alone, not counting the reduced performance of historical assets and missed profits on the property portfolio. This is the "real" value of those dividends.

When you add in reduced flexibility and higher leverage & risk those dividends contributed, it is difficult to see how investors could expect only the CEO to fall on her sword?

ANOTHER YESTERDAY HISTORY LESSON.. [8D]

duncan macgregor

01-04-2007, 09:56 AM

BRICKS

01-04-2007, 09:59 AM

quote:Originally posted by duncan macgregor

quote:Originally posted by hiawatha
"Hindsight" is obviously a valuable thing. Though property values seem to have increased since the decision to sell and lease back was taken they could not have certain at the time that this would happen. Indeed property values may have fallen. On the eve of launching a risky venture into Australia it was probably good risk management to pass the property risk over to someone else.
hiawatha
What a load of rubbish property values were going up 10pc pa before and since. They could have borrowed the money from the bank cheaper or asked you blue eyed starry eyed types to finance it.
Would you spend $800000 doing up the landlords property :D:D:D macdunk

TURN THE RECORD OVER.. [8D]

Halebop

01-04-2007, 10:40 AM

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

ANOTHER YESTERDAY HISTORY LESSON.. [8D]

With a 90 cent share price, the other side of the record plays "it's yesterday once more"...

duncan macgregor

01-04-2007, 10:45 AM

quote:Originally posted by Halebop

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

ANOTHER YESTERDAY HISTORY LESSON.. [8D]

With a 90 cent share price, the other side of the record plays "it's yesterday once more"...
Another one springs to mind YESTERDAYS MAN.[:o)]macdunk

Deev8

01-04-2007, 11:02 AM

quote:Originally posted by duncan macgregor

YESTERDAYS MAN.[:o)]macdunkMaybe you could use it as a signature.

Halebop

01-04-2007, 11:15 AM

quote:Originally posted by hiawatha

"Hindsight" is obviously a valuable thing. Though property values seem to have increased since the decision to sell and lease back was taken they could not have certain at the time that this would happen. Indeed property values may have fallen. On the eve of launching a risky venture into Australia it was probably good risk management to pass the property risk over to someone else.

There was no hindsight at the time or now or perhaps you have misunderstood my post? They could not afford the combination of Eagle Boys, Real Estate and dividends. It seems only the 10 cent dividend was considered a certainty? Perhaps they had already decided that the dividend was the only factor supporting the share price? Is so, they should have considered the bigger picture of "why"?

quote:Originally posted by hiawatha

You mention Vicky Salmon "falling on her sword". However Ms Salmon was not CEO at the time these decisions were taken, and the former CEO, Craig whatsisname, has left.
hiawatha

There aren't many CEO positions where the honeymoon period would extend beyond 12 months. That Jim Collier couldn't get the company firing is not a good enough reason for Vicky Salmon to also fail. The strategic decisions that have tripped them up like acquisitions and dividends are set at board level in any case, so Vicki Salmon had as much input in this regard as Jim Collier.

Now RBD find themselves in the position where to get the KFC stores firing, they have to spend $800,000 per unit - the "Radical transformation". The radical transformation doesn't include a rethink of capital management - where dividends must be paid for from the 88 KFC stores, an average of $110,000 after tax ($164,000 pretax) per store per annum. It is not clear to me (nor the market, quite obviously) that they are or will earn a return on this transformation. Higher profits are not enough if the store must be revamped again in 8 years. The profits must exceed the cost and life of investment and be sustainable too. An $800,000 investment doesn't fix fundamental issues like inadequate service and a core product that is 3 decades too late. Numerous competitors have taken advantage of this already as RBD's takeout market share continues on its moribund way.

Halebop

01-04-2007, 11:32 AM

...although KFC have undoubtedly been under-invested-in over the last few years thanks to low profits and high dividends, why does "radical transformation" cost $800,000? This is an aggregate $70m across the KFC stores. For each $100,000 saved off the cost of "radical transformation", shareholders would be saved $8.8m - close to a whole years dividend. It smacks of the old property developer solution to problems - build your way out of it. I wonder if they tested a less radical $500,000 or $300,000 fix, if results would be materially different?

The problem is to remain current, stores need regular reinvestment. When I was involved in such things, the accepted standard in the USA where this is a science, is typically around 7 years in most FMCG categories (Ranging from Fast Food to Supermarkets). So that $800k needs to be paid back very quickly before its "Yesterday once more".

BRICKS

01-04-2007, 11:36 AM

quote:Originally posted by Halebop

quote:Originally posted by hiawatha

"Hindsight" is obviously a valuable thing. Though property values seem to have increased since the decision to sell and lease back was taken they could not have certain at the time that this would happen. Indeed property values may have fallen. On the eve of launching a risky venture into Australia it was probably good risk management to pass the property risk over to someone else.

There was no hindsight at the time or now or perhaps you have misunderstood my post? They could not afford the combination of Eagle Boys, Real Estate and dividends. It seems only the 10 cent dividend was considered a certainty? Perhaps they had already decided that the dividend was the only factor supporting the share price? Is so, they should have considered the bigger picture of "why"?

quote:Originally posted by hiawatha

You mention Vicky Salmon "falling on her sword". However Ms Salmon was not CEO at the time these decisions were taken, and the former CEO, Craig whatsisname, has left.
hiawatha

There aren't many CEO positions where the honeymoon period would extend beyond 12 months. That Jim Collier couldn't get the company firing is not a good enough reason for Vicky Salmon to also fail. The strategic decisions that have tripped them up like acquisitions and dividends are set at board level in any case, so Vicki Salmon had as much input in this regard as Jim Collier.

Now RBD find themselves in the position where to get the KFC stores firing, they have to spend $800,000 per unit - the "Radical transformation". The radical transformation doesn't include a rethink of capital management - where dividends must be paid for from the 88 KFC stores, an average of $110,000 after tax ($164,000 pretax) per store per annum. It is not clear to me (nor the market, quite obviously) that they are or will earn a return on this transformation. Higher profits are not enough if the store must be revamped again in 8 years. The profits must exceed the cost and life of investment and be sustainable too. An $800,000 investment doesn't fix fundamental issues like inadequate service and a core product that is 3 decades too late. Numerous competitors have taken advantage of this already as RBD's takeout market share continues on its moribund way.

