SANford Chart

[iceman]

Looks to me like a "downsize" with no indication of where the money might be better spent ... I think the company needs to give shareholders more visibility for sure!

This is what worries me, an enforced "downsize" to stop bleeding in the business. . I know they are not managing their biggest operation, deepwater fishing, very well and wonder if the money is going there. It probably should, but then we need to see what they're doing with it and will it fix their problems !. The salmon farming operation is in dire need of a huge investment, so the money could be going there as well. But we don;t know. They have sold lots of assets in the last few years , including some really good ones and I can not see that it has gone into productive use.

DISCL: Not a holder for last 2-3 years

[winner69]

I see the SAN share price was about 8 bucks a few years ago

Was that when they were making heaps and things looked bright.

Seem a bit of a disaster these days

[winner69]

Just skimmed through the first couple of pages on this thread

Nothing seems to have changed much in the last 17 years - even the share price is much the same

[iceman]

I see the SAN share price was about 8 bucks a few years ago

Was that when they were making heaps and things looked bright.

Seem a bit of a disaster these days

I hold some shares in a couple of fishing companies in Iceland. Here are 12 months graph for them and Sanford.:
https://www.landsbankinn.is/markadir/hlutabref/svn
https://www.landsbankinn.is/markadir/hlutabref/brim
https://www.directbroking.co.nz/Dire...&QuickQuote=Go


The industry World wide is doing pretty well at the moment. The 2 Icelandic companies would show SAN up even worse if I could show you the chart going back 3 years or so, but 1 of them only listed last year and the other changed name and I can't find the history. Meanwhile, as you pointed out, SAN has had a terrible 5 years or more https://www.directbroking.co.nz/Dire...&QuickQuote=Go

p.s. just realised the copying of the links from Direct Broking don't work properly. Select "charts" and timeframe you want to see what I mean.

[ralph]

Sanford chief executive Peter Reidie said the lobster quota "did not provide the best return on investment" and proceeds from the sale would be reinvested in the business.
"It will ultimately help improve shareholder value by contributing to the significant investment required over the next five years to meet our primary strategic outcomes," he said.

There is a lot of ways of looking at this ,dependent on your leanings etc negative positive I think with Peter taking over from Volker and the involvement of ngai thai they will be looking to take positive moves forward and from the statement he is not giving anything away and would be a fool to do so .
Hey everyone knows its been downhill for a long while with Volker & covid I see this as a good entry point or topping up point

[Aaron]

Just skimmed through the first couple of pages on this thread

Nothing seems to have changed much in the last 17 years - even the share price is much the same

Not a growth company then?

Used to pay a pretty reliable dividend at a reasonable yield , I had assumed the dividend would rise with inflation but maybe not.

Share price unchanged for decades looking at Phadreus's first post on this thread although the last 10 years has seen a rise to $8 and back down again. I wonder if it tracks Volker's time at the helm. All piss and wind about marketing and high end restaurants blah blah while selling quota to keep things running. Investors got excited but the dream never turned into reality. At the current 0% yield it makes me wonder if it is worth hanging on.
7%-8% yield is my minimum hurdle for a dividend stock.
That said 7-8% was from an earlier age where yield meant something and central bank driven capital gain wasn't the only game in town.

[iceman]

Not a growth company then?

Used to pay a pretty reliable dividend at a reasonable yield , I had assumed the dividend would rise with inflation but maybe not.

Share price unchanged for decades looking at Phadreus's first post on this thread although the last 10 years has seen a rise to $8 and back down again. I wonder if it tracks Volker's time at the helm. All piss and wind about marketing and high end restaurants blah blah while selling quota to keep things running. Investors got excited but the dream never turned into reality. At the current 0% yield it makes me wonder if it is worth hanging on.
7%-8% yield is my minimum hurdle for a dividend stock.
That said 7-8% was from an earlier age where yield meant something and central bank driven capital gain wasn't the only game in town.

I would only buy into SAN if they stopped dividends for a few years and spent the much needed several hundred of millions required to get the business up to scratch (vessels and production facilities) and had a clean out of management and board. I suppose that basically means I will not become a SAN holder again in the near future !!
DYOR.

I bought into Volker's ideas and rode a good rise in SP. But I sold out when he repeatedly failed to deliver. In my view, he failed because he did not surround himself with the right people to implement his ideas. They are still there.

[ralph]

Not a growth company then?

Used to pay a pretty reliable dividend at a reasonable yield , I had assumed the dividend would rise with inflation but maybe not.

Share price unchanged for decades looking at Phadreus's first post on this thread although the last 10 years has seen a rise to $8 and back down again. I wonder if it tracks Volker's time at the helm. All piss and wind about marketing and high end restaurants blah blah while selling quota to keep things running. Investors got excited but the dream never turned into reality. At the current 0% yield it makes me wonder if it is worth hanging on.
7%-8% yield is my minimum hurdle for a dividend stock.
That said 7-8% was from an earlier age where yield meant something and central bank driven capital gain wasn't the only game in town.

Hit the nail on the head there Aaron ,Volkers ideas (all piss and wind ) a thing of the past now they can move forward without that bullcrap & covid .

[Ottiehund]

Hit the nail on the head there Aaron ,Volkers ideas (all piss and wind ) a thing of the past now they can move forward without that bullcrap & covid .

I actually have the opposite view - I got the impression the 'marketing' changes proposed contributed to Volkers move? - selling direct to end users and cutting out distributors, all sounds good in theory, save a margin, develop a end user relationship etc however we (NZ as a whole, Sanford even smaller) are a small and for many items seasonal producer and working with a distributor in a place like the US gives buyers the benefit of consolidating their purchases year around and from a range of products. Much preferable to the buyer over dealing direct with a small seller from across the globe who can supply some products some of the time, albeit good products. This proposed change (is it happening now, I don't know) was short sighted in my view and shows also a lacl of industry experience at board level (and maybe at Sanford marketing level as presumably they presented or supported the idea). That will have improved with NT coming on board.

I had the impression these changes were not supported by Volker and that was one of the reasons that contributed to his leaving. I also have the opinion the new CEO may be a 'safe pair of hands' but not much more than that, pretty underwhelming for a public company, and essentially may have been selected as he could be a puppet for the board. And remember after his appointment it came out that 2 board members have been in business with the new CEO and that was never disclosed - it appears the disfunction stems from the top down.

CRA quota is a niche fishery and I can understand them selling it (to concentrate on areas of the business they can control presumably?) however as has been said above once sold it will be hard to buy back, and it is a valuable asset and one which will have cost them little.

[ronaldson]

I have always thought that much of NZ's seafood production presently on-sold in o/seas markets could be marketed at minimal cost and with the best price discovery by utilising an auction platform such as is operated by Fonterra for dairy products - indeed the actual Fonterra platform could probably be used with only minor adaption, while maintaining individual corporate branding of seafood product wholesaled in that manner.

Currently every producer is incurring significant overhead doing their own thing. Now that Ngai Tahu are a stakeholder, and with maori investment in Sealord, you would think some fresh thinking might emerge that could advantage all industry participants!