About 120/130 a year or so ago ....all the way to 180 plus ....and now 120/130 again
Amazing
Hope some of you got the 50% gain and didn't see the market taketh it away
Printable View
About 120/130 a year or so ago ....all the way to 180 plus ....and now 120/130 again
Amazing
Hope some of you got the 50% gain and didn't see the market taketh it away
I see Fisher Funds just bought 6.5 million shares.
I'd be interested to hear any of your views, low risk and good upside at current prices?
Bling sells.
A few comparisons for you,between MHJ and LOV [asx].Both target different sectors of the market.
..........................MHJ..................... ........LOV.
Market cap. NZ $445.5mil...................AU $403.2 mil
PE ratio................21.5......................... ......17.4
Yield................NZ 4.52%........................AU 3.13%.
Market........medium price......................low price.
To get a better understanding of both, you need to find out the pay back period for new stores.LOV is about a year.I would expect MHJ is about 3 years.
The market.Maybe MHJ may face competition from on line sellers,while Lovisa's is teen spending,who want it now,and can afford to buy it now .
The set up cost of each LOV store is not a great deal,and they can operate from very small stores.The value of their stock holding per store would be a fraction of MHJ's.
MHJ have been very clever retailers,however I think LOV are smarter.
Percy I think that Teen spending want it now and can afford it now ....it's going on a credit card !!! :)
MHJ is likely to have underlying NPAT around $30m-36m in FY17 - at $1.15 = PE 12-14
With continued growth "EXPECTED" moving forward, It is not the worst idea to look this way.
It is creeping into buy territory for me personally, but not quite yet.
Brick and mortar is still the most effective way to sell mid-high ticket jewelry...
As I have not followed MHJ for a good number of years I am finding looking at them again interesting.
I have been using www.4-traders.com to do some comparisons with Lovisa.At first look they both look to be buys.
..........................2017.................... ............2018.................................. .2019
LOV.eps ...............19.9............................... ..27.3 .................................30.1
........eps growth......................37.4%................. ...............10.2%
MHJ.eps.................9.02...................... ............10.2.................................. 11.4
........eps growth.......................13%.................. .................11.7%
LOV.pe..................18.6...................... .............13.6................................. ..12.3
MHJ.pe...................12.6..................... ..............11.1................................ ...9.93
LOV. roa.................68.5.......................... ..........57.2
MHJ.roa...................14.2.................... ...............14.5
Net margin.ie Net profit/revenue.
LOV........................15%.................... ..............13.8%
MHJ.........................5.60%................. ..............5.9%
I like my dividends to be imputed. I sold this share when that was no longer the case.
Well I have had fun watching the MPG thread over the past few days.Funny as a play,but even funnier was today's announcement from MHJ.....lol.
Well Mark Waller at Ebbos admitted to being an accountant,nothing dour about him.
So in any industry there is diversity.
On the MHI thread perc.. !!! I think you are really a Peter's man at heart.
I think you LOV those baubles also... :-)))))
Shame global domination didn't work out
So come home and consolidate in these parts of the world
https://stocknessmonster.com/announc...hj.nzx-313377/
Market doesn’t seem to like recent announcements. Reading between the lines even normal trading hasn’t been to brilliant either
All that and a bad market not good as share price sinks below 120
From 144 back down to 118 due to one off costs impacting a single year of reporting while the group itself is moving steadily... exacerbated by the selloff one could see the ~20% dive a big fat overreaction.
The market really enjoyed the solid results they posted earlier this year... this is including the $12m EBIT loss courtesy of the US operations which they are looking at either cutting out or downsizing.
At the end of the day the bottom line will benefit greatly.
I always liked MHI as a scaleable business model but was surprised they didn't do things differently with the US and Emma & Roe (and exit the US earlier):
- US : They spread themselves too thin for effective marketing. Why didn't they concentrate on one state, and once that model was refined, roll it out across the rest of the states?
- E&R : This has been unprofitable from the beginning and even on contribution margin level. Why would you roll-out hoping for scaleability? Poor performance IMO.
The recent announcement shows that on a normalised basis (excluding the anticipated $20m restructuring hit), EBIT will be down c. $5m year on year. No explanation was given which gives a lot of uncertainty?
The other challenge for me, and a key indicator if MHI can survive the retail model is if they can obtain same store sales increasing at least at the rate of CPI. It's one of their KPI's in their annual report and they didn't meet this or give any reason to believe they are even looking at this.
Disc: Don't hold.
As they said, increased losses from their US operations.
"The key contributing factors were the deterioration in the performance of the US
and Emma & Roe businesses, which underpinned the Company’s strategic actions recently announced"
Theoretically by disregarding the fat losses from the US business ( which hopefully wont be there next year ) from this half you would be seeing a sizeable increase in earnings.