WELL you better get down there first thing tomorrow and drop all your non shares on the NZX front door step.. [8D]

winner69

01-04-2007, 12:34 PM

The 'transformed' Kent Tce Wgtn one is really rocking though

duncan macgregor

01-04-2007, 12:58 PM

quote:Originally posted by winner69

The 'transformed' Kent Tce Wgtn one is really rocking though
There is a song about that one as well. DOWN THE OLD KENT ROAD.[:o)][:o)]:D:D Sorry bricks and HIAWATHA your sense of humour must be at an all time low by now. macdunk

winner69

01-04-2007, 01:23 PM

Isn't OLD KENT RD one of the cheapo sites in Monolopy ...... maybe an omen

duncan macgregor

01-04-2007, 01:39 PM

quote:Originally posted by winner69

Isn't OLD KENT RD one of the cheapo sites in Monolopy ...... maybe an omen
Better to ask bricks he would be up on that sort of thing.:D:Dmacdunk

winner69

01-04-2007, 01:53 PM

Mind you commercial properties in that part of Wellington have gone up 50% plus in the last 2 years

BRICKS

01-04-2007, 04:09 PM

quote:Originally posted by Deev8

quote:Originally posted by duncan macgregor

YESTERDAYS MAN.[:o)]macdrunkMaybe you could use it as a signature.

JUST GREAT.. [8D]

winner69

01-04-2007, 06:33 PM

quote:Originally posted by hiawatha

[quote

In an ideal world, all profits would be paid as dividends, and additional capital needed, raised in the capital markets.

..... and if this happened in the case of RBD what returns would the providers of the additional capital get? Zilch .....as all the profits have gone to pay a divie to the existing shareholders

Halebop

01-04-2007, 07:09 PM

quote:Originally posted by hiawatha

But if there is it is certainly not due to "low profits and high dividends". The profits earned have obviously been sufficient to cover the dividends.

Profits paid dividends and nothing was left for the stores that generated those profits. Now RBD borrows to relicense the fried chicken rights. Borrows to refit the stores. Borrows to expand the coffee shop foot print.

Its about sustainability and a road map to their future...

Reported profits since 1997: $96.5m
Dividends Paid since 1997: $81m (84% of profits)
Net Retentions since 1997: $15.5m (16% of Profits)
"Growth" Capex (in excess of depreciation): $38.9m
Additional Acquisitions: $43m
Funded by: Selling real estate, reduced working capital and increased borrowings

How do they keep funding this? At what point are these investments, so far an extra $82m not counting the opportunity cost, going to contribute to increased profits? RBD's absolute profit is lower yet their asset base in ever higher. Profits are lower whichever metric you use - return on equity, return on assets, dollars, EBIT margins. Australia is not their only problem.

quote:Originally posted by hiawatha

And where in the financing rulebook does it say that new investment must be met out of profits? The opposite is true I would have thought. In an ideal world, all profits would be paid as dividends, and additional capital needed, raised in the capital markets. Shareholders who wanted their share of profits "ploughed back" could subscribe to a drip scheme.

That must be in the financial rulebook chapter entitled: "Dilution, the road to riches".

There is a very simple set of rules that covers borrowing, profits, cash flow, timing and flexibility. It is called math. So far it's something like Math 10, RBD Nil. Buffet's weighing machine has spoken.

quote:Originally posted by hiawatha

Everyone agrees that their entrance into the Australian pizza market was a bad move and that it has damaged the company. But to conclude from that that their financing methods are at fault is non sequitur.
hiawatha

Really?

So what reserves are they calling on to ensure the completion of the 50 store expansion of the coffee chain? The "radical transformation" of the chicken stores? The turnaround of the pizza business? Dividends have had as big a part to play in the "radical rundown" of this company as their inability to pick the competitive vacuum created by Eagle Boys, their inability to read the Victorian pizza market, their inability to lift the share price, their inability to sustain return on equity, their inability to sustain return on assets, their inability to do anything to sustain anything a rational investor might look for when risking their hard earned capital.

This is TEL all over again, proving the lie that modern capital "efficiency" models fail to address that anyone else could with common sense physics and hands on business nous. While RBD fanboys defend the indefensible, this company continues to gobble shareholder wealth in the same manner the RBD's competitors have gobbled their market share. Without honest criticism, how does this fix itself? The rationale for RBD has been defended on this forum for literally years while the company itself proves its detractors and other rationalists right with frightening monotony.

The new chairman at leasts presents a glimmer of hope but RBD has delivered many glimmers wit

winner69

01-04-2007, 07:36 PM

quote:Originally posted by hiawatha

quote:..... and if this happened in the case of RBD what returns would the providers of the additional capital get? Zilch .....as all the profits have gone to pay a divie to the existing shareholders

If additional capital is raised for investment there would, or should, be an increase in profits out of which extra dividends could be paid. Otherwise there is no point in raising capital and investing it.

So you agree with halebop then ..... that paragraph of yours is wxactly what halebop has been saying ..... and in RBDs case the should has never happened

Halebop

01-04-2007, 10:24 PM

quote:Originally posted by hiawatha

[quote]This is not at all what halebop has been saying. halebop seems to be blaming all of RBD's problems on the paying out of most of its profits as dividends. But what have dividends got to do with the misreading of Eagle Boys situation and the misreading of the Victoria pizza market?
hiawatha

No. I was linking the shortcomings of strategy (Board) with the shortcomings operations (Management). There were a litany of disasters recorded in my post(s), not all of which can be attributed to the CEO(s). Dividends are however a very controllable factor with a very predictable cost. They have been costing this company strategically and operationally for quite some time. I'd accept the argument that the saving grace of dividends is at least shareholders get to spend them instead of management. Not a great rationale to prompt investment though.

winner69

02-04-2007, 06:34 AM

One certainity is that YUM! and Starbucks Inc get their $20M odd every year ..... but YUM! might be a bit worried their bit is not increasing

Bling_Bling

02-04-2007, 07:19 AM

I totally agree with all you doomsday preachers of KFC. And yes it is a dog run by a bunch of useless board of directors who should ultimately be responsible for RBDs failures in the past and present.

