PDA

View Full Version : Burgerfuel



Pages : [1] 2 3 4

DCski13
12-05-2007, 12:36 PM
$20m float for whose benefit.

zyreon
12-05-2007, 12:50 PM
wonder if they'll have shareholder benefits [8D]

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/3/story.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10439288

DCski13
12-05-2007, 01:05 PM
and it's a terrible day down here too. Perchance, could you add a feature to enable us over 30s to read text. Anything under type font size 11 is getting harder to read these days.

lakedaemonian
12-05-2007, 01:58 PM
Wouldn't the likes of Burger King and McDonald's cranking out a line of "super premium" burgers simply destroy an unknown quantity like Burgerfuel?

I like the concept of a super premium burger, it fits well into the "mini-luxury" mold....but the name of the outfit sounds quite corny to me...but then so did Starbucks.

COLIN
12-05-2007, 04:52 PM
Haven't done any research on this outfit but with the miserable performance of RBD since it floated it would have to be a pretty good story to attract my interest.

DCski13
13-05-2007, 12:55 PM
Without looking at the internal business and marketing plan one can only undertake intelligent guesses. There are numerous and, same old same old, reasons for founders floating their companies. My guess is RBD was and is overloaded at HQ with food marketing stuff, expensive infrastructure and Amercian parents who need their retirement funds. BF currently has neither but wait and see re internals. When I looked at RBD something told me to say clear. Well, they started at $2 and went south never to return - funnily that (probably a merchant bank got into the picture as in Feltex's case - I can't recall).

Further - as a guide - what's happened with Burger Winconsin and Hell's Pizza jumping the moot. All fit into ladedaemonian's "mini-luxury' idea. Now, if they were selling to the over 60s, that market will make up 25% of our population come 2020 - then I'm in.

More.. how does the felt chain stack up against competitors. I'll stop here. There's really very little to analyse. I'll wait for the prospectus if the Aussies dont' take them out before hand (are we entering the late 80s framework again. The insurance companies will shortly have bags for money looking for a home come 1st July. Far more money chasing ventures that X and Y and beyond don't have the resources to buy their over inflated product prices).

Flying Goat
13-05-2007, 05:27 PM
To compare Burger Fuel with Restaurant Brands in terms of quality businesses is, in my opinion, quite misguided. Burger Fuel, where I happen to dine at at least once a week is a strong and growing brand, neither Hell Pizza nor any others have filled the gap in terms of a quality yet affordable and convenient food chain. Having once looked at buying a franchise, cannot disclose figures but can tell that the stores are extremely profitable, have very high turnover with fiercely loyal clientele, and very efficient systems in place such that a monkey could be trained and the burgers would still be served on time. Some kiwis also started a similar chain in London a few years ago and flicked it off for something like 12 million pounds due to the scalability of the concept. Burger Fuel have a strong scalable brand that they have already taken abroad with pilot store in Australian Sydney. If this thing makes it to the NZX, and is priced sensibly I am in for sure. If it is lost to the Aussie's before that then well a damn shame for this country just like every other decent business we have lost. Restaurant Brands on the other hand was not much more than a mismanaged licensee for a few lard merchant brands that lost their appeal to all but a select few about a decade ago - refusing to change with the times, they figured they could stay ahead by serving up the same old rubbish, and now wonder why they turned into a toad....!

DCski13
14-05-2007, 08:43 AM
Ok. so what's difference. We're going round in circles here on educated guesses.

BRICKS
14-05-2007, 08:57 AM
THERE is a Goat in every town a chance to enlarge the NZX is a good thing but for the knockers so hope burgerfuel gets floated, as for RBD holing a couple of million shares would be good thing if you could afford and there two brands KFC & Starbucks are great earners and Starbucks even has now controls over the coffee MARKET.. [8D]

thereslifeafter87
14-05-2007, 09:05 AM
BurgerFuel definitely have a strong brand in New Zealand. It will be interesting to see from the prospectus how the business model operates - what kind of franchise fees are charged etc.

I can't see McDonald's, Burger King et al competing with BurgerFuel - they sell to different markets. Even if the incumbents introduce 'premium' burgers, they are not going to be able to drop their current brand image quickly.

If the float is reasonably priced it could definitely be worth a look.

Bling_Bling
14-05-2007, 09:50 AM
I personally think this concept is good for NZ but not overseas. But thats just my opinion.

DCski13
14-05-2007, 09:58 AM
The term is something like transplanting. That is, just because it works here and you spend a week in Sydney/London checking it out don't mean it's gona work there - witness Warehouse, Telecom, AMP Henderson and Tower to name just the big players

FarmerGeorge
14-05-2007, 01:49 PM
I used to eat regularly at BF and everything about the place was light years ahead of any RBD outlet of any kind. The only reason I don't any more is that there are none this far South! this could be one of those Lynch-type successes. The concept is good and while I'm dubious about 'one in every suburb' claim there is certainly room for expansion. The question for me will be one of price.

kura
14-05-2007, 04:19 PM
I have a vague memory of an gourmet burger chain (I knew of 2 stores) called "Burger Wisconsin" some 20 years ago, they were a real nice burger, just a pity the one near me closed down.

Never tried BF yet.

etrader
14-05-2007, 05:19 PM
To get traction would BF be better to buy selected brands with established reputations in selected countries, Icons that go off here don't always go off there,read the report from Hells Pizza since they opened in london, to date it's not as easy as they thought. B.W have a good solid rep.

Paddy
15-05-2007, 02:59 PM
quote:Originally posted by Flying Goat

To compare Burger Fuel with Restaurant Brands in terms of quality businesses is, in my opinion, quite misguided. Burger Fuel, where I happen to dine at at least once a week is a strong and growing brand, neither Hell Pizza nor any others have filled the gap in terms of a quality yet affordable and convenient food chain. Having once looked at buying a franchise, cannot disclose figures but can tell that the stores are extremely profitable, have very high turnover with fiercely loyal clientele, and very efficient systems in place such that a monkey could be trained and the burgers would still be served on time. Some kiwis also started a similar chain in London a few years ago and flicked it off for something like 12 million pounds due to the scalability of the concept. Burger Fuel have a strong scalable brand that they have already taken abroad with pilot store in Australian Sydney. If this thing makes it to the NZX, and is priced sensibly I am in for sure. If it is lost to the Aussie's before that then well a damn shame for this country just like every other decent business we have lost. Restaurant Brands on the other hand was not much more than a mismanaged licensee for a few lard merchant brands that lost their appeal to all but a select few about a decade ago - refusing to change with the times, they figured they could stay ahead by serving up the same old rubbish, and now wonder why they turned into a toad....!




FG, if the franchise deal was good, why are you not in?

BRICKS
15-05-2007, 04:16 PM
quote:Originally posted by Paddy


quote:Originally posted by Flying Goat

To compare Burger Fuel with Restaurant Brands in terms of quality businesses is, in my opinion, quite misguided. Burger Fuel, where I happen to dine at at least once a week is a strong and growing brand, neither Hell Pizza nor any others have filled the gap in terms of a quality yet affordable and convenient food chain. Having once looked at buying a franchise, cannot disclose figures but can tell that the stores are extremely profitable, have very high turnover with fiercely loyal clientele, and very efficient systems in place such that a monkey could be trained and the burgers would still be served on time. Some kiwis also started a similar chain in London a few years ago and flicked it off for something like 12 million pounds due to the scalability of the concept. Burger Fuel have a strong scalable brand that they have already taken abroad with pilot store in Australian Sydney. If this thing makes it to the NZX, and is priced sensibly I am in for sure. If it is lost to the Aussie's before that then well a damn shame for this country just like every other decent business we have lost. Restaurant Brands on the other hand was not much more than a mismanaged licensee for a few lard merchant brands that lost their appeal to all but a select few about a decade ago - refusing to change with the times, they figured they could stay ahead by serving up the same old rubbish, and now wonder why they turned into a toad....!




FG, if the franchise deal was good, why are you not in?


ANSEWER, because he is a GOAT.. [8D]

Onthemoney
15-05-2007, 05:31 PM
quote:Originally posted by etrader

To get traction would BF be better to buy selected brands with established reputations in selected countries, Icons that go off here don't always go off there,read the report from Hells Pizza since they opened in london, to date it's not as easy as they thought. B.W have a good solid rep.


Where is the report on Hell pizza in London etrader? Cheers

Paddy
15-05-2007, 05:36 PM
Interesting typo Bricks......

CJ
16-05-2007, 07:22 PM
The thing I dont understand about this investment is what they need the money for. My understanding of the franchise situation is that the franchisee pays for everything (shop fit out, advertising, percentage of sales), the franchisor just rakes it in (ie, all their costs are effectively paid by the shop owners - the percentage of sales should more than cover head office costs). What am I missing.

Top burgers by the way, love the Bastardo.

Flying Goat
16-05-2007, 09:31 PM
quote:

FG, if the franchise deal was good, why are you not in?


because am more tyre kicker than genuine buyer.

Flying Goat
16-05-2007, 09:32 PM
quote:
ANSEWER, because he is a GOAT.. [8D]


BRICKHEAD, don't give up your day job.

BRICKS
17-05-2007, 12:40 PM
quote:Originally posted by Flying Goat


quote:

FG, if the franchise deal was good, why are you not in?


because am more tyre kicker than genuine buyer.




YOU are a GOAT as you tried to infer you where big time buyer only to confess to be a LOOKER.. [8D]

DCski13
17-05-2007, 02:24 PM
quote:Originally posted by CJ

The thing I dont understand about this investment is what they need the money for. My understanding of the franchise situation is that the franchisee pays for everything (shop fit out, advertising, percentage of sales), the franchisor just rakes it in (ie, all their costs are effectively paid by the shop owners - the percentage of sales should more than cover head office costs). What am I missing.

Top burgers by the way, love the Bastardo.


What are you missing? You're missing the big picture, mate (It's a great opportunity for two guys and their advisors to pull 20 mil, that's the big picture)

Onthemoney
17-05-2007, 03:16 PM
Yeah 7 million more than hell

CJ
17-05-2007, 07:21 PM
quote:Originally posted by DCski13


quote:Originally posted by CJ

The thing I dont understand about this investment is what they need the money for. My understanding of the franchise situation is that the franchisee pays for everything (shop fit out, advertising, percentage of sales), the franchisor just rakes it in (ie, all their costs are effectively paid by the shop owners - the percentage of sales should more than cover head office costs). What am I missing.

Top burgers by the way, love the Bastardo.


What are you missing? You're missing the big picture, mate (It's a great opportunity for two guys and their advisors to pull 20 mil, that's the big picture)


I understand that in that it is similar to 42 below, but in 42 belows case they actually needed the cash, in this case, it appears to be a simple cashing out. Since the company doesn't need the cash, it suggests they aren't sure the expansion will go as planned so they better at least get some cash out first.