Apologies, I only glanced the announcement. It still implies the rest of the business is not performing as strongly by saying "contributing factors"?
Agree though, I think this is a good move. Earnings will increase significantly and they can cut this loose - an expensive lesson!
One of my other concerns is with E&R - will they successfully rebrand or will this end up costing and be a drag on earnings....
As well as propping up the loss making US operations, the good operations were already servicing the groups debts ( roughly $40m of debt )
US contributed a lovely -13M to EBIT last year and by the sound of things these losses are growing... therefore one can comfortably assume cutting this huge loss maker will positively impact earnings.
Disc: I do not hold, but at this price I am thinking of jumping in.
All makes sense hardt
But the majority of the US losses came from E&R. MH ebit -$3.8m and E&R ebit -$6.9m
The US bit will go but how much of a drag will E&R continue to be even if losses might reduce or turn into profit. Big gamble I reckon even though demi-fine stuff might be the trick
Wonder if Rob Fyfe’s 16 grand a month support is paying dividends?
I guess they are saying... stick to the knitting!!
So Emma and Roe a goner ..totally
http://nzx-prod-s7fsd7f98s.s3-websit...796/281504.pdf
Yes the divs are imputed. Just check to see if fully. Lets see the NZD amount received on one of my entities was $136.59 and the NZ imputation credit was $53.12. That means a grossed up div of $189.71.
$53.12/$189.71 is 28% so yes fully imputed. 5 cents per annum normally.
thats not what NZX have listed?
Attachment 9759
I'm not sure what you are looking at, but I am looking at my dividend statement. I know which one I would trust more :)
http://investor.michaelhill.com/stat...2-d45a1725d667
page 23 of 2017 annual report...
"Since year end, the Directors have
declared the payment of a final dividend
of au2.5¢ per fully paid ordinary share*
(2016 - au2.5¢). The final dividend will
be unfranked for Australian shareholders
and fully imputed for New Zealand
shareholders. "
I know to check with the experts here on Sharetrader.
Thanks for your replies.
I hope the NZX are reading this. You'd think precision and accuracy would be their maxim 100%!! .Becoming a laughing stock. Resting on their laurels due to their 20 min delay advantage, turning into yet another fake news story provider?!!!
I see MHJ as undervalued at the moment and have been purchasing. Have also owned Briscoes and HLG for a few years now.
Exiting loss making divisions will improve bottom line in the short-medium term. Growth opportunities from Canada (bigger market than AUS) is proven. Less risk of disruption than Briscoes imo and more reliable growth than all other retailers in NZ (maybe excluding KMD? don't really follow that one). I am a bit curious why they need a Chief Person Officer as well as an HR senior exec. Chief person office sounds like a redundant position if HR is doing their job and probably on a fat wicket. Would be interested to see their responsibilities.
I have confirmed with Michael Hill that their dividends are fully imputed as per their reports (have yet to recieve one). He advised he would let NZX know that their dividends have been fully imputed since the IRD matter was resolved. Obviously has not happened yet. Also dividends are in AUD which is another little bonus.
A couple members of the NZX use to read ST, but unsure if they still do (not in their job description).
I've dug into the MHJ Dividend announcement and found all the info needed on the last page. What has happened (from how I understand it) is that the NZX has only inserted the foreign div amount and no franking credits (yellow highlighted) into their system and missed the note in 5.1 about the NZ imputation credits.
Looking at ANZ who is another ASX primary listed company (which pay their dividends in AUD and have imputation credits for NZ investors in NZD), the NZX has entered both the AUD dividend and the NZD imputation credits into their system.
Entering Dividends use to be a 3 check process (3 different people), but it seems that the NZX has dropped the ball on MHJ.
I sold all my MHJ shares about 2 years ago, and from recollection then, their divvies in the NZX have never been imputed. Just the ASX perhaps, which was one of my reasons for selling back then.
Same store sales + 0.4%.
Online sales 1.9% of total sales.
A lot of work to be done .
What do you think of the last result?
http://www.sharechat.co.nz/article/1...ure-costs.html
The fizz has gone out of the bottle.
Trying to get it back into the bottle may prove hard and costly.
Online sales will possibly work,but they are now years behind their competition,and starting from a very low base.
Maybe unfair, but they look to be a "turn around" business.
Turn arounds usually take longer and cost more than originally thought.Often they do not work.
We must remember management have made a few bad costly calls,so why should they get it right this time.?
So it could work,but their only real growth is coming from Canada.
Their success or failure will come from their largest make,Australia.At present time they are struggling there.
I hardly think they are a "turn around" case. Their continuing operations are very successful and they have proved up their growth in Canada, which is a larger market than Aus - although they do not seem to be targeting all of it at the moment. I see the shares as good value with one caveat below.