It is time for the board to do the right thing and let RBD go to the highest bidder.

No more looking at fundamentals, lets geton with the sale! FFS!

manuka

02-04-2007, 10:03 AM

Even Pizza Huts name is out of date.... One Red Dog, Hell Pizza. What about some fresh ideas? Maybe like celebrity pizza's. Or maybe take the easy way and sell.

BRICKS

02-04-2007, 10:31 AM

quote:Originally posted by manuka

Even Pizza Huts name is out of date.... One Red Dog, Hell Pizza. What about some fresh ideas? Maybe like celebrity pizza's. Or maybe take the easy way and sell.

KIWI`s do not like pizza`s that much so with any/many competition makes a big chain with overheads that's large would be better out so they should SELL to small operators and move on with the parts that do PAY.. [8D]

Bling_Bling

02-04-2007, 11:23 AM

quote:Originally posted by hiawatha

quote:I totally agree with all you doomsday preachers of KFC. And yes it is a dog run by a bunch of useless board of directors who should ultimately be responsible for RBDs failures in the past and present.

It is time for the board to do the right thing and let RBD go to the highest bidder.

No more looking at fundamentals, lets geton with the sale! FFS!

I don't think selling the lot is a good idea (unless they get a good price, of course). However, if they could somehow flick off Pizza Hut and keep the rest, they might be getting somewhere. Otherwise I think PH needs some serious thought.
hiawatha

I would dump my holding on the market if the directors decide to keep the operations and not sell. The board is a bunch of useless idiots. Time for them to go also.

BRICKS

02-04-2007, 12:15 PM

quote:Originally posted by Bling_Bling

quote:Originally posted by hiawatha

quote:I totally agree with all you doomsday preachers of KFC. And yes it is a dog run by a bunch of useless board of directors who should ultimately be responsible for RBDs failures in the past and present.

It is time for the board to do the right thing and let RBD go to the highest bidder.

No more looking at fundamentals, lets geton with the sale! FFS!

I don't think selling the lot is a good idea (unless they get a good price, of course). However, if they could somehow flick off Pizza Hut and keep the rest, they might be getting somewhere. Otherwise I think PH needs some serious thought.
hiawatha

I would dump my holding on the market if the directors decide to keep the operations and not sell. The board is a bunch of useless idiots. Time for them to go also.

O NO Bling not the whole 100 shares , Go KFC for dinner.. [8D]

Bling_Bling

02-04-2007, 03:56 PM

Hey BRICKs wake up boy, you been having a wet dream. You've been watching too many of those rap videos and fantasing about the huge portfolio you've got with the discount brokers. :D

duncan macgregor

02-04-2007, 04:08 PM

You lot had better lay off my mate BRICKS.[:I]. He went on a buying spree today, and shoved the price up 7.8pc so far today. Good on you bricks money where the mouth is EH. Its not a dog after all its a dead cat bouncing.:D:D:Dmacdunk

BRICKS

02-04-2007, 04:59 PM

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

quote:Originally posted by Deev8

quote:Originally posted by duncan macgregor

YESTERDAYS MAN.[:o)]macdrunkMaybe you could use it as a signature.

JUST GREAT.. [8D]

Ha Haa keep it up macdrunk & Bling we all know your got 200 shares.. [8D]

BRICKS

04-04-2007, 09:30 AM

2 days of peace and quite the knockers are on holidays or just hiding in the bushes like the communist use to do so they can counter attack with the left out rubbish at KFC.. [8D]

lager

16-04-2007, 09:39 PM

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

quote:Originally posted by lager

Bling Bling, 90cents is too high.
I would say 75cents best bet.

DO you have any to SELL will BUY them @ 75 if you have make sense LAD,

Bling all the negative talk has WON even 69 said they wont go to 90 cents and bugger me he was wrong the clown Scott has yet to play his record again and again, this is the bottom of pit take your life in your its a BUY one word of takeover and off it will go like a AIR 777 JET.. [8D]

Sorry was out of action, looking at the graph since my last posting suggest that RBD price will continue to fall. Maybe my 75cents prediction might be a bit off but buy order at 85cents is my best bet.

Bling_Bling

17-04-2007, 11:16 AM

Bling will buy more if it comes to 85 cents :). I am happy to buy and hold.

Deev8

27-04-2007, 04:53 PM

Detailed final results released today.
Total sales for New Zealand operations up 1.7% to $293.6 million
Store EBITDA down 18% to $37.0 million
Group Net Profit after Tax (excluding non-trading items) down 47% to $6.5 million
Final dividend 3.0c down from 5.5c a year ago

Restaurant Brands Report to Shareholders for the Year ended 28 February 2007 (http://www.nzx.com/market/market_announcements/by_company?id=146726)

Shares down 1c to 91 following the announcement today.

Onthemoney

03-05-2007, 08:52 PM

Went to my local refurbished KFC today. No wonder RBD struggles staff quite openly handing out excess change to friends. Give them $10 get a meal and get $20 change what a joke. Where were the managers - sitting in the outdoor area chatting. I was in shock destined for failure.

duncan macgregor

04-05-2007, 07:29 AM

quote:Originally posted by Onthemoney

Went to my local refurbished KFC today. No wonder RBD struggles staff quite openly handing out excess change to friends. Give them $10 get a meal and get $20 change what a joke. Where were the managers - sitting in the outdoor area chatting. I was in shock destined for failure.
Perhaps it was you that got it wrong ONTHEMONEY. RBD has a new policy to pay the rifraf to eat the stuff to raise their over the counter figures. I feel sure BRICKS must be behind this somewhere. [:o)][:o)][:I]Macdunk

BRICKS

04-05-2007, 08:42 AM

quote:Originally posted by Onthemoney

Went to my local refurbished KFC today. No wonder RBD struggles staff quite openly handing out excess change to friends. Give them $10 get a meal and get $20 change what a joke. Where were the managers - sitting in the outdoor area chatting. I was in shock destined for failure.

SHAME on you Onthemoney you where witness to theft and you did nothing about it so why bother to tell US.. [8D]

Onthemoney

04-05-2007, 02:41 PM

I have given up telling other businesses downfalls in their businesses. I would only tell the owners direct in this case the shareholders some people who manage businesses don't want to know.