Are they selling existing shares (cash goes to them) or new shares (cash goes to company - which they will no doubt take out in big salary/consultants fees)

DCski13
17-05-2007, 07:44 PM
[/quote]
Are they selling existing shares (cash goes to them) or new shares (cash goes to company - which they will no doubt take out in big salary/consultants fees)
[/quote]



Hey CJ. There's No difference! (So where did you get your degree, The Open Polytech or Otago Polytechnic?)

BRICKS
18-05-2007, 09:15 AM
quote:Originally posted by DCski13


Are they selling existing shares (cash goes to them) or new shares (cash goes to company - which they will no doubt take out in big salary/consultants fees)
[/quote]



Hey CJ. There's No difference! (So where did you get your degree, The Open Polytech or Otago Polytechnic?)
[/quote]

Mr DCski you don't want to show of to MUCH these statements have a habit of back firing.. [8D]

kura
18-05-2007, 11:09 AM
Gee Bricks, that's the smartest thing I can recall you ever saying.

Reminds me of back when I did a few years as a lawnmowing contractor, I was having a chat with some "kid" who was studying commerce at university, I told him "...Yes, I have a commerce degree, so if you study hard enough, you too, may get to mow lawns in the future"

BRICKS
18-05-2007, 12:55 PM
quote:Originally posted by kura

Gee Bricks, that's the smartest thing I can recall you ever saying.

Reminds me of back when I did a few years as a lawn mowing contractor, I was having a chat with some "kid" who was studying commerce at university, I told him "...Yes, I have a commerce degree, so if you study hard enough, you too, may get to mow lawns in the future"


ARE you still mowing lawns or you have moved on and up interesting.. [8D]

DCski13
18-05-2007, 02:20 PM
quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

Mr DCski you don't want to show of to MUCH these statements have a habit of back firing.. [8D]



The grass is green. The sky is blue :D

kura
18-05-2007, 02:42 PM
Still do the odd lawn, but if I earn too much, the nasty people at WINZ will reduce my benefit.

moe
18-05-2007, 02:58 PM
quote:Originally posted by kura

Still do the odd lawn, but if I earn too much, the nasty people at WINZ will reduce my benefit.


Thats the attitude...

CJ
18-05-2007, 07:00 PM
quote:Originally posted by DCski13


quote:
Are they selling existing shares (cash goes to them) or new shares (cash goes to company)

Hey CJ. There's No difference! (So where did you get your degree, The Open Polytech or Otago Polytechnic?)
One the cash goes to the company (company has additional cash to spend), one it goes to the shareholder (company has no additional money to spend). Is that not different.

(I bought mine over the internet - as if I am going to waste 3-5 years not getting paid)

Scuffer
18-05-2007, 10:34 PM
I was in sydney two weeks ago they have one opening in the cross

BRICKS
19-05-2007, 07:55 AM
quote:Originally posted by Scuffer

I was in sydney two weeks ago they have one opening in the cross


SILLY little Scuffer .. [8D]

moe
19-05-2007, 09:24 AM
quote:Originally posted by Scuffer

I was in sydney two weeks ago they have one opening in the cross


Is that all you indulged in at the cross? There are a few "poorly packed kebab" places on the cross aren't there?[:p]



Sorry. *picks up bag and leaves*

DCski13
19-05-2007, 10:40 AM
quote:Originally posted by CJ


quote:Originally posted by DCski13


quote:
Are they selling existing shares (cash goes to them) or new shares (cash goes to company)

Hey CJ. There's No difference! (So where did you get your degree, The Open Polytech or Otago Polytechnic?)
One the cash goes to the company (company has additional cash to spend), one it goes to the shareholder (company has no additional money to spend). Is that not different.

(I bought mine over the internet - as if I am going to waste 3-5 years not getting paid)


Ok, I concede I lost the plot in explaining that one very well... guess it goes like this.(I'll go down the company line)...the company issues shares and receives the cash .... and then the cash ends up with the founders after everything else has been deducted (advertising and promotion, corporate salaries, founders remuneration and incidental HO expenses)

kura
19-05-2007, 02:30 PM
It was a fair enough question, a few years ago there was 2 companies having an IPO about the same time, one was merely the existing owners wanting out, the other wanted the funds to expand the bizz (I put some dollars down on the latter company that wanted to grow)

The first company was FTX, the second PPL (need I say more)

FTG
20-05-2007, 04:21 PM
Albeit franchisees stump up a lot/all of the cash when opening a new site, opening up in new markets is an entirely different situation. In fact, franchisors can often can take years to make money in a new market. Both Subway & McD's are a case in point. Neither organisation made decent returns until they had reached a critical mass in the NZ market - no small feat.
When opening up in a new market there is a lot of infrastructure to set up. e.g. supply chain,site construction, Head office support etc etc. Then of course there is the marketing. Getting say 3-6% advertising levy of a couple initial sites is just not going to cut the mustard as far as growing a brand in a market QUICKLY.
Of course we are yet to see the prospectus, but based on the PR that has been released to date re BF, it seems to be clear that the owners are wanting to expand, rather than "get out" (at least for the medium term!).

Scuffer
21-05-2007, 01:25 PM
quote:Originally posted by moe


quote:Originally posted by Scuffer

I was in sydney two weeks ago they have one opening in the cross


Is that all you indulged in at the cross? There are a few "poorly packed kebab" places on the cross aren't there?[:p]



Sorry. *picks up bag and leaves*
It had not opened still being fitted out, but yes you are right some of the takeaways are pretty rough but the cross is not as seedy has it used to be, I will keep my private indulgences to myself thanks, i'm new to this site and am finding it enlightening to say the least but I did wonder if bricks was the type of guy to steal a toddlers ice cream and kick the poor kids puppy, I do hope I'm wrong.

Bling_Bling
21-05-2007, 01:32 PM
Hey Scuffer, you are not too far from the truth with Bricks :D

Scuffer
21-05-2007, 01:41 PM
quote:Originally posted by Bling_Bling

Hey Scuffer, you are not too far from the truth with Bricks :D
I'm not having a go at him I just felt like i'm the new kid on the block and I patted a dog and it bit me but hey he is probably a nice guy and was having a bad day.

BRICKS
21-05-2007, 05:26 PM
quote:Originally posted by Scuffer


quote:Originally posted by moe


quote:Originally posted by Scuffer

I was in sydney two weeks ago they have one opening in the cross


Is that all you indulged in at the cross? There are a few "poorly packed kebab" places on the cross aren't there?[:p]



Sorry. *picks up bag and leaves*
It had not opened still being fitted out, but yes you are right some of the takeaways are pretty rough but the cross is not as seedy has it used to be, I will keep my private indulgences to myself thanks, i'm new to this site and am finding it enlightening to say the least but I did wonder if bricks was the type of guy to steal a toddlers ice cream and kick the poor kids puppy, I do hope I'm wrong.


DONT you mean Moe he is the one talking to you,, I would just say your a new DILL.. [8D] Regards

Sideshow Bob
21-05-2007, 06:16 PM
quote:Originally posted by Scuffer


quote:Originally posted by Bling_Bling

Hey Scuffer, you are not too far from the truth with Bricks :D
I'm not having a go at him I just felt like i'm the new kid on the block and I patted a dog and it bit me but hey he is probably a nice guy and was having a bad day.


All Bricks post are like that

.....wait, however I do remember 1 post where he put a coherent English sentence together and it was non-abusive!

BRICKS
22-05-2007, 09:44 AM
quote:Originally posted by Sideshow Bob


quote:Originally posted by Scuffer


quote:Originally posted by Bling_Bling

Hey Scuffer, you are not too far from the truth with Bricks :D
I'm not having a go at him I just felt like i'm the new kid on the block and I patted a dog and it bit me but hey he is probably a nice guy and was having a bad day.


All Bricks post are like that

.....wait, however I do remember 1 post where he put a coherent English sentence together and it was non-abusive!


BOB, BOB your sideshow has been out of action for some time we know your been in jail for a holiday was it good, You must get back to your meat company going to stop killing and start milking the cows so good to hear from you REGARDS.. [8D]

Bling_Bling
22-05-2007, 10:00 AM
BRICKS, this place is not the same without you mate. LOL

johndeyell
19-06-2007, 03:57 PM
Is anyone interested in buying shares in this company now that the IPO is officially a go-ahead?
---------------------------------
BURGERFUEL TO LIST ON NZAX

Gourmet burger chain BurgerFuel plans to list on the NZAX after raising $15 million with an issue of 15 million shares at $1 each.

Investors will also get a one-for-five option to buy additional shares at the same price in 18 months. Funds raised will be used for expansion in New Zealand, Australia, Europe and the US. BurgerFuel presently has 19 outlets in New Zealand and one in Sydney.

The company's 70,000 VIB members (very important burger connoisseurs) will have first bite at the share offer until June 25 when the prospectus will become available to the wider public.

BRICKS
19-06-2007, 04:42 PM
NOW all you KIWI`s can put your money where your moth is and don't forget they sell Mr Chips and the KFC store is just around the corner so good eating and have a happy TIME.. [8D]

BRICKS
19-06-2007, 04:43 PM
NOW all you KIWI`s can put your money where your mouth is and don't forget they sell Mr Chips and the KFC store is just around the corner so good eating and have a happy TIME.. [8D]

Halebop
19-06-2007, 05:18 PM
There is a lot of blue sky priced into the offer.

Burger Fuel own 1 store - probably loss making - in Sydney, 1 store in Auckland, a wholesale distribution business and the franchise rights. In the 9 months to December 2006 (Why are these results so old?) the company lost about $150,000, having made a small profit in NZ and lost a larger sum in Sydney while incurring setup costs over there.

Given the NZ profits are NZ$132k before tax for 9 months, the bulk of their earnings probably stem from the single original company owned store. Excluding up front franchise fees, their royalty stream is probably about $1m pa at the moment. That doesn't pay for a lot of overhead. With a fairly long operating history, I was however surprised at the paucity of financial data.

I was also suspicious of the low tax rate incurred on the NZ earnings - just 4.53% - which hints that either aren't profitable on an operational level or they have lost money in prior periods as well.

The sizzle comes from expectations of global success. They point out that just a small global penetration results in many stores (and we can surmise a lot of royalties although the prospectus is pretty light on hard data other than some specious what if conclusions).

If they have any sort of success, the $60m price tag the float assigns itself may be justified. I'd find it difficult to pay $60m for a company that is losing money, has an unproven international expansion policy and limited profit potential in their home market. I think the promoters got greedy with their pricing and would consider a price that values the company at half the offer more realistic.

