MVN Methven

[percy]

Another negative headline for Winner69s wall of Methven shame.

https://www.nzx.com/files/attachments/173577.pdf

NPAT excluding one offs to be down 12% on last year.

Milford clearly don't get all their decisions right.

Been a lot of warning signals.
Methven have in the past have talked the talk,but never been able to walk the walk.!
[hope I got that right?]
A long time ago I pointed out Rick Fella failed to return my phone call.I said at the time that was bad business practice.
Sorry to see Milford get it wrong,but they are not the only ones,as I think there are other intos on MVN's registry.
Again thanks to winner69 for his great posts that have kept us away from this underperformer.

[BIRMANBOY]