I used to work in retail over 20 years ago and pointed out shop lifters numerous times - no manager would do anything.

I have caught a shoplifter leaving a bookshop with a jacket full of magazines pulled him back into the shop and the employees didn't know what to do or want to do anything, the manager said just let him go.

Saw a woman walk right out of a Briscoes store with a vacuum not paid for - pointed this out to staff they said did she? They stood there and let her go. When the manager came down he said too late and didn't want to know either.

Again it seems to be that people don't care or give you any thanks so why point it out. I have given up unless I can talk directly to the owner of the business and not the axle grinders.

Anna Naum

06-05-2007, 07:05 PM

See Tower Funds Management selling, notified they were going under 5% just 4.8% of the company to go!

clearasmud

07-05-2007, 12:03 AM

most times when my partner gets late nite munchies and order 2 thigh pieces but get charged only $2.
Is this correct?

Bling_Bling

07-05-2007, 09:26 AM

The party is not over yet. Keep watching this space. ;)

BRICKS

07-05-2007, 10:18 AM

quote:Originally posted by Bling_Bling

The party is not over yet. Keep watching this space. ;)

OH no Bling your going to BUY another 100 shares can`t stand the PACE.. [8D]

Bling_Bling

07-05-2007, 05:49 PM

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

quote:Originally posted by Bling_Bling

The party is not over yet. Keep watching this space. ;)

OH no Bling your going to BUY another 100 shares can`t stand the PACE.. [8D]

Thats 90 shares more than your portfolio... lol:D

winner69

29-05-2007, 09:47 AM

Solid start to the new RBD year with pretty good sales growth

Even Pizza Hut seems to be showing signs of improvement

With the fast food / takeways sector still recording double digit growth ..... and no matter what happens to the economy this will continue ..... RBD should see this growth continue

Snoopy / Bricks et all ...... time to load up ..... don't think the price (of RBD shares that is) will ever get any lower than today

And Bling Bling .... why not make it 200 shares this time around

BRICKS

29-05-2007, 10:05 AM

quote:Originally posted by winner69

Solid start to the new RBD year with pretty good sales growth

Even Pizza Hut seems to be showing signs of improvement

With the fast food / takeways sector still recording double digit growth ..... and no matter what happens to the economy this will continue ..... RBD should see this growth continue

Snoopy / Bricks et all ...... time to load up ..... don't think the price (of RBD shares that is) will ever get any lower than today

And Bling Bling .... why not make it 200 shares this time around

VERY good news, come and join us 69.. [8D]

Deev8

29-05-2007, 11:37 AM

What's more shareholders can enjoy their complementary toasted twister while they absorb the good news on sales growth.

Onthemoney

29-05-2007, 07:19 PM

PH improvement - not sure whether we are reading the same report....

BRICKS

30-05-2007, 09:50 AM

quote:Originally posted by Onthemoney

PH improvement - not sure whether we are reading the same report....

HOW is the crime stoppers GOING.. [8D]

Bling_Bling

30-05-2007, 12:32 PM

quote:Originally posted by winner69

And Bling Bling .... why not make it 200 shares this time around

210 shares to be exact.. LOL

BRICKS

31-05-2007, 05:50 PM

ITS great McDuck is GONE..??.. [8D]

duncan macgregor

31-05-2007, 07:20 PM

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

ITS great McDuck is GONE..??.. [8D]
You are not that thick that you think that i would be a shareholder are you BRICKS?.:D:D:DYOUR old mate MACDUNK

BRICKS

01-06-2007, 11:15 AM

quote:Originally posted by duncan macgregor

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

ITS great McDuck is GONE..??.. [8D]
You are not that thick that you think that i would be a shareholder are you BRICKS?.:D:D:DYOUR old mate MACDUNK

BUGGER.. [8D]

Halebop

01-06-2007, 11:54 AM

The KFC top line result was good. However, the numbers don't yet allow a clear determination that increased sales will actually pay back those "new concept" fit outs (and then some for shareholders) over their limited economic life. Even if successful, I'm dubious that an operational turnaround really required $500,000 to $800,000 per store and wonder if they couldn't have come up with a more creative solution to reign in capex?

Pizza Hut is not showing any sign of turnaround despite semantics to the contrary. An 8% sales drop is a continued implosion, not a stabilization. Perhaps too late / problematic now but they could consider reinstating Pizza Haven at the discount end to help spoil Dominos expansion. With only 3 Pizza Chains of any scale (and Hell and Dominos are really only "half" pizza chains), RBD have made a real mess of their pizza strategy.

Starbucks managed a 2% same store rise. Less than the rate of inflation, less than the rate of wage inflation. The outcome over time can only be lower profitability unless they manage to lift sales growth by a couple of factors. They had previously mooted another 50 stores. Let's hope they lift the profitability of the existing ones before tipping any more capital in.

BRICKS

01-06-2007, 01:34 PM

quote:Originally posted by Halebop

The KFC top line result was good. However, the numbers don't yet allow a clear determination that increased sales will actually pay back those "new concept" fit outs (and then some for shareholders) over their limited economic life. Even if successful, I'm dubious that an operational turnaround really required $500,000 to $800,000 per store and wonder if they couldn't have come up with a more creative solution to reign in capex?

Pizza Hut is not showing any sign of turnaround despite semantics to the contrary. An 8% sales drop is a continued implosion, not a stabilization. Perhaps too late / problematic now but they could consider reinstating Pizza Haven at the discount end to help spoil Dominos expansion. With only 3 Pizza Chains of any scale (and Hell and Dominos are really only "half" pizza chains), RBD have made a real mess of their pizza strategy.

Starbucks managed a 2% same store rise. Less than the rate of inflation, less than the rate of wage inflation. The outcome over time can only be lower profitability unless they manage to lift sales growth by a couple of factors. They had previously mooted another 50 stores. Let's hope they lift the profitability of the existing ones before tipping any more capital in.

NOW give us your CONCLUSIONS.. [8D]

duncan macgregor

01-06-2007, 01:44 PM

The conclusion BRICKS my old mate is they are in dire need of a new secret recipe.[:o)]:D:Dmacdunk

Bling_Bling

01-06-2007, 02:12 PM

Dominoes Pizza discount to kill off Pizza Hut cant go on forever. It must be hurting their franchisee's bottom line. It will take alot of capital to turn pizza hut around. Best to let it go at a discount.