Best wishes to the promoters and potential investors. It is nice to see a local company with ambitions. Too rich for me.

warthog
19-06-2007, 06:08 PM
quote:Originally posted by BRICKS


quote:Originally posted by Sideshow Bob


quote:Originally posted by Scuffer


quote:Originally posted by Bling_Bling

Hey Scuffer, you are not too far from the truth with Bricks :D
I'm not having a go at him I just felt like i'm the new kid on the block and I patted a dog and it bit me but hey he is probably a nice guy and was having a bad day.


All Bricks post are like that

.....wait, however I do remember 1 post where he put a coherent English sentence together and it was non-abusive!


BOB, BOB your sideshow has been out of action for some time we know your been in jail for a holiday was it good, You must get back to your meat company going to stop killing and start milking the cows so good to hear from you REGARDS.. [8D]


The hog now believes that BRICKS and MacDunk are long lost siblings, separated at birth in a heart-wrenching twisted saga of lost love and lives unfulfilled. They both started out in similar lives but soon BRICKS gave away the chance at education and literacy settling instead for the complex and challenging life that is cleaning catch-tanks from fishing boats. MacDunk on the other hand went straight to the udder, as they say, and worked his way up to head share-milker, eventually cashing in his seven cows and marrying the ex-Carter Holt assistant tea-lady whom he initially got drunk on cheap wine in the hope of finding out what brand of biscuits Carters habitually bought for smoko breaks (his plan being to invest the bovine proceeds in a biscuit-producing operation). Now, the two siblings are bought together once more but this time life is quite different. Currently, no fewer than eight universities are vying for access to the pair to establish some coherent and conclusive position on the question of nature vs. nurture. How will it turn out? Did MacDunk invest in the right biscuit company, or did he put his bun in the wrong oven? Will BRICKS cement a solid relationship at last with MacDunk of memories old? We will just have to sit tight and wait to see ...

CJ
19-06-2007, 08:06 PM
quote:Originally posted by Halebop

There is a lot of blue sky priced into the offer.
...

If they have any sort of success, the $60m price tag the float assigns itself may be justified. I'd find it difficult to pay $60m for a company that is losing money, has an unproven international expansion policy and limited profit potential in their home market. I think the promoters got greedy with their pricing and would consider a price that values the company at half the offer more realistic.

Similar things were said about 42below??

Not sure about expansion into Europe either. GBK (the UK copy of the NZ store) was bought for £10m a few years ago (about 8-10 stores) and the new owners want to expand in UK and Europe (do a search on Gourment Burger Kitchen - they were in the Hearld in the past 2 weeks).

Selling burgers to the US? I think they probably have that base covered.

As far as NZ goes, there is lots of growth potential. Tauranga is about to open its second store and i think they have a few more opening before christmas.

once Sydney is established, there are plenty of options there as well.

Halebop
20-06-2007, 08:35 AM
CJ there are a lot of "ifs" in there for $60m. The thing with Sydney is that it's not once established it's if profitably established.

I could imagine New Zealand easily supporting 40 or 50 stores but even if it were 100 stores (and that would take 5, 10 or more years) the royalty stream would perhaps be about $6m pa in today's dollars less overheads (currently around $3m with public company costs yet to be added). Hardly a reason to pay $60m now.

Taking a 10 year view and given a less than proven pedigree you'd probably want to earn returns of at least 15% per annum, then the business would have to be worth about $240m in 10 years time. If the market assigned a higher than normal average PE over that time - say 20 - the company would need to earn $12m after tax, about $17.1m before tax. Overhead would have to be substantially higher to support a pan-tasman infrastructure, much higher stores numbers and 10 years worth of inflation - say triple current overhead and add 35% for inflation - about $12.2m pa. (this compares well enough with ASX listed RFG, perhaps its on the light side allowing for inflation on top of the RFG numbers). So the company would need to gross $29.3m. If 20% of revenues were fee rather than royalty related, they would need to generate $23.44m from royalties, implying system sales of $390m, implying 250 to 300 stores (also allowing for 35% inflation in sales figures). That's a very demanding rate of store unit growth before factoring execution risk on top. ...I'm not saying they couldn't do it, just that the pricing doesn't reflect a harsher and pragmatic reality.

...But then it this appears to be a float targeted at burger lovers rather than investors. Maybe in 10 years times we'll have a bunch of aged 20 something "Burger" millionaires...

BRICKS
20-06-2007, 10:10 AM
The hog now believes that BRICKS and MacDunk are long lost siblings, separated at birth in a heart-wrenching twisted saga of lost love and lives unfulfilled. They both started out in similar lives but soon BRICKS gave away the chance at education and literacy settling instead for the complex and challenging life that is cleaning catch-tanks from fishing boats. MacDunk on the other hand went straight to the udder, as they say, and worked his way up to head share-milker, eventually cashing in his seven cows and marrying the ex-Carter Holt assistant tea-lady whom he initially got drunk on cheap wine in the hope of finding out what brand of biscuits Carters habitually bought for smoko breaks (his plan being to invest the bovine proceeds in a biscuit-producing operation). Now, the two siblings are bought together once more but this time life is quite different. Currently, no fewer than eight universities are vying for access to the pair to establish some coherent and conclusive position on the question of nature vs. nurture. How will it turn out? Did MacDunk invest in the right biscuit company, or did he put his bun in the wrong oven? Will BRICKS cement a solid relationship at last with MacDunk of memories old? We will just have to sit tight and wait to see ...
[/quote]

WELL there is one thing for sure is that BRICKS will not have a relationship with THE HOG because he has had his nose up his REAR so long now that he cant tell BLACK from WHITE and we don't have to sit tight to SEE.. [8D]

Bling_Bling
20-06-2007, 11:11 AM
I rather put my money with RBD with the SP at these levels. AT least RBD has a div and are under valued. Burger is too much risk at $60 M. I still cant believe they valued it at $60 M ..LOL

Scuffer
20-06-2007, 11:41 AM
Honestly can anyone see this as more than a pipe dream, but aim for the stars good luck to them.

CJ
20-06-2007, 06:57 PM
quote:Originally posted by Halebop

CJ there are a lot of "ifs" in there for $60m. The thing with Sydney is that it's not once established it's if profitably established.
I never said it was a good investment and have said that to others as well.

I beleive the "dream" is similar to 42 below but I dont think that they will get the global penitration to have the same result.

I beleive any money they use to go to the USA or Europe (especially UK - GBK will have 150 stores in under 5 years here) will be more than a waste of money, it will be a cashflow drag.

However, their burgers are still good and I think that is the way i will be supporting them (ie. by eating rather than investing).

clearasmud
20-06-2007, 08:06 PM
Good burgers ay.
I'll give them a go.
As for the shares ha ha

John
20-06-2007, 09:35 PM
I find it real interesting to see their "valuation" of the co and I think I even heard someone from BF making ref to the 42below story. i.e. we are going to build this up as much as we can with loads of hot air before selling to some large corporate....

Footsie
20-06-2007, 10:01 PM
current valuation is over $3m per store......

no thanks

UK dreams....... havent they heard of GBK

Onthemoney
21-06-2007, 08:03 AM
They don't even own all the stores.... The company in its current form would be lucky to get between 1-2 million in the current open market.

Placebo
21-06-2007, 08:07 AM
quote:The hog now believes that BRICKS and MacDunk are long lost siblings, separated at birth in a heart-wrenching twisted saga of lost love and lives unfulfilled. They both started out in similar lives but soon BRICKS gave away the chance at education and literacy settling instead for the complex and challenging life that is cleaning catch-tanks from fishing boats. MacDunk on the other hand went straight to the udder, as they say, and worked his way up to head share-milker, eventually cashing in his seven cows and marrying the ex-Carter Holt assistant tea-lady whom he initially got drunk on cheap wine in the hope of finding out what brand of biscuits Carters habitually bought for smoko breaks (his plan being to invest the bovine proceeds in a biscuit-producing operation). Now, the two siblings are bought together once more but this time life is quite different. Currently, no fewer than eight universities are vying for access to the pair to establish some coherent and conclusive position on the question of nature vs. nurture. How will it turn out? Did MacDunk invest in the right biscuit company, or did he put his bun in the wrong oven? Will BRICKS cement a solid relationship at last with MacDunk of memories old? We will just have to sit tight and wait to see ...

Warty that's the most beautiful story ever told. I wept :(

I hope Peter Jackson is reading this thread, he could buy the movie rights, it would make a ripping yarn. Sean Connery to play MacDunk and Shrek to play Bricks [?]

duncan macgregor
21-06-2007, 08:14 AM
PLACEBO, SEAN CONNERY is not good looking enough to play MACDUNK.

BRICKS
21-06-2007, 09:36 AM
Placebo the CLOWN............ Which is just NORMAL.. [8D]

Placebo
21-06-2007, 10:01 AM
Here's the family patriarch:
http://www.learnenglish.org.uk/trivia/apimages/scotland.gif

The only things missing are his caber, his pipes, his wee dog called Kiltie, and the massive chip on his shoulder :D

Is this what Bricks and MacDunk see when they look in the mirror?

BRICKS
21-06-2007, 10:05 AM
Placebo has such thin SKIN you can see through HIM.. [8D]

duncan macgregor
21-06-2007, 10:14 AM
quote:Originally posted by Placebo

Here's the family patriarch:
http://www.learnenglish.org.uk/trivia/apimages/scotland.gif

The only things missing are his caber, his pipes, his wee dog called Kiltie, and the massive chip on his shoulder :D

Is this what Bricks and MacDunk see when they look in the mirror?
Not bad PLACEBO try again. I am still better looking than that.:D:DMacdunk

CJ
21-06-2007, 10:44 PM
Just found out. Apparently it will be the first IPO in NZ that you can pay by credit card.

Scuffer
22-06-2007, 07:20 AM
Thats great just what NZ needs more debt sounds like an act of desperation, the news report had a few would be investors saying they were going to buy in they didn't look like warren buffet.

BRICKS
22-06-2007, 09:29 AM
quote:Originally posted by Scuffer

Thats great just what NZ needs more debt sounds like an act of desperation, the news report had a few would be investors saying they were going to buy in they didn't look like warren buffet.


YOUR right avoid this IPO.. [8D]

Halebop
22-06-2007, 09:32 AM
quote:Originally posted by duncan macgregor

PLACEBO, SEAN CONNERY is not good looking enough to play MACDUNK.


...not old enough either [:p]

duncan macgregor
22-06-2007, 09:42 AM
quote:Originally posted by Halebop


quote:Originally posted by duncan macgregor

PLACEBO, SEAN CONNERY is not good looking enough to play MACDUNK.


...not old enough either [:p]


I am not to sure on that one roughly the same i think. I have more hair on my head than he has. He was voted the worlds sexiest man. my only claim to fame was I won a best legs contest.
Thought you would like to know that. :D:D:Dmacdunk

Placebo
22-06-2007, 10:58 AM
Wasn't he just knighted too, so he's Sir Sean? In the same list as Dame Edna :D.