What concerns me is the unexplained $10m increase in corporate costs, I could understand this being temporary due to the relatively large change that has been undertaken this year - However if overheads have permanently increased by $10m it would be a bit concerning. Hopefully some 'colour' is provided around this in the conference call.
Possibly large amounts spent on that strategy to reposition themselves from a traditional retailer to a differentiated omnichannel brand
Strategic initiatives mirror The Warehouse .....MHJ and Warehouse execs and advisors must have gone to sale management school
Pretty week plan on paper .....all depends on execution eh ...but putting on a few more expensive managers to help them do this
Does Rob Fyfe still ‘mentor’ the newish CEO?
Will be leaving NHJ on the watch list ...but my love of retail will see me watching developments closely
Share price below a buck and sinking to multi year lows
Punters not like the story or something
The story must have pretty good when punters drove the share price up to 170 plus - might be half price soon
We failed our investors in getting into the USA and are pulling out, so your investment is fecked and we'll get back to you on what's next on the growth agenda, meantime suck it up.
Half price would be a good outcome. It'll probably be much worse than that when investors come to terms with the enormity of throwing in the towel on the US market.
Really? I invested only after they announced they were pulling out of US and closing Emma and Roe. They can't hemorrhage money forever trying to get into US.
I think investors are unhappy about the large increase in corporate costs despite the decrease scope of the business. If I was aware that would be occurring I wouldn't have invested until SP was closer to current levels.
However, they have a solid core business which seems to be trading at good value currently, I hope price drops a bit further.
That is my take on it too. Great decision to withdraw from the US. Can now use resources to focus on Canada and NZ/AUS. Plenty of growth to come from Canada, but even if no growth, can now go and make a good 10 CEPS plus with all the savings from not losing money hand over fist in the US and with Emma Roe.
Sold all my MHJ shares at $1.30 when they moved everything to Aus about 2 years ago, including their main listing in the ASX. This turned out to be a fortunate decision for me as their shares haven't done well since. I must admit that I've had MHI shares since 2003 and they had been a very good investment, especially when my (at the time) 2000 shares became 20,000 shares after a 10 for 1 share split, and the share price started rising again eventually.
TA review makes a compelling case to keep your powder dry. Just plain ugly with no sparkle to be seen.
For me the move to house branded watches is a very big mistake. I have no idea where their MH watch is made, the quality, accuracy or durability of the inner workings the case or the strap.
https://www.michaelhill.co.nz/watche...s?fdid=article Not a single other brand to choose from other than the house brand. Someone forgot to tell Michael Hill that the customer is always right and that customers like choice !
I want to buy a brand I know and trust is super accurate and durable and for me that's Seiko. I wouldn't pay $100 for a Michael Hill watch they typically wanted $700 for when I looked a while back. The fact that my local Michael Hill store will not stock well known trusted brands of watches undermines their total store offering and I don't know if I could trust any of their other products, especially house branded ones. For me, they have shot themselves in the foot. This sort of house brand strategy is designed to give them extra margin and was a roaring success for Dick Smith wasn't it ! I don't believe in their stores or their product strategy so wouldn't own their shares either. (my 2 cents)
I think you're probably right going off vague memory. My last gold Seiko watch looked very stylish, kept perfect time and provided excellent durable timekeeping for 25 years so they had no chance of selling me a house brand lol. I remember being very surprised that they don't sell any of the big name brands.
I thought what a joke and went to a proper Jewelry store https://www.stewartdawsons.co.nz/watches
Does anyone on Sharetrader know anyone who shops at Michael Hill.?
I have heard of 2 items from two different people being bought at Michael hill in last 6 months. Total value in excess of $1k. Not really a place people shop regularly I wouldn’t think.
In my view their stores look the best compared to other offerings in malls. As far as quality goes I can’t comment. But I’m a bloke a diamond ring is a diamond ring to me.
I have bought from MHI before it became MHJ
Yeap, our local mall has a LOV shop and a MHI shop not far from each other and there's no prizes for guessing which one is way busier than the other.
As KW once told me the stuff you buy from LOV only lasts one or two wears but its so cheap it doesn't matter...Michael Hill watches probably have the same durability lol
my other half refuses to step foot in the place Percy and I very much value her opinion as to what is trendy and what is not (I am clueless)
LOV is very much 'in' for the cheap stuff, and Tiffany&Co (or a local custom jewellers i.e. Village Goldsmith) is very much 'in' for the expensive stuff.
perhaps MHJ is neither one thing, nor the other?
fwiw, I know a lot of people (Gen X) who have shopped online for engagement & wedding rings etc.
Choose your design, choose your diamond. individually made to order. collect and collect. all for 30% cheaper than a high-street retailer and with 'cooler' branding. also means stock count is not huge. There were a lot of companies in London offering this service with just a front end show-room located in the west-end or hatton garden where you could go for consultation & assistance. everything was reviews-based, with companies only being as good as their customer ratings. assuming the NZ/AUS market lags the UK, perhaps it is a sign of things to come?