BRICKS

01-06-2007, 02:49 PM

quote:Originally posted by duncan macgregor

The conclusion BRICKS my old mate is they are in dire need of a new secret recipe.[:o)]:D:Dmacdunk

WE have one YOU.. [8D]

Halebop

01-06-2007, 06:08 PM

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

NOW give us your CONCLUSIONS.. [8D]

Barks like a dog.

BRICKS

02-06-2007, 10:11 AM

quote:Originally posted by Halebop

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

NOW give us your CONCLUSIONS.. [8D]

Barks like a dog.

SO we gather you don't like it and you don't own it so why should we WORRY.. to listen to YOU.. [8D]

Halebop

02-06-2007, 11:32 AM

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

SO we gather you don't like it and you don't own it so why should we WORRY.. to listen to YOU.. [8D]

You should stop spending so much effort on "not listening" :D

BRICKS

02-06-2007, 12:09 PM

quote:Originally posted by Halebop

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

SO we gather you don't like it and you don't own it so why should we WORRY.. to listen to YOU.. [8D]

You should stop spending so much effort on "not listening" :D

WE are listening but your saying NOTHING.. at all.. [8D]

Halebop

02-06-2007, 12:14 PM

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

WE are listening but your saying NOTHING.. at all.. [8D]

Ditto

duncan macgregor

02-06-2007, 12:20 PM

Sounds like two dummies having an arguement.[:o)][:o)]:D:D
Only joking guys dont take it to heart. Macdunk

BRICKS

03-06-2007, 10:21 AM

quote:Originally posted by Halebop

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

WE are listening but your saying NOTHING.. at all.. [8D]

Ditto

SORRY DILL.. [8D]

Scuffer

25-06-2007, 06:24 PM

Someone bought a nice WEE parcel today, it might be a few people are starting to see RBD as a better buy than Burgerfuel they appear to be getting mopped up at 88cents, they have to be a buy at that, even a takeover target.

Bling_Bling

25-06-2007, 07:20 PM

quote:Originally posted by Scuffer

Someone bought a nice WEE parcel today, it might be a few people are starting to see RBD as a better buy than Burgerfuel they appear to be getting mopped up at 88cents, they have to be a buy at that, even a takeover target.

If RBD sp comes down anymore, it would be a very tasty target for potential hostile T/O target. :)

Scuffer

25-06-2007, 07:39 PM

Someone is mopping up is it you Bling, or it could be Bricks I think he likes this stock.

Snoopy

26-06-2007, 12:22 AM

quote:Originally posted by hiawatha

quote:Originally posted by Halebop

Pizza Hut is not showing any sign of turnaround despite semantics to the contrary. An 8% sales drop is a continued implosion, not a stabilization. Perhaps too late / problematic now but they could consider reinstating Pizza Haven at the discount end to help spoil Dominos expansion. With only 3 Pizza Chains of any scale (and Hell and Dominos are really only "half" pizza chains), RBD have made a real mess of their pizza strategy.

Would their contract with yum allow them to sell pizzas under a different brand name? Does anyone know?
hiawatha

Halebop's fading memory is testment as to why 'Pizza Hut' selling Pizzas under a different brand would fail. The 'Pizza Haven' franchise for New Zealand that Halebop refers to was purchased by Dominos. It is hardly likely that Dominos would have bought the chain out in New Zealand if Pizza Haven could immediately open up again under the wing of Domino's biggest competitor! It was 'Eagle Boys' that was bought up by RBD and 'integrated' (that is business speak for closed down) to allow Pizza Hut to expand very rapidly into the takeaway end of the market.

At the bottom end of the market, the Pizza business is 'deal driven', not 'brand driven'. Branding is so strong (sic) at the bottom that Halebop, who IIRC has done some consulting work in this industry, couldn't even remember what brands went where! And you can bet most kiwis won't have the memory that Halebop has.

In the interest of 'research' I picked up a couple of Dominos Pizzas today, cashing in one of my mailbox coupons. I asked the girl behind the counter whether many people bothered to bring in the coupons.

"Oh yes, she said. Because the coupon's make the Pizzas sooo cheap."

Pizza Hut are already matching Dominos here in Christchurch 'dollar for dollar' with their 'Unlimited Large Favourites' for $6.90 and three large favourites for $19.90. That means on price PH is covered.

So even if RBD was allowed to set up a competing Pizza Chain to Pizza Hut, why would they? The last thing RBD needs is another layer of head office administration costs.

SNOOPY

discl: hold RBD

Halebop

26-06-2007, 08:07 AM

My failing memory is obviously matched by their ability to imprint brand on my psyche. If I buy a mass market pizza I'd typically shop from Hell, so I'm one part of the ends of the market that has already been carved off PH.

However, if you think there is no correlation between deal and brand you should go work for RBD, you'd probably fit right in. Not so long ago Briscoes conceded that all their "deals" had damaged the "brand". But they were probably just making crazy talk.

In terms of parallel brands I've worked for 1 organisation (3 distinct brands) and consulted to 2 who have this very strategy. When you operate multiple brands you do not need to add "another layer" of administration costs. (By the way, "another layer" sounds scary but I'm not clear on why it would take "another layer" to implement). Corporate services like purchasing, HR, credit control, finance, property, strategy, marketing etc would see very few changes other than branding. The entire organization might conceivably gain a 1 or 2 staff members to oversee branding (if it makes you feel better they can name the role "Deal" manager). I'm more sure still that enough fat could be found to replace 1 or 2 roles were it to come down to that.

But the real benefit of multiple brands is that you get to operate in different heads paces. Market for cheap pizza? Use the cheap pizza brand. Market for gourmet pizzas? Use the gourmet pizza strategy. But sell cheap pizza and gourmet side by side? Goodbye market share.

...or they can do nothing & keep getting chopped at both ends. By why mince with words in debate? The sum total of fundamental and share price performance more clearly demonstrates the shape of their strategy than my single suggestion.