Not sure if that makes him/her Sir Dame Edna or Dame Dame Edna... grateful if someone could clarify [?]

Crypto Crude
22-06-2007, 12:27 PM
quote:BRICKS-YOUR right avoid this IPO..

im with Bricks on this one...
I read that Burgerfuel have turnover of 3million dollars and they are trying to raise 60million
analysts said this float is "ambitious"
[8D]
.^sc

Rumplestiltskin
22-06-2007, 01:47 PM
If you must invest in the fast food business, then surely RBD at 86c,(taking into account its current problems with pizza hut etc,an iconic brand poorly maintained and marketed but with potential for a turn-around) would be a better place to put your money? With the costs and risks involved in developing Burger Fuel, I can't see why they wont be cheaper than $1 in the future.

Scuffer
22-06-2007, 01:53 PM
were you the guy that shouted the king is wearing no clothes its pretty obvious to all thanks buddy someone had to say it well done :D

etrader
23-06-2007, 10:00 AM
Interesting article in herald today, it looks that the public are pumping a lot of money into something and holding a 1/4 share, the owners are going to do very well out of it, almost makes me want to float my business should put a $30 million dollar potential value on a lot of small $1 to $2 mill turnover firms.

Good on them if they can get that off the public smart way of making $

tsb
23-06-2007, 02:44 PM
Here at Burger Wisconsin we have been perfecting gourmet Burgers since 1989. That means we have plenty of experience in sourcing the finest & freshest ingredients to give you, our valued customer, the world’s best burger.

For the next 65 years Charlie sold his hamburgers at fairs all over Wisconsin while his creation went on to conquer the world.

I spose its a business

Deev8
24-06-2007, 09:37 AM
Christopher Niesche's column in the Saturday Herald provides a reasonable summary:

It has 19 stores, all but one of which are franchises. For some reason the latest financial statements aren't included in the prospectus, but they reveal that Burger Fuel New Zealand earned revenue of $4.3 million and made a "trading surplus" of $186,499.

If we add back interest payments and depreciation of $190,045 we get earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation - or something like it - of $376,544. If we then put Burger Fuel International's operating loss to one side, this puts the float on a multiple of 160 times earnings.

That doesn't look enticing, to say the least ...

Sideshow Bob
24-06-2007, 09:57 AM
I've noticed ads for Burger Fuel on TV in the last week.

Are they raising 'brand awareness' to sell burgers or sell shares?

Paddy
24-06-2007, 10:28 AM
quote:Originally posted by Sideshow Bob

I've noticed ads for Burger Fuel on TV in the last week.

Are they raising 'brand awareness' to sell burgers or sell shares?


selling a few more burgers either way!

Stranger_Danger
24-06-2007, 12:25 PM
Or turning their reported tiny profit for the last year into a big loss for the current year.....

Sideshow Bob
25-06-2007, 06:15 PM
quote:Originally posted by Paddy


quote:Originally posted by Sideshow Bob

I've noticed ads for Burger Fuel on TV in the last week.

Are they raising 'brand awareness' to sell burgers or sell shares?


selling a few more burgers either way!


OK, now I've seen an ad when the end line is 'would you like shares with that!'

I'm out! (Not that I was ever in, I just wanted to use the line!)

shasta
25-06-2007, 06:22 PM
Not sure it's publicity machine are earning there keep with that commercial.

They should be trying to sell a "growing franchise" opportunity to sophisicated investors not some student types scrapping together $1k to buy in.

Never tried there food but may try it & observe the setup, & won't be touching the shares in any case.

Scuffer
25-06-2007, 06:37 PM
Wonder what the guys at Burger Wisconsin think they must be quaking in their buns.

Placebo
26-06-2007, 09:01 AM
I used to play squash at Thorndon Club in early 90s when Stu Davenport had this weird idea about a gourmet burger chain. He put heart and soul into developing products basically from scratch and the brand, opened a shop in Northland (Welly suburb) we all thought he was mad. But there's money in them there buns!

Who are Burger Fuel pitching to? "scrape together $1000 and invest in us" they say. I have never seen a telly ad campaign for an IPO -- are they desperate?

Tok3n
26-06-2007, 09:27 AM
neither

cute ads though.

Closes I had was AZA (ASX) sending us NXS Holders a DVD when they tried to take over NXS (ASX) lol.

FarmerGeorge
26-06-2007, 09:29 AM
shasta mate the burgers are awesome, as are the fries and the beautiful aioli if the Hamilton branch is indicative of the others. That said I won't be buying in.

Halebop
26-06-2007, 10:09 AM
Placebo there are plenty of examples of Television advertising for an IPO - some companies take a softly "brand" approach while others just pitch the float. It's been done in NZ for quite a while – the earliest local example I can think of is Petrocorp in the 80's.

I agree with Tok3n - Burger Fuel make "cute" adverts. A little more 3 dimensional than the Burger King adverts (pretty girls and funny concept though) and a lot less intuitional than the McD's various segmented campaigns (I'm still taken aback that they have actually started targeting 30 somethings in their marketing - Being Gen X I'm not used to being a targeted demographic - and I think they've missed the mark because my instinctive Gen X reaction is cynicism).

Steve
26-06-2007, 07:17 PM
quote:Originally posted by Halebop

Placebo there are plenty of examples of Television advertising for an IPO - some companies take a softly "brand" approach while others just pitch the float. It's been done in NZ for quite a while – the earliest local example I can think of is Petrocorp in the 80's.

I can just recall the Petrocorp ads on tv - was 86 or 87. I requested a prostectus, but could not apply as I was under 18.

Having seen the 'would you like shares with that?' ad, I will not be asking for a prostectus for this...

cloggs
26-06-2007, 07:43 PM
The burgers ARE great, and twice the price of 'normal' burgers. Maybe they're targetting the unsophisticated investor who wants to be part of the burger revolution.

temuk
27-06-2007, 09:16 AM
Go for it Spoonman.

You might want to go catch a horse so you can
buy more shares!

And good luck.

Onthemoney
27-06-2007, 09:17 AM
Easier to sell product through existing distribution channels than have to set up burger shops to sell burgers - that is a key difference.

Deev8
27-06-2007, 12:17 PM
quote:Originally posted by SpoonMan

Hah doesn't worry me if the old fogies don't get this coy. Means less scaling for me ... Hang on a minute, were you the same people that laughed off the ambitious growth plans of Frucor, who have a similar target market?No - it's the same people who laughed off the ambitious growth plans of Plus SMS because they just couldn't see how the company could turn a profit.

Halebop
27-06-2007, 03:11 PM
quote:Originally posted by Deev8

No - it's the same people who laughed off the ambitious growth plans of Plus SMS because they just couldn't see how the company could turn a profit.

Cynical doubters!

CJ
27-06-2007, 07:33 PM
quote:Originally posted by Onthemoney

Easier to sell product through existing distribution channels than have to set up burger shops to sell burgers - that is a key difference.

But Franchisees are paying the Franchisor to set up these shops.

I have no doubt the company will do well, whether it is valued at 60m is another matter. (there is a difference but to a shareholder, only the latter matters).

Spoonman - do you have any links to interesting articles on Josef Roberts. i have been meaning to look into him for a while.

Onthemoney
27-06-2007, 07:52 PM
Okay what I mean is that you could have 60 stores with 60 potential variances and complexities or one production house with one potential variance and no complexity. You make the product and market it.

Too many variables in setting up a chain of manufacturing stores....

temuk
27-06-2007, 08:59 PM
quote:Originally posted by SpoonMan

I don't get the horse thing? reference to cowboys?



In 1 add the guy try's to catch some horses (with a fish net) to find the money to pay for his shares but only ends up mith a bleeding nose[B)].

coge
28-06-2007, 09:55 AM
The TV campaign is pitch to those with no experience in the NZSE, so alarm bells are sounding to me. Simple, eh?

zyreon
28-06-2007, 07:32 PM
As always here's Bruce with a great analysis of the thing: http://www.stuff.co.nz/4109984a1865.html

pretty much my thoughts, I mean sure I'd like to see more companies come to market, but this one to me is quite speculative...

Scuffer
28-06-2007, 07:37 PM
Its laughable really but stranger things have happened, but I won't be riding this wave.Good luck to anyone investing in this, it all reminds me of the days of tulips everyone is getting in on the sharemarket.

boysy
29-06-2007, 09:51 AM
well at this stage the ipo does look like a bit of a pipe dream but hey you never know look what happened to 42 below . In saying that i wouldnt think of puting money into them at this stage ill leave it up to those silly enough and or brave enough to be convinced by a 30 second ad to put money into a business with little financial information(look at the prospectus for a start). In saying that i wish those well who put there money where there mouth is

trackers
07-07-2007, 09:32 PM
quote:Originally posted by coge

The TV campaign is pitch to those with no experience in the NZSE, so alarm bells are sounding to me. Simple, eh?



I just saw the ad on TV now.... Wouldn't touch this coy with a barge pole if they have to resort to these sorts of things to attract investors (not to mention how much money they're draining in promoting it...)

Scuffer
07-07-2007, 10:12 PM
Absolut can ya give me ya friends phone number I've got an old bicycle frame I want to sell.

shasta
07-07-2007, 10:18 PM
quote:Originally posted by Scuffer

Absolut can ya give me ya friends phone number I've got an old bicycle frame I want to sell.


LOL @ Scuffer :D:D:D

Maybe you could float it on the NZAX, Mark Weldon will do a write up for the papers welcoming you to the NZ stockmarket! ;)

Scuffer
07-07-2007, 10:32 PM
I could what a good idea its the perfect colour GREEN:D:D:D

shasta
07-07-2007, 10:34 PM
quote:Originally posted by Scuffer

I could what a good idea its the perfect colour GREEN:D:D:D


You just to secure a supplier to dredge out the bikes in the Amsterdam ****s & you have a more feasible business than a burger chain!

Snow Leopard
08-07-2007, 10:29 AM
For advertising I suggest you get one of the successful riders in le Tour de France (http://www.letour.fr) to wear a green jersey.

Scuffer
08-07-2007, 03:16 PM
What a good idea I would need a good rider because the wheels fell off years ago.:D:D:D

shasta
08-07-2007, 03:26 PM
Shane Cameron can have the company logo tattooed on his back, for exposure in the States!