Yes I would think quality jewellers with a good reputation will do well on line.
Cheap end of the market is more impulse buying,what I call the Mars Bar,cake of chocolate,lotto ticket etc where LOV will continue to do well.
ps I sold my LOV shares .sp is currently a bit high for me to consider buying them again.
MHI will have to show real growth not only in Canada,but Aussie and NZ too before I would look at them.
I have a silly amount of softness for Michael Hill because he helped me buy my first house.
Back early in the life of peat I didn't have enough for a house deposit so I did what Mary Holm would never do - I put what I had into Michael Hill Shares, and it quickly made me enough to top up the deposit. Of course that was ages ago and was a punt which went well and that's possibly why I have brand loyalty.
The thing is though, this company is not run by the man himself these days so its very hard to have the faith.
To answer your question yes occasionally we shop at Michael Hill for a trinket of sorts, but only once or twice a year.
But I wouldn't invest at the moment. Unlikely to show strong growth anymore.
I think you’d be waiting a long time to see some real growth in NZ and Australia.
In spite of their efforts sales in both countries have only grown at 2.4% pa over the last 5 years (local currency)
Australia must be a worry because store numbers have gone from 162 to 171 in that time. At least modest NZ growth has been achieved with no increased store numbers.
Interesting they sell more per store in NZ than they do in Australia ....don’t know what this means except maybe highlights how hard Aussie retailing is.
MHJ a Canada story if you want to get rich .....and for somebody down this part of the world that makes it a risky type of investment.
Just did not want to dash any of the "true believers" hopes.
I agree with you ,NZ and Aussie per store growth will not happen.
[QUOTE=peat;727969]I have a silly amount of softness for Michael Hill because he helped me buy my first house.
Back early in the life of peat I didn't have enough for a house deposit so I did what Mary Holm would never do - I put what I had into Michael Hill Shares, and it quickly made me enough to top up the deposit. Of course that was ages ago and was a punt which went well and that's possibly why I have brand loyalty.
/QUOTE]
Snap - me too....he made a big impact on my personal home mortgage those years ago....I am looking at them again as my initial numbers on a $1 share price are good. But will wait a bit....I got out well before their US journey. NZ companies often fail in expansions (Pumpkin Patch) as they don't hold a strong central control.
Yes that is an emotional attachment that I can understand why one would hold as an enduring memory however I couldn't help having a bit of another chuckle on the flight back from Queenstown the other evening reading the inflight magazine advertisement about Seiko watches made since 1881....the breathtaking arrogance of the man putting his name on all watches, making them in China and trying to put them out there as quality.
What would Seiko making watches since 1881, Tag Heuer since 1860 or Omega since 1848 know about watch making right ?...lol Not one of them are any good so lets not stock them because we as the owners know better....or is it just plain corporate greed and the margins are much bigger by a factor of perhaps as much as ten so it doesn't matter if most people simply walk out in disgust...as long as there's enough stupid one's to buy our complete rubbish pitched at premium prices who cares right ?
The whole house brand thing and hoping people are silly enough to buy only a house brand has proven itself to be a flawed concept, Dick Smith a classic example.
Imagine going to your local supermarket and all their was in the whole store was various food items all with the same house brand label and all made in China...yes the concept really is that flawed.
But what would I know...if you sell just a moderate number of watches for $700 that perhaps cost just $10 to make in China there's a buck to be made and who cares about ethics and customers right to chose anyway...
CEOs don’t come cheap ....for MHJ probably $2m plus
http://nzx-prod-s7fsd7f98s.s3-websit...204/287153.pdf
Wow some really sh it numbers that they put out after market on a Friday. Wonder what the price will be on Monday....
https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/201810...q4q3kryhpb.pdf
Seems like they shot themselves in the foot big time. Hopefully they fix this, sold half my holding this morning.
I don't buy that michael hill are a slow moving train wreck. Seems like they had 1 average to poor year in their core NZ/AUS/CAN operations now they are changing strategy.
I imagine they want to be more like Tiffany and Co. i.e. premium/desirable brand, no need to discount. I read tiffany and co suprisingly have a lower gross margin (havent looked at their statements myself) but much higher revenue/store (their assets and fixed costs work MUCH harder, they have only 1 busy store in Auckland). Unfortunately Michael Hill have 30 years of being a middle of the road brand and you are right, you cannot turn that around easily. I feel their stores look better than competition in malls (but hey, I'm no female and definitely no expert), so maybe they can do it. I am not holding my breath which is why I sold half this morning.
PE still pretty HIGH @ 57 which indicated growth premium so with todays sobering sales ann where will they come from, imho PE for a retail share in this environment should be in the mid 20's , so what would that indicate as a share price for MHJ ?