Bling_Bling

26-06-2007, 08:17 AM

It is too late for PH to set up another cheaper brand to compete with Dominos. They should have done that before Dom came into the market. RBD needs to flick off the lost making PH and admit defeat and concentrate on growing and perfecting KFC and STarbucks. Just need to bring in a CEO that has passion, vision and energy to grow the existing brand and maybe bring in a new brand to NZ.

BRICKS

26-06-2007, 10:13 AM

quote:Originally posted by Bling_Bling

It is too late for PH to set up another cheaper brand to compete with Dominos. They should have done that before Dom came into the market. RBD needs to flick off the lost making PH and admit defeat and concentrate on growing and perfecting KFC and STarbucks. Just need to bring in a CEO that has passion, vision and energy to grow the existing brand and maybe bring in a new brand to NZ.

WELL said BLING..[8D]

hairdresser

26-06-2007, 10:41 AM

The Dominos strategy is to drive volume and clip the ticket on each pizza sold, with the Franchisee worrying about profitbality on a store level.

RBD has to worry about profitabilty throughout the entire value chain and unless they can operate vey efficient stores [unlikely IMO with the low paid and unmotivated managers they employ] they will struggle.

Fast food is a volume game and Dominos seem to have the advantage.

With Dominos at the bottom and Hell at the top it leaves PH to occupy the unenviable stuck in the middle position, trying to defend both ends of its market segment.

Bling_Bling

26-06-2007, 10:58 AM

quote:Originally posted by hairdresser

The Dominos strategy is to drive volume and clip the ticket on each pizza sold, with the Franchisee worrying about profitbality on a store level.

Dom's discounting can only go on for so long, before the franchisees start to question the franchise's strategy. At the end of the day, the franshisees cannot afford to make a lost long term. If the franchisees are not profitable, they will find it hard to expand and grow.

If I was RBD, I would look at doing a deal with Dom. PH and Dom do fit in nicely and can control the mid-low end market and maybe even start a new brand and take on Hell.

Snoopy

26-06-2007, 02:04 PM

quote:Originally posted by hiawatha

I asked the question about operating a different brand because a few months ago a journalist crticised their decision not to retain the Eagle Boys brand name and said that it reflected bad judgment on the part of RBD management. I wondered at the time whether their contract with YUM would have allowed them to. After all, RBD outlets don't sell Coca Cola.
hiawatha

Hiawatha, here is what RBD management said as a prelude to the 2003 AGM, on page five of the AGM notice.

"The company has considered the possibilities for independent brand development often, in the context of its strategic planning and monitoring. However any new brands would be in addition to, not instead of the existing franchised brands."

"If (franchise agreements) were terminated following their expiry in 2007, the company will be restrained from participating in the market for a period of twelve months."

"In addition to the legal consequences, termination would result in an immediate loss of business. The company would be unable to to sell products similar to those of its former franchises. We could not, for example, sell 'Original Recipe' chicken or anything legally close to it."

My interpretation of the above is that Restaurant Brands would be restrained from operating another Pizza Chain or any chain that was broadly in the same market as either KFC or Pizza Hut. Retaining 'Eagle Boys' as a seperate brand would have bought a legal fight with YUM. IOW the journalist who suggested retaining 'Eagle Boys' hadn't done their homework.

SNOOPY

Scuffer

26-06-2007, 05:37 PM

RBD could open a chain of Indian takeaways/ restaurants that stay open until about 5am these places always do well nobody appears to have a chain of Indian restaurants on a national scale,I for one would give them my dollars for a good curry after copious amounts of alcohol.

ratkin

26-06-2007, 05:56 PM

Tandoori palace do a better job than RBD ever could.

Scuffer

26-06-2007, 06:11 PM

I agree but are they open at 5am and all over the country.

moe

26-06-2007, 07:37 PM

quote:Originally posted by Scuffer

I agree but are they open at 5am and all over the country.

Thats what kebab shops and 2 4's are for.

Scuffer

26-06-2007, 07:47 PM

nah that doesn't work for me a good curry after a night on the beer thats the bomb

winner69

27-06-2007, 04:57 PM

quote:Originally posted by Scuffer

Someone is mopping up is it you Bling, or it could be Bricks I think he likes this stock.

not much mopping up today scuffer

everybody lost interest again ..... even though the recent volumes weren't all THAT high

Onthemoney

27-06-2007, 09:07 PM

Does anyone have the info on hand when they complete the renewals of the rest of their franchise licenses... Or at least when the dates come up etc.

Scuffer

27-06-2007, 10:00 PM

yuor right winnere69 but I still think they have got to be a good deal at these prices, it will just be a bit of a wait they will come back up.

winner69

28-06-2007, 12:00 PM

come on snoopy .... you must have gone .... tell us all about it

teh words were so positive .... quick count of +ve words v's -ve words is 90%+ positive

must have been a exhilarating performance and worth the entry money in itself

Snoopy

28-06-2007, 04:16 PM

quote:Originally posted by winner69

come on Snoopy .... you must have gone .... tell us all about it

the words were so positive .... quick count of +ve words v's -ve words is 90%+ positive

must have been a exhilarating performance and worth the entry money in itself

Yeah I tramped along to the AGM at the Rydges Hotel (the old Noahs I think), Winner. I suspect that after a bad year the directors thought they would hold the meeting in a quiet southern location to take some of the heat off. Boy were they wrong! Van Arkel was on the receiving end of a bollocking from all over the floor - particularly over the line he used 'growing shareholder wealth'. Someone had calculated that from listing ten years ago RBD had destroyed on average $200,000 worth of shareholder capital every week since. And while the meeting hotted up, the after meeting eats in the next room got cold!

No radical announcements. Indeed I had to check my Annual Report to confirm that Van Arkel was not reading from it word for word. Profit guidance was reiterated for FY2008 at $9m to $10m net of one offs 'in accordance with market expectations', helped by the closure of another six red roof Pizza Hut Restaurants and the transformation of a further 8 KFC stores.

Management was asked whether they were able to benchmark their performance against the other eight privately owned KFC restaurants in New Zealand (87 RBD owned plus 8 privately owned means a total of 95 KFC outlets operate throughput New Zealand). They replied 'no' because these operators had a direct relationship with YUM, and RBD only dealt with them as customers for their own logistics arm. Danny Diab piped up and said that the RBD KFC operations benchmarked well compared to anything that was happening in Australia (he knew most of the Australian operators personally).