Scuffer
08-07-2007, 03:35 PM
Hey Shasta love ya ideas I crack up laughing, they will be a few on the ADY thread wondering if we are complete nutters, well bud gotta go out going to watch Transformers gonna see if there is any way to turn an old bike frame into a gourmet burger,catch ya later.:D:D:D

Bling_Bling
08-07-2007, 03:55 PM
quote:Originally posted by Scuffer

Hey Shasta love ya ideas I crack up laughing, they will be a few on the ADY thread wondering if we are complete nutters, well bud gotta go out going to watch Transformers gonna see if there is any way to turn an old bike frame into a gourmet burger,catch ya later.:D:D:D


Maybe you can raise $250k so you can bring the bike to the guys at American Choppers to pimp it for ya. Get Grant Sammy to put a value of $500k after the American Chopper dudes have build the bike. :D

Deev8
08-07-2007, 04:56 PM
quote:Originally posted by trackers

... not to mention how much money they're draining in promoting itQuite a lot of money being spent on that. The following was from an article in The Herald a couple of days ago:

Has anyone told that bloke on the telly rustling horses and selling vacuum cleaners to get his $1000 worth of Burger Fuel shares how much of his hard-earned cash will be used just to get the thing listed?

The prospectus estimates the IPO will cost Burger Fuel $1.2 million - that's 8 per cent of the $15 million being raised. A pretty hefty whack, even for a company that believes it is worth $60 million.

Brokerage fees for the float are 3 per cent of the money raised - plus a 1 per cent success fee. That's $600,000. So give or take $30,000 of independent directors fees, it looks like more than $500,000 is being spent on marketing.

Onthemoney
08-07-2007, 05:22 PM
Last throw of the dice for the shareholders involved. If they can't get the IPO off the ground it will go under. One way to get the vendor finance back.

corporateraider
08-07-2007, 05:48 PM
I'm in for GBI. I can see it becoming the framework of NZX's new carbon trading exchange

PointyHat
11-07-2007, 11:18 AM
I have just read the advert and prospectus and I agree with sentiment on this thread. My max investment, some time in the furure, will only be $9.00 in a 1/3 burger with Brei and salad! Let's hope they are still a float when I pass one of their stores, LOL.

FTG
16-07-2007, 07:52 PM
Looks like despite all odds that this one is going to list!

Reading between the lines, it seems that they must have been not to short of the $8mill. Hence why they are only extending by a week and the founding s/holders will "make up" any difference.

Who would have thought eh!

NZX Regulation Decision
BurgerFuel Worldwide Limited ("BFW")
Application for Waiver from NZAX Listing Rule 7.12.2


Background

1. BurgerFuel Worldwide Limited ("BFW") is currently undergoing an initial public offer of ordinary shares and options which are intended to be listed on the NZAX market. BFW is seeking up to $15 million with a minimum subscription level of $8 million. The offer opened on 18 June 2007.

2. The offer timetable outlined in BFW's prospectus is as follows:
- Offer Opening Date - 18 June 2007
- Offer Closing Date - 16 July 2007
- Anticipated allotment of shares and options - 23 July 2007
- Expected quotation and trading on NZX - 25 July 2007

3. BFW reserved the right to vary the offer opening and closing date subject to NZX requirements.

4. As of today's date, BFW has not received the minimum subscription level of $8 million.

5. The Board of BFW has decided, if allowed by NZX Regulation ("NZXR"), to amend the offer period by extending the Offer Closing date to 23 July 2007. As a result of this change, the likely allotment and quotation date of shares and options would be 27 July 2007.

Application

6. BFW has requested a waiver from Listing Rule 7.12.2 in order to allow the closing date to be extended to 23 July 2007.

7. In support of the application, BFW has submitted that:

a. The founding shareholders of BFW have decided to subscribe for any shortfall in the public offer to ensure that the minimum level of $8 million is achieved. BFW believes that this is information is significant to the investing public and that the offer period should be extended in light of this announcement.
b. Early subscribers to the offer are not significantly affected by the extension of the offer period as the anticipated quotation date has only moved out by 2 days.

c. The prospectus clearly states that BFW reserved the right to vary the offer closing date.

Listing Rule 7.12.2

8. Listing Rule 7.12.2 provides that:

Extension of Closing Date: An NZAX Issuer shall not extend the closing date for applications to subscribe for new Securities unless, at least five Business Days prior to the original closing date, the NZAX Issuer has notified NZX of the extension, and of the new closing date. An NZAX Issuer shall not, without the prior consent of NZX, extend a closing date more than once.

Decision

9. On the basis that the information provided to NZXR is full and accurate in all material respects, NZXR has decided to grant BFW a waiver from NZAX Listing Rule 7.12.2 to allow BFW to extend the closing date of the offer by one week until Monday 23 July 2007.

10. This waiver was granted on the conditions that:

a. BFW must immediately announce to the market, upon approval by the NZX of that announcement, that the closing date for the offer is being extended by a period of one week;

b. The announcement shall contain information relating to the founding shareholders' announcement and the new timetable.

Reasons

11. In coming to the decision to grant BFW a waiver from NZAX Listing Rule 7.12.2, NZXR has considered the following matters:

a. The announcement by the founding shareholders to pick up any shortfall means that the minimum subscription level will be achieved and BFW shares and options will proceed to quotation. NZXR is satisfied that this is important information to prospective investors in BFW.

b. Early subscribers of BFW shares and options are not significantly disadvantaged by having the quotation date extended by 2 days.

c. The prospectus outlined that BFW reserved the right to amend the offer closing date as is common in prospectuses.

d. There is a precedent for extensions of closing dates and in terms of the quotation date, this extens

PointyHat
17-07-2007, 07:56 AM
NO surprises here then!

5:00AM Tuesday July 17, 2007
By Christopher Niesche


Photo / Martin Sykes
Burger Fuel's initial public offering has failed to raise the minimum $8 million it needed to float on the share market but will still go ahead after its founding shareholders said they would make up the difference.

The offer, which was due to close yesterday, has been extended for a week. It has been promoted on TV and through Burger Fuel stores.

The company had aimed to raise $15 million, with a minimum subscription of $8 million.

Director Josef Roberts said yesterday he could not reveal how big the shortfall was but said he and founder Chris Mason would make up the difference.

"The founding shareholders of [Burger Fuel] have decided to subscribe for any shortfall in the public offer to ensure that the minimum level of $8 million is achieved," the company said in its application to the NZX for an extension.

"[Burger Fuel] believes that this information is significant to the investing public and that the offer period should be extended in light of this announcement."


Advertisement
AdvertisementThe NZX agreed to extend the offer to July 23 and to push back the listing date by two days to July 27.

The burger chain, which has international ambitions, said in its prospectus that total sales in the March year rose 54 per cent to $16.4 million.

whatsup
17-07-2007, 08:26 AM
Looks like these guys are going to "fund' a company that they already own, hoping for a exit somehow!!!

hairdresser
17-07-2007, 10:21 AM
1600 buyers from all that advertising. Hope their A&P spend is more productive.

I think they have just confirmed to the market that this is a dog.

Bling_Bling
17-07-2007, 10:33 AM
It wouldnt be a dog if they priced it right and gave a more realistic business plan and strategy. AT $60 million and have BF stores dotted around the world is selling a dream, not reality.

boysy
17-07-2007, 10:42 AM
I dont think dream gives them the right credit i think pipe dream might be more realistic reality especially given what they thought the company was worth:D

Toddy
17-07-2007, 10:59 AM
I'm still rolling around the floor laughing about these guys.

Selling shares from a burger joint to a target market of students.

Right, back to flipping burgers.

wsheridan
17-07-2007, 12:39 PM
quote:Originally posted by whatsup

Looks like these guys are going to "fund' a company that they already own, hoping for a exit somehow!!!


Yes, no doubt the extra they buy will be drip fed onto the market over coming monhts, further undermining its price.

etrader
17-07-2007, 01:53 PM
Will they be taking a loan from the company they owned to the company they partially own, then bought shares in the company they owned by borrowing funds from the company they now partly own.

upside_umop
17-07-2007, 09:43 PM
Do you think they will be silly enough to try list this share a premium?

Picks for opening/closing?

6 Months time?

Serpie
18-07-2007, 08:28 AM
If they only got 1600 investors that would hardly cover the advertising campaign.

So they've still got to cough up $6.4M themselves, and they've got 1600 shareholders who (I would imagine) don't know much about holding shares, that need to be managed.

If I had $6.4M I can think of better investments than a burger chain start-up.

Actually, it's pretty hard to come up with worse ones. But maybe that's what they said about Maccas.

Caesius
18-07-2007, 08:55 AM
How easy is it to go short with a NZX stock? I'd like to with this one.

warthog
18-07-2007, 09:56 AM
quote:Originally posted by upside_umop

Do you think they will be silly enough to try list this share a premium?

Well, if you can list this company at a premium then the boys at Burgerfuel will reward you handsomely.

However, the old hog suspects that you can't, and neither can Burgerfuel's advisors.

If you want a slice of Burgerfuel, wait patiently.

trackers
18-07-2007, 10:08 AM
quote:Originally posted by Caesius

How easy is it to go short with a NZX stock? I'd like to with this one.


Good point, you can short sell NZX stocks by using CFDs

Scuffer
18-07-2007, 11:15 AM
Get ya old bicycle frames here two for the price of one.[}:)]

Bling_Bling
18-07-2007, 12:21 PM
quote:Originally posted by trackers


quote:Originally posted by Caesius

How easy is it to go short with a NZX stock? I'd like to with this one.


Good point, you can short sell NZX stocks by using CFDs


What is CFD?

I know that you can only short sell if you can get your hands on some stock. Burgerfuel wont have many shareholders, so will be hard to get stock to short, unless the promoters wants to lend you their stock so you can short it...LOL :D

warthog
18-07-2007, 12:27 PM
Contract For Difference. You're just winning - or losing - with the margins. Like most derivatives, CFDs are highly-leveraged. Only one local player in NZ AFAIK (there are others if you include buying on margin) and that's CMC Markets.

You can effectively go short by using a CFD, and never touch the stock/share from which the CFD derives its value.

Big-Noters
18-07-2007, 12:30 PM
Contracts for Difference Bling

The definition of a Contract for Difference is an agreement (made between two parties) to exchange, at the closing of the contract, the difference between the opening and closing prices, multiplied by the number of shares detailed in the contract.

BigBob
18-07-2007, 12:35 PM
I doubt very much you'll be able to short Burger Fuel with CMC Markets though...

Last time I looked you could only trade the top 50 (or so) NZX stocks and BurgerFuel is not even on the NZX... it's listing on NZAX...

FTG
18-07-2007, 12:46 PM
Hi Warthog,

I think you will find OMF do NZ CFD's too. DMA (Direct Market Access) as opposed to being market written, which CMC do.

Regardless though, I couldn't see any one doing CFD's on BF for the forseable future. As already mentioned, insufficient script and not on the NZX.

Scuffer
27-07-2007, 05:23 AM
Burgerfuel list on NZAX 27th july watch these dive from the dollar down.[V]

shasta
27-07-2007, 05:37 AM
When does GBI list?

They should go straight to the main board!

Scuffer - Have you sorted the minimum entitlement out yet?