We learned that RBD headquaters have moved to a new single floor open plan location in Auckland which will save rent in future years. We learned that Vicki wasn't sacked but retired from her position after being burnt out with all the problems, particularly the close down in Australia, and that she no longer had the zest to carry on after ten years in the game. The agreement on the need for new blood was mutual with the board. That was Ted's tale anyway. More importantly when one shareholder was 'baying for names' to be accountable, we learned that Rod de Vreis had been given the task of turning around the Pizza Hut New Zealand side of things but we got warned not to expect any tangible results until FY2009. This I regard as good because Rod was the driving force behind the successful expansion of Pizza Hut in the Eagle Boys acquisition years. And finally we learned that the KFC renewal of license agreement (the other half of it) was due to be signed with YUM any day.

Sue Suckling came across as quite a fiesty new director. She had already made it known that she did not consider the Starbucks experience acceptable - the restauants were not clean enough and the chairs were uncomfortable for starters. It was disclosed that Starbucks management had been out from the USA and given RBD a rev up along similar lines.

During lunch, the directors and senior staff did make a particular attempt to circulate amongst the shareholders afterwards rather than huddling together in a defensive formation. I must say I was impressed at the freebies on offer. As much as you could eat - or was that as much as you could stomach - of Pizza Hut and KFC product(there was plenty left at the end even though the turnout of shareholders was good). I reckon I consumed about twenty bucks worth of stuff including a couple of Starbucks fruit frapppachinos. Then we got a take home pack of Starbucks 'fair trade' ground coffee and a free Starbucks drink voucher to boot.

See you all at the AGM next year?

SN

Bling_Bling

28-06-2007, 04:51 PM

Good post Snoop. You eating all our profits at the AGM mate? LOL [:p]:D

I agree Starbucks is messy and dirty. Need not only good middle management but a new and passionate CEO to save this puppy. But then if the price is right, I am sure a predator will come and have a sniff for a possible meal. There are no major shareholders to hold them back from a hostile T/O. The RBD SP at these levels and lower is cheaper then Dominos coupon pizzas. :D

Phaedrus

28-06-2007, 05:13 PM

Why are chronically underperforming stocks so widely and deeply discussed? I've never been able to understand the attraction.

This one is even worse than TEL!

http://h1.ripway.com/Phaedrus/RBD628.gif

duncan macgregor

28-06-2007, 06:35 PM

PHAEDRUS, I feel happy about people averaging down in dog companies like RBD, and TEL. I am happy to see the new CEO of TEL having a salary of 3,5 million a year in a company in a downtrend. I would hate it if these clown investors start to wise up, and be a threat in the real investing world. Some of those companies require mug investors, otherwise they would fold. Who the hell is going to buy my shares when the market turns?, so please dont educate to many of them, they are worth their weight in gold. Macdunk

Scuffer

28-06-2007, 08:41 PM

What goes up must come down and vice versa as long as they don't go bust thats when the preverbial hits the fan. I think they will make a comeback but when?

duncan macgregor

28-06-2007, 09:14 PM

quote:[i]Originally posted by hiawatha/quote]

"Real investing world"? You reckon that's the world you inhabit?
Oh please!!

hiawatha

HIAWATHA it certainly looks like it dont you think?. Who in their right mind would hold on to RBD averaging down making excuses for the company. We need people like that in the market other wise the market would collapse. MACDUNK.

shasta

28-06-2007, 09:20 PM

quote:Originally posted by duncan macgregor

quote:[i]Originally posted by hiawatha/quote]

"Real investing world"? You reckon that's the world you inhabit?
Oh please!!

hiawatha

HIAWATHA it certainly looks like it dont you think?. Who in their right mind would hold on to RBD averaging down making excuses for the company. We need people like that in the market other wise the market would collapse. MACDUNK.

Macdunk

The NZX needs investors to buy into the likes of RBD, Burgerfuel etc

Makes my decision to buy into ASX stocks while the $ is high all the better. ;)

Halebop

28-06-2007, 11:36 PM

I think its a lot more morbid to own RBD than to post about it. [:p]

...it's strange that in a forum dedicated to discussion about investing in specific securities, those with a positive view on a security often seem quite put out about the views of those who think otherwise. There is some irony in the insecurity accusation leveled at Phaedrus. Particularly as his post just states the obvious - the shares have diminished in value across numerous time frames. But then owning these securities might well expose my insecurities too.

Scuffer

29-06-2007, 05:21 AM

I disagree I think these guys are just indulging in an inate desire to help their fellow man its a nurturing sort of thing a bit like teaching a kid about the stranger danger.

ratkin

29-06-2007, 05:50 AM

I have often wondered what motivates Mr P . Whenever a stock goes into a downtrend then he is sure to pop up with a chart telling us where he would of bought and sold (see sealegs thread, or charlies or almost any other for that matter).

My own theory is that he works for one of the software companies, with metastock at around a 1000 dollars including data this is a fertile hunting ground for new recruits

ratkin

29-06-2007, 06:15 AM

Posted - 03/07/2002 : 6:29:18 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I bought this stock a year or two back at 1.00, was a good bargain. Now i would say its fairly priced, if it goes to 1.60 i will too be thinkin about it

ratkin

I did sell out soon after for a nice profit, the stock hasnt been all bad.
My bargain radar is once again starting to point in the direction of RBD havent held for five years now but the time may be arriving to go in again , my instinct tells me something going to happen soon (within months)

Bling_Bling

29-06-2007, 07:44 AM

I am a value investor. Short term trend doesnt affect me at all. More an opportunity to accumulate more shares. :) If you follow the trend all the time than you too can miss out on such stocks like WHS when the market got it so so wrong. The WHS drifted downwards for a long period of time around $3-4 and then BANG! T/O came the the SP hit as high as over $7... yes Bling did own a very small bit of WHS.. thank you! :)

Bling is happy to buy more RBD if it does come down to 80 cents.:D:D

Halebop

29-06-2007, 08:08 AM

quote:Originally posted by hiawatha

Why?

I was referring to mental attitudes, not the ownership or non ownership of shares.