These Burgerfuel type IPO's usually indicate the market is about to turn bearish...

I'm expecting a few more of these "flog off to the public" type companies coming to the market.

i found an old coffee machine the other day, & might give Mark Weldon a call...

Rod Petricevic wants me to list it & do a backlisting onto the NZX with his latest "idea".

NB, This is for amusement purposes only!

Ok, fess up who is buying Burgerfuel today!

Scuffer
27-07-2007, 06:48 AM
I will buy if they give me a 100% guarantee that I will make more than inflation, go for it with the coffee machine it will be a big seller in the morning and at smoko, you would be able to day trade easy money, buy just before ten and sell at ten morning smoko sorted.:D Forgot to ask ya do ya want one of my old bike frames.[}:)]

777
27-07-2007, 08:04 AM
Burgerfuel float raises a third of target
5:00AM Friday July 27, 2007
By John Drinnan


Burger and fries from Burger Fuel.
Burger Fuel majority owners Josef Roberts and Chris Mason have had to take a bigger bite of the fast-food chain after its share float raised a little over one-third of the original target.

The company had aimed to raise up to $15 million, with a minimum of $8 million, to take a place on to the NZAX.

Yesterday company chairman Peter Brook said total applications from 2380 shareholders had reached just $5.25 million.

This means Roberts and Burger Fuel founder Mason will chip in with $2.75 million to reach the $8 million threshold after splitting the remaining shares in the public pool.

Roberts says that he is "wiser now" after the float.

"It was a new experience and we know better how it works," he said.

The Burger Fuel stock will start trading on the NZAX today. The IPO (initial public offering) closed on Monday, having been extended by a week.

The company had a minimum subscription of just 1000 $1 shares, which it offered to customers at Burger Fuel.



The chain has 19 franchises and two outlets.

Roberts said the lower-than-expected outcome was due in part to negative media coverage but he acknowledged the company had overestimated the likely degree of support from brokers for such a small float.

It had sought customers as shareholders but the advertising, which included a TV campaign, aimed to promote the Burger Fuel brand as well as the float, he said.

That advertising - which was heavy for such a small float - had boosted sales at the chain.

At the proposed $15 million, that public float would have represented 25 per cent of shares, valuing the company at $60 million.

Roberts stood by the valuation, which he said represented the future expansion plans for the company.

But with Roberts and Mason forced to top up, independent shareholders have just 8.75 per cent of Burger Fuel.

The outcome means the two men own 90 per cent, with 34 per cent of the portion traded on the NZAX.

Brook said yesterday that the reaction to the float might have been affected by the emphasis on marketing Burger Fuel shares to customers.

The company was using the money to expand the chain in New Zealand and Australia and had looked at different options depending on the outcomes.

It would use the new capital to secure prime locations and undertake preliminary fit-out work.

Roberts said that with a lesser amount of capital the company was likely to move some new branches directly to franchises rather than holding them in company ownership at the start.

The franchise approach meant that the capital could be recycled and invested in new sites and fit-outs.

In Australia, where Burger Fuel already has one franchised store, the company would use the same franchise model as in New Zealand to expand.

peterb
27-07-2007, 08:10 AM
Negative media coverage? Some of the coverage was irresponsibly positive about this shambolic overvalued IPO. Many people called a spade a spade yes, I'd love it if Roberts said the same: 'commentators got wise to how little the company was worth and told the public, undermining our sneaky stubstanceless advertising which cost most of what the IPO eventually raised.

trackers
27-07-2007, 08:13 AM
Damn I wish I had a CFD account so that I could short these this morning...

QOH
27-07-2007, 08:26 AM
I feel sorry though for the probably naive young investors for whom this will likely be their first experience of investing in the sharemarket. It may put them off forever.

Hoop
27-07-2007, 08:33 AM
It will teach these kids a valuable lesson.
DO YOUR HOMEWORK!!!. I keep yelling this to my two teenage boys...do they listen...NO.

Oh well... such is life

peterb
27-07-2007, 09:14 AM
what time do they start trading?

Toddy
27-07-2007, 09:20 AM
quote:Originally posted by peterb

what time do they start trading?


11 to midnight 7 days a week.

Paddy
27-07-2007, 09:32 AM
Offer at 1.02????????????

peterb
27-07-2007, 09:43 AM
quote:Originally posted by Toddy


quote:Originally posted by peterb

what time do they start trading?


11 to midnight 7 days a week.


Haha, on the NZAX mate

mibo
27-07-2007, 10:05 AM
Offer at 1.00. What, no buyers... 5c anyone [:0]

FTG
27-07-2007, 10:12 AM
Tried that!

"Order is too far from market"

777
27-07-2007, 10:17 AM
Where are you guys seeing the quotes? DB site does not have them showing that I can find.

777
27-07-2007, 10:20 AM
Found it. Was using GBI as mentioned further up this page.

peterb
27-07-2007, 10:34 AM
lol, I tried GBI too :P

GR8DAY
27-07-2007, 10:36 AM
...so whats da code??

Hoop
27-07-2007, 10:37 AM
777

Go on to your DB site and type BFW in the quick quote box. This is operating now

I assume that BFW will be showing up on the NZAX board as soon as it starts trading (NB... allow for the stupid 20 min delay )

BFW.NZX - Burger Fuel Worldwide Limited Ordinary Shares
Depth as at 11.35am
[u]Sellers</u>

100cents 1 25,000
102cents 1 9,600

[u]No Buyers</u>

777
27-07-2007, 10:43 AM
Thanks Hoop. I could not find it in the NZAX list and of course GBI did not work.

Can't see how the 5c offer by FTG can be turned down as there is no market yet. And the fact that it would be the highest until I came in at 6c of course.

Crypto Crude
27-07-2007, 10:43 AM
quote:QOH-I feel sorry though for the probably naive young investors for whom this will likely be their first experience of investing in the sharemarket. It may put them off forever.

QOH,
that is so true... I know of people that were scared off shares forever because of one bad beat...
I cannot be bothered reading all the 8 pages of this thread... why so much posting for a stock not worth talking about?
has anyone here admited buying into the IPO?
will anyone here be buying Burgerfuel shares ever?

This stock has disaster written all over it...
[8D]
.^sc

Hoop
27-07-2007, 10:59 AM
1000 shares traded at a $1 !!! [:0][:0][:0]

And there I was wondering whether to follow you 777 with a 6c bid

FarmerGeorge
27-07-2007, 11:03 AM
Utterly, utterly, hilarious. This thread is almost as much fun as the plus sms one!

peterb
27-07-2007, 11:07 AM
quote:Originally posted by Hoop

1000 shares traded at a $1 !!! [:0][:0][:0]

And there I was wondering whether to follow you 777 with a 6c bid


It was probably one BFW insider selling to another to give semblance of respectability. Hey these guys have about $48000000 worth of shares to play with anyway.

John Mexted
27-07-2007, 12:22 PM
"IPO is too far from market"

Yossarian
27-07-2007, 12:39 PM
so $1000 worth of shares traded in its first two hours as a listed co????

is this because all buyers are "too far from market"????

cjhaigh
27-07-2007, 12:44 PM
What does "too far from the market actually mean? As in the bids (0) are an infinite distance away from the offers?

classic

paul_nz
27-07-2007, 01:05 PM
Seems to have really taken off now .... up to 1100 traded. Who would buy 100?.....

777
27-07-2007, 01:09 PM
Would this IPO be classified as the most embarrassing event of 2007?

Bling_Bling
27-07-2007, 01:12 PM
quote:Originally posted by 777

Would this IPO be classified as the most embarrassing event of 2007?


Cant be worst than Plus SMS... LOL

Crypto Crude
27-07-2007, 01:14 PM
Paul NZ.
welcome to the thread...
this stock is an absolute disaster, Im picking it will fall 50-60cents when it bottoms out... many posters here have said this will be a disaster float, (including myself) ...with not one buyer on the bid side is something I have never seen for a first day IPO...
The advertisement was relentless from burgerfuel... I even saw a recent advert on the stocknessmonster site...
This company new analysts would dump this stock so managment had to attract/ and fool the public by any means neccessary...
[8D]
.^sc

Toddy
27-07-2007, 01:22 PM
quote:Originally posted by paul_nz


Seems to have really taken off now .... up to 1100 traded. Who would buy 100?.....


Probably a student. Probably using their parents eftpos card too.
They will be maxed out now so BF will miss out on a customer tonight.

etrader
27-07-2007, 01:29 PM
They might have used there interest free student loan to buy the shares hoping at the end to be able to buy a burger with the profit, take out the capital and pay the loan off before interest kicks in.

Sounds a winner, wonder if they got fries with there shares.

FarmerGeorge
27-07-2007, 01:33 PM
If this was to fall to 50-60c are there any potential buyers here? I posted before the IPO that I love the burgers and I'm definitely a potential buyer but only at the right price. Unfortunately, like most here, my right price is a long way 'from market' right now.

777
27-07-2007, 01:35 PM
No bids though could be brokers refusing to enter those that they think are too low. This would of course be manipulation of the market. All bids should be entered so the market can decide the value.

Crypto Crude
27-07-2007, 01:44 PM
quote:etrader-take out the capital and pay the loan off before interest kicks in.

Etrader,
Interest only kicks in if I leave the country and work overseas...
[8D]
.^sc

Onthemoney
27-07-2007, 01:50 PM
I wonder who pays for the advertsing. Probably racked up on 20th of the month accounts won't be much left of the funds from the IPO as Burger Fuel Ltd pays for it. What a joke.

These guys will still treat this company like they own 100% of it. Watch this company take a dive.

trackers
27-07-2007, 01:56 PM
quote:Originally posted by Shrewd Crude


quote:etrader-take out the capital and pay the loan off before interest kicks in.

Etrader,
Interest only kicks in if I leave the country and work overseas...
[8D]
.^sc


Unless he means that he reckons Nats will get rid of it, if they get in (which they will)

Crypto Crude
27-07-2007, 01:59 PM
Trackers what the nats do around student loans is out of our control/ and unconfirmed at this stage?... you are a speculator Trackers...

the interest free situation is a big question for me to stay or go...
EG not only is it the interest I save by staying, it is also the return I can get by not paying it off... its a double whammy...
trackers, vote Labour... do it for your buddy shrewd...
[8D]
.^sc

Bling_Bling
27-07-2007, 01:59 PM
quote:Originally posted by FarmerGeorge

If this was to fall to 50-60c are there any potential buyers here? I posted before the IPO that I love the burgers and I'm definitely a potential buyer but only at the right price. Unfortunately, like most here, my right price is a long way 'from market' right now.


At 50 cents, the company has a value of $30M, which is still way over valued in my books. Maybe 10 cents is a price Bling may look at it. Only look, NOT buy.

Onthemoney
27-07-2007, 02:07 PM
A PE of 3 is the highest. I would go. Equates to bearly $500,000 for the whole company. So it should be in the penny dreadful stakes.....

Bling_Bling
27-07-2007, 02:12 PM
Why OTM you stingy bugger..lol :D There is some value in those hills with the branding and existing stores.

I put BFW on my watch list just for fun. :D

Yossarian
27-07-2007, 03:03 PM
bids at 80c...

Yossarian
27-07-2007, 03:04 PM
although only for 175 shares i now notice...???

777
27-07-2007, 03:09 PM
175 shares at 80c plus brokerage of a minimum of 29.90 costs just over 97c per share. Why would you do it.

mibo
27-07-2007, 03:29 PM
quote:Originally posted by 777

175 shares at 80c plus brokerage of a minimum of 29.90 costs just over 97c per share. Why would you do it.

And I always take into account buy and sell brokerage so that makes it $1.14 breakeven. Not something I would do.

FarmerGeorge
27-07-2007, 03:36 PM
Cheers Bling, a 'look' at 10c is very generous of you! The disappointing thing here is that the product is actually good, but now management/governance/owners look both greedy AND foolish which I think means we have to discount the company even further than before the IPO.

FTG
27-07-2007, 03:50 PM
Onthemoney.
$500,000 - now that's a bit cruel!
Let's say we took over BF and just wanted to lie on the beach! Hence we built no more stores.
22 current stores @ an average of $1m sales each - taking 6% royalty = $1.32M
Take out say $500K for Head Office functions: GM, marketing person, a couple of admin and a couple of op's people. That leaves us with $820K. But then we also own a couple stores ourselves so lets add a conservative $250K for that. So that takes us back over $1M EBITDA pa.
So even with your PE of 3 we would be paying quite a bit more than $500K!

In regards to the "too far away from market" I wonder if we each stacked bid orders behind the 85c order, and then subsequently each other, if we could then get to a 10c bid? THEN those above 10C remove their order - would the 10c order be permitted to remain?

Onthemoney
27-07-2007, 05:44 PM
FTG my thoughts were based on the current situation....

FTG
27-07-2007, 05:53 PM
OTM.
Yep that's the way I took it.
If you took the current situation there wouldn't be much that needs changing - other than a lot of bluesky spending on trying to grow the business quickly. I would imagine the HO infrastructure I mention above is already in place.

tim23
27-07-2007, 06:03 PM
Shrewd Crewd has posted 4 times on this topic today despite earler saying it was not worth posting on - duh

Onthemoney
27-07-2007, 06:09 PM
A lot of the current stores are being propped up by the vendors.

FTG
27-07-2007, 06:12 PM
Really!?
How do you know that?

Onthemoney
27-07-2007, 06:13 PM
Ask the franchisees. Check and see if they are happy?
Why can't they pay back the vendor finance?

FTG
27-07-2007, 06:36 PM
As per the prospectus the AVERAGE franchise ebitda is over $100K. So unless there is misrepresentation in the prospectus I would suggest that struggling sites would be well in the minority. As it happens, I know a couple franchises well. Overall they say morale within the franchise group is very good.

Perhaps you need to be just a little careful with broadstroke comments OTM. :-)

disc - NOT a BFW s/holder

Onthemoney
27-07-2007, 06:40 PM
I suppose misrepresentation will be to the forefront when the franchisor rolls - what will the poor franchisees do then?

As I have said before this was a huge throw of the dice for the franchisors and time will tell.

winner69
27-07-2007, 07:03 PM
Interesting clash between FTG and onthemoney here .... wonder whose right? .... onthemoney has proved his worth in the past ..... so lets see what eventuates over time

One thing the franchisees should be doing OK from all that advertising paid for by the punters .... one way of paying the advertising bill .... pretend to do an IPO

winner69
27-07-2007, 07:07 PM
quote:Originally posted by etrader

Will they be taking a loan from the company they owned to the company they partially own, then bought shares in the company they owned by borrowing funds from the company they now partly own.


Sounds very complicated

Onthemoney
27-07-2007, 07:07 PM
Have to agree winner great pubicity, all publicity is good don't they say.

777
27-07-2007, 07:13 PM
Well I have never been to Burger Fuel but will no doubt give it a try now.

Onthemoney
27-07-2007, 07:15 PM
A report back to fellow sharetraders would be great.

777
27-07-2007, 07:23 PM
The thing is I am probably like a lot of people in that I don't even know where the closest shop is. Probably one of the reasons not many invested in it.

Onthemoney
27-07-2007, 07:29 PM
Yes exactly.... If you wanted a bottle of 42 below you can get it. If you wanted a burger you need to wait till they have an outlet (built at considerable expense).

CJ
27-07-2007, 07:38 PM
quote:Originally posted by Onthemoney

Ask the franchisees. Check and see if they are happy?
They are happy. And sales are up after all the advertising.

Onthemoney
27-07-2007, 07:44 PM
Great CJ so investors and franchisees have nothing to worry about.

FTG
27-07-2007, 09:16 PM
777, you have raised an interesting point. Public awareness of BF is not a strength (yet). However in Auckland where it all started I would think general awareness is not too bad.
The lack of critical mass in NZ is yet another reason why imo the franchisors moved to a listing too early.
After reading some press about the ex Red Bull guy saying they had "learnt a lot" going through the IPO process it makes me wonder. Did the sponsor broker "play the game", seeing the naivity of the franchisors in regards to raising capital as a quick ticket to earn a few hundred $K for themselves?

shasta
27-07-2007, 10:38 PM
quote:Originally posted by 777

The thing is I am probably like a lot of people in that I don't even know where the closest shop is. Probably one of the reasons not many invested in it.


I should probably try BF before i continue knocking it...

I think there is one on Courtney Place, though i don't know exactly where...& given the time ive spent on Courtney place over the last 4 years it cant have great presence!

Pike River "PRC" gets its IPO slatted for a $200m company despite having a steady income stream for the next 20 odd years, & BF gets valued at $60m...

BF is overvalued at even 20c IMO...[:o)]

winner69
28-07-2007, 06:20 AM
quote:Originally posted by shasta


quote:Originally posted by 777

The thing is I am probably like a lot of people in that I don't even know where the closest shop is. Probably one of the reasons not many invested in it.


I should probably try BF before i continue knocking it...

I think there is one on Courtney Place, though i don't know exactly where...& given the time ive spent on Courtney place over the last 4 years it cant have great presence!

Pike River "PRC" gets its IPO slatted for a $200m company despite having a steady income stream for the next 20 odd years, & BF gets valued at $60m...

BF is overvalued at even 20c IMO...[:o)]


The opposite end and side of Courtenay from the pubs explains why you haven't come across it mate

Down on the Taranaki St corner

Weren't too bad for a 'gourmet' burger - but the vegies love the choice available - you into chick peas and tofu butgers?

Balance
28-07-2007, 09:10 AM
quote:Originally posted by shasta


quote:Originally posted by 777

The thing is I am probably like a lot of people in that I don't even know where the closest shop is. Probably one of the reasons not many invested in it.


I should probably try BF before i continue knocking it...

I think there is one on Courtney Place, though i don't know exactly where...& given the time ive spent on Courtney place over the last 4 years it cant have great presence!

Pike River "PRC" gets its IPO slatted for a $200m company despite having a steady income stream for the next 20 odd years, & BF gets valued at $60m...

BF is overvalued at even 20c IMO...[:o)]


There are similarities between PRC and BF with BF - both were floated on the promise of future earnings. Heck, FTB was floated on the promise of no earnings but market presence! At this stage, BF must be cons8idered as having the edge as an actual operating company with real earnings and cashflow. PRC has no earnings and will be sucking cash until coal is PROFITABLY du up and sold.

boysy
30-07-2007, 12:57 PM
gosh who would of ever thought burger fuel would go below its list price ;) i really do feel for shareholders by the way

AMR
30-07-2007, 01:04 PM
Had a "fuel" burger for lunch today, absolutely lovely although I think their pricing scheme is a bit out of wack. Why should I pay $5 extra just for some fancy sauce and the same amount of meat?

Pity about the share price, it looks totally illiquid.

Bling_Bling
30-07-2007, 01:18 PM
The investor who bought at $1 and sold 81 cents less brokerage fees must be feeling the pain today.. LOL. Must be a uni student who needed booze money, so had to liquidate his holding. I bet he was an engineering student. [:o)]

etrader
30-07-2007, 01:52 PM
BFW what a joke.

The founders are laughing all the way to the bank having just 7% from memory of the company available to the public they might as well do a take over at .81c and privatise it, would be the shortest IPO/privatisation in nzx history i would think.

boysy
30-07-2007, 01:55 PM
im sure the investor who sold at 81 cents might need a few drinks after what hes seen happen to his share price wonder if he can afford to hit top shelf to drown his sorrows[:p]

Stranger_Danger
30-07-2007, 02:36 PM
Has anyone figured out yet what happens to a loyal customer base if you flog them shares in $1000 parcels that immediately lose 20% of their "value" and are totally illiquid?

Stranger_Danger
30-07-2007, 02:45 PM
Wouldn't surprise me if the founders wanted $800 for drinks and figured it a sensible way to make an easy $750.

boysy
30-07-2007, 02:46 PM
do you even think its worth 20c though :D i fell sorry for shareholders obviouly the owners knew it was a dog but sucked in people with advertising.

Stranger_Danger
30-07-2007, 02:50 PM
boysy - I just gave my valuation.

Crypto Crude
30-07-2007, 03:03 PM
quote:etrader
BFW what a joke.

The founders are laughing all the way to the bank

Well the founders are not laughing all the way to the bank... That was the reason why they listed this company because they wanted to attract investment from other means than their own pockets... one of the directors was reported saying in the chch press that the extra money he had to front for this IPO to go ahead "came at a stretch"... over 1million from 2 directors... cant remember his name and exact added investment because im not looking into deeply, and Its a stock we can all laugh at rather than time entrys at 50% plus discount to IPO price etc.... these directors arenot laughing all the way to the bank...
Someone here tried to compare Pike to Burger Fuel, and said that Burger fuel was better... Burger fuel is nothing like PRC, and BFW has nothing on what PRC will offer over the long term.... and I cant be bothered explaining why...
[8D]
.^sc

etrader
30-07-2007, 03:11 PM
Fair enought SC

Mind you depth has come on strong with buy side building strong now new buyer looking to pick up 5000 at a 25% discount to ipo

Yossarian
30-07-2007, 03:25 PM
the founders valued this company pre ipo at $45m.

the market (so far!!) values it just under $43m, including $8m cash.

etrader
30-07-2007, 03:30 PM
quote:Originally posted by Yossarian

the founders valued this company pre ipo at $45m.

the market (so far!!) values it just under $43m, including $8m cash.



Will be interesting to see how quickly the $8 mill get chewed up and when they'll come to the market for mor $.