So was I :)

quote:Originally posted by hiawatha

I cannot understand why the likes of MacDunk and Phaedrus keep rabitting on about shares that they don't own.

I cannot understand the fixation that someone needs to own a share to comment about it. If you want to invite comment from holders only, you will get an ownership bias - obviously on some level holders are optimistic or positive about the company. To restrict input to optimists only is not balanced and does not serve holders nor potential holders of the share. Criticism and debate are healthy for everyone (even if RBD holders must suffer the "I told you so" smugness of non holders).

quote:Originally posted by hiawatha

It seems to me to be evidence of a need for reassurance.

I see precisely the opposite. If you are questioning the validity of someone's contribution (rather than their contribution itself) just because it does not match your own position, the insecurity does not rest with them.

quote:Originally posted by hiawatha

Unless of course they are in fact "closet" owners hoping to drive the price down so that they can purchase more.

I think that would more logically need to be closet non owners wanting to drive down the price before purchasing. But like any argument I can reverse it. Perhaps the RBD optimists are just trying to give their under-performing investment a boost with positive commentary? ...but irrespective it would be better to focus on the message than the messenger. It sharpens your own logic and decision making to analyse opposing views and determine their merit. The group think of "me too" fan boys (and girls) is asking to be punished by the market.

Halebop

29-06-2007, 08:12 AM

quote:Originally posted by Bling_Bling

I am a value investor. Short term trend doesnt affect me at all.

I am also a value investor and short term does affect me greatly. If I am lining up a long term investment in the fast food industry, which is my better entry - $2.50 or 87 cents? But to look at RBD and call the current share price a short term outcome is to not give the company it's due credit. They have been diligent at earning this particular share price re-rating and it his not been "short" in the making.

Phaedrus

29-06-2007, 09:34 AM

Hiawatha and Ratkin, your replies are perfect examples of Argumentum ad Hominem. Briefly, this is defined as
"An attempt to prove someone wrong by trying to discredit his person, instead of arguing against his ideas. Generally used by people who disagree with someone but cannot find anything logically wrong with their statements.
A debater commits the Ad Hominem Fallacy when he introduces irrelevant personal premisses about his opponent, in the hope that such red herrings may successfully distract the opponent or the audience from the topic of the debate."

The topic here is RBD. The posted chart graphically demonstrates that this stock is a long-term destroyer of value. It also clearly shows the current downtrend. Given the fact that it is not hard to find fundamentally and technically sound NZ stocks, I am genuinely puzzled as to why stocks such as TEL and RBD generate such high levels of interest.

duncan macgregor

29-06-2007, 10:00 AM

quote:Originally posted by hiawatha

But they don't actually contribute anything. All they do is pat themselves on the back for not being holders, and jeer at the rest of us for holding. They can hardly be surprised if we jeer right back.
hiawatha
First time you have admitted holding this dog HIAWATHA. Nice to see you fronting up after hiding in the closet for all those years. This must be one of the worst investments an Indian could make on the cowboy exchange.:D:D:D Macdunk

boysy

29-06-2007, 11:03 AM

Phaedrus has a good point come on as long as both sides of the coin are discussed then its a balanced thread i mean hiawatha if u want a thread about how great RBD is going to be then do it but as long as people back up there arguments you have no right to complain about other peoples views on the stock. You dont have to hold a stock to have strong views about it and how lame would the thread be if only those with RBD wrote on it im not sure how you could be positive about the share price after Phaedrus graphics.

boysy

29-06-2007, 02:04 PM

well if they are both egging each other on its guna continue so just stick with the facts peoples

winner69

29-06-2007, 02:50 PM

quote:Originally posted by duncan macgregor

This must be one of the worst investments an Indian could make on the cowboy exchange.:D:D:D Macdunk

hey mac .... one of your best comments yet ..... made me laugh .... really did mate

ratkin

29-06-2007, 03:43 PM

I too do not disagree with what Phaedrus is saying , its his motivation i question.
Any five year old can see that RBD has been in a downtrend , is there any need to have it pointed out in such a smug and superior sounding manner?.
Hardly suprising that holders will be a little antagonised.

I wouldnt object quite so much if he pointed out the buy and sell points in real time, but he often makes his first appearance on a thread once the action is over, usually accompanied by a chart which points out where he would of bought and sold , when he has in reality done neither.

BRICKS

29-06-2007, 05:25 PM

quote:Originally posted by ratkin

I too do not disagree with what Phaedrus is saying , its his motivation i question.
Any five year old can see that RBD has been in a downtrend , is there any need to have it pointed out in such a smug and superior sounding manner?.
Hardly suprising that holders will be a little antagonised.

I wouldnt object quite so much if he pointed out the buy and sell points in real time, but he often makes his first appearance on a thread once the action is over, usually accompanied by a chart which points out where he would of bought and sold , when he has in reality done neither.

YOUR right rat he is yesterdays chart man but not tomorrow's MAN..[8D]

Phaedrus

29-06-2007, 06:04 PM

"I wouldnt object quite so much if he pointed out the buy and sell points in real time"
Ratkin, I post plenty of charts giving buy or sell signals in real time. For example, [u]just this week</u> I posted a breakout from a trading range 'Buy' signal on NZO - on the actual day of the breakout. How could I possibly do any better than that?

"He often makes his first appearance on a thread once the action is over, usually accompanied by a chart which points out where he would of bought and sold , when he has in reality done neither."
What I myself do is totally irrelevant. Whether I bought, sold, held or did nothing, the chart would be exactly the same. Did I personally follow the buy and sell signals as shown on the NZO chart? Well, yes I did, actually. Not that it is any of your business.

Ratkin, many of the charts I post are to show the current status of individual stocks and therefore may not feature any recent signals. These generally take the form of :-
(1) AIR is in a steady uptrend - why would you want to sell? Why not wait until......etc.
or (2) RBD is in a downtrend - why would you want to buy? Why not wait for......etc.

You must surely realise that it would be a huge job for me to post every buy and every sell signal on every NZX stock! Why would I? Just so some twit like you can question my motivation?

Bricks, if you could give me the name of someone that could post tomorrow's chart, I would be forever in your debt. I should perhaps point out that Ratkin in fact agrees with what I say, he just doesn't like the way I say it. He's a bit sensitive like that.