Yossarian
30-07-2007, 03:31 PM
I hate to be negative, but the share price at the next capital raising will probably mean a lot of dilution for existing holders.

That said, I'd honestly like to see Burgerfuel prove me wrong.

Onthemoney
30-07-2007, 03:39 PM
Long story short they wanted $45 million of a company that they valued at $60 million.

Stranger_Danger
30-07-2007, 04:22 PM
What I find curious is they that tried to float at the same market cap as Xero, but with a more established business in terms of revenue, market share, proven concept etc.

Rightfully, we're all laughing at this IPO, but not at the other one. Amazing what hi-tech and a few famous blokes on your board will do ey?

etrader
30-07-2007, 04:48 PM
quote:Originally posted by Stranger_Danger

What I find curious is they that tried to float at the same market cap as Xero, but with a more established business in terms of revenue, market share, proven concept etc.

Rightfully, we're all laughing at this IPO, but not at the other one. Amazing what hi-tech and a few famous blokes on your board will do ey?


They should get sam morgan on the board and put a "Buy now" price and order online with reserves, that will put a boot up the shareprice

upside_umop
30-07-2007, 05:51 PM
i'd pay 20c a share for it...

look to see the share price hit &lt;50 cents...

i also noticed some analyst's putting, not a buy, sell or hold but an 'avoid' haha

etrader
30-07-2007, 06:11 PM
quote:Originally posted by upside_umop

i'd pay 20c a share for it...

look to see the share price hit &lt;50 cents...

i also noticed some analyst's putting, not a buy, sell or hold but an 'avoid' haha

upside_umop at 20c your buying the cash at cost presuming they hold at that level and get a share in the company for free, i have put a bid below current quotes, not sure if it will get to that level meaning i'm buying the cash and assuming a 6.5 mill value in the francise system will see how i go at that level. talking to my broker today they said that a quote will only show up at no lower than 25% below the previous close hence the .75c showed, tomorrow anything from .60c and above will show. Wonder how many lower bidders there are ?

Onthemoney
30-07-2007, 06:25 PM
Hell Pizza New Zealand had store wide sales of around $50 million and as a franchise company sold for $13 million. There is your bench mark.


Watch this share plummet if only the bids could be listed.

Bling_Bling
30-07-2007, 06:33 PM
Do you know the profit for Hell's Pizza?

Onthemoney
30-07-2007, 06:34 PM
Also check out

http://www.burgerfuel.com/shares/application/financial_accounts_pop_up

Caveat emptor.

Onthemoney
30-07-2007, 06:36 PM
No Bling Bling but good enough for Tasman Pacific Partners to pay $13 million for. Their royalty is 5%? so I suppose they have revenues of $2.5 million less franchisor costs.

FTG
30-07-2007, 08:10 PM
Well OTM,

Looking at the latest accounts (as per your link above)I'm sure even you would agree that your broad statement:
"A lot of the current stores are being propped up by the vendors" is not so accurate after all.
A total of 4 (20%) franchisees have been provided finance to START their business - This is common practice with plenty of Franchise systems giving good franchisees a hand up at the beginning of their relationship.

However, it would be a lot more concerning if there were
(a)lots of franchisees needing a hand up
(b)if franchisees that had had a hand up weren't reducing their loan
(c)if loans to "established" franchisees started to appear in the Franchisors balance sheet.

Fortunately for BFW none of these scenarios seem to be happening.

At this stage I still stand by my opinion. BF is a sound business with good growth potential. BUT the owners value it way too highly and have taken the listing option too early.
Let's hope they learn from the whole listing experience!

Onthemoney
30-07-2007, 08:32 PM
quote:Originally posted by FTG



BUT the owners value it way too highly and have taken the listing option too early.
Let's hope they learn from the whole listing experience!


Would have to agree. Lets wait and see...

morpork
30-07-2007, 10:35 PM
I can't understand why theres an active thread on bgw or whatever it calls itself,unless they win Lotto like FTB this must be the last seat on an aeroplane,unless its just taking off,which in that case I wish all passengers well.

Caesius
31-07-2007, 05:55 AM
quote:unless they win Lotto like FTB

Are you saying FTB was another Burger Fuel and "got lucky"?

Yossarian
31-07-2007, 08:58 AM
quote:Originally posted by morpork

I can't understand why theres an active thread on bgw or whatever it calls itself,unless they win Lotto like FTB this must be the last seat on an aeroplane,unless its just taking off,which in that case I wish all passengers well.


don't you visit the sideshows at the fair??

Hoop
31-07-2007, 08:59 AM
Quote from 777 on 27/07/2007
Can't see how the 5c offer by FTG can be turned down as there is no market yet. And the fact that it would be the highest until I came in at 6c of course.

Thxs for your informative post E-Trader. I wondered what happened to our bids.
....talking to my broker today they said that a quote will only show up at no lower than 25% below the previous close hence the .75c showed, tomorrow anything from .60c and above will show. Wonder how many lower bidders there are ?

3 that I know of :D:D:D:D[}:)]

FTG
31-07-2007, 09:47 AM
Interesting!

Someone has put in an order at 57cents (25% below the 75 cent order) and someone has now put an order in at 25% below that at 43 cents.

So we just need about three more bids like that and we will be getting closer to real value.
The question is will the lower bids be allowed to remain if the higher bids then get cancelled?

boysy
31-07-2007, 09:48 AM
sad to see chairman and company owners still totally deluded

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/3/story.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10454781

Yossarian
31-07-2007, 09:52 AM
would be funny it it was not tragic...

"There are just not the shares out there to buy. I think if you wanted to buy 30,000 or 35,000 you would be paying $1.20 per share," he said."

(there are currently 34,000 sellers at $1)

jonny5
31-07-2007, 10:51 AM
"An advertising campaign cost $1.2 million. Brook said: "I don't think there are many of the people who bought the shares for trading.""

I wonder how many buyers had/have any idea what they were/are going to do with their holding?

Crypto Crude
31-07-2007, 11:12 AM
Im not sure if this question has been asked...
has anyone had a burger fuel burger?
and if so would you have it again?
and if so would you buy shares in the company please?
:D
.^sc

jonny5
31-07-2007, 11:17 AM
has anyone had a burger fuel burger? Yes
and if so would you have it again? I do
and if so would you buy shares in the company please? Maybe

At 80c? no. I think there are a lot of numbers being thrown around here stating what the company is worth, 20c seems to be a consensus of sorts. Given BFW doesn't sink I think it'll level around 40c, and given correct levels of support I'd consider buying

John Mexted
31-07-2007, 12:37 PM
has anyone had a burger fuel burger? Yes
and if so would you have it again? I do
and if so would you buy shares in the company please? Not at anywhere near the current levels.

I compare this company to some that I am invested in privately. Risk, low liquidity and future prospects are similar but in terms of net assets per share and profit... BF is a dog burger in comparison.

FarmerGeorge
31-07-2007, 01:20 PM
Have had many BF burgers
Loved them (and the spud fries and aioli) and bought them religiously while I lived in Hamilton (no outlet currently where I live)
Very strongly considered buying until I saw what the price was - now not considering due to management/governance incompetence/deceit.

I don't know if the owners got this float together in this way to rip people off or because they didn't know any better. Either way they are not worthy of investment.

Now I think about it if you really believe in Burgerfuel you would probably be better to set up a franchise for yourself.

Balance
31-07-2007, 04:07 PM
"Company chairman Peter Brook said not much could be read into the share price change because there was very little liquidity in the stock.

"There are just not the shares out there to buy. I think if you wanted to buy 30,000 or 35,000 you would be paying $1.20 per share," he said."

This is a very dumb reply to the share price fall from the Chairman who should know better. Fancy saying that the stock could go to $1.20 if someone wanted 30,000 shares when the company could not get rid of 10m shares at the IPO! Treat the market as a fool and it will treat the company as a complete idiot and unworthy of serious consideration.

etrader
31-07-2007, 04:17 PM
Yip BFW making an inital botch up post IPO most stocks debut at a slight to large premium i think 1000 shares traded day one 1000 the next and falling in that time. I would expect to see the 2350ish investors to start bailing out. If i was a loyal customer and i got sold a lemon that hardly anyone wanted to buy into i would proably think twice about going there to keep supporting then, i'll cut my losses and move on, lets face it they're just over priced oversized burgers that cost about $1.50 to $2 to make put in a brown paper bag, the I.P of the firm is stuff all as any entrant can come in and order over sized buns and a few fancy names, a deep fryer and sell them for 1/2 the price and still coin it IMO.

warthog
31-07-2007, 04:33 PM
Etrader you forget that most people investing in BFW would probably be small or first-time investors, and they're likely to hang on until either grim death or after many years, getting something like their original investment back. Such is the behaviour of the hoardes.

Steve
01-08-2007, 06:40 AM
quote:Originally posted by Balance


"Company chairman Peter Brook said not much could be read into the share price change because there was very little liquidity in the stock.

"There are just not the shares out there to buy. I think if you wanted to buy 30,000 or 35,000 you would be paying $1.20 per share," he said."

This is a very dumb reply to the share price fall from the Chairman who should know better. Fancy saying that the stock could go to $1.20 if someone wanted 30,000 shares when the company could not get rid of 10m shares at the IPO! Treat the market as a fool and it will treat the company as a complete idiot and unworthy of serious consideration.

I thought that the NZX rules prevented Directors from making statements as to what the shareprice could, should or ought to be?

jonny5
01-08-2007, 08:20 AM
etrader I respectfully disagree. Go to burger king or McD's and order one of the larger burgers and compare to BurgerFuel. You may be right about the $1.50-$2 difference, but read a bit more into it.

A) you won't feel like a bloated cow when you finish the BFW burger
B) It's made with fresh lettuce, tomatoes, real cheese, and real mince
C) the burger is easily $1.50-$2 bigger

Bling_Bling
01-08-2007, 08:21 AM
quote:Originally posted by Balance


"Company chairman Peter Brook said not much could be read into the share price change because there was very little liquidity in the stock.

"There are just not the shares out there to buy. I think if you wanted to buy 30,000 or 35,000 you would be paying $1.20 per share," he said."

This is a very dumb reply to the share price fall from the Chairman who should know better. Fancy saying that the stock could go to $1.20 if someone wanted 30,000 shares when the company could not get rid of 10m shares at the IPO! Treat the market as a fool and it will treat the company as a complete idiot and unworthy of serious consideration.







ROFL.. I was laughing so hard reading that statement. Is the chairman trying to talk up the share price and covering his butt? No wonder the IPO was a flop. There's your answer.

boysy
01-08-2007, 01:07 PM
BFW back up to $1 i wonder which of the companys owners bought this $1000 parcel :D poor poor shareholders. What liquidity when $1000 traded can add or take off $10 million of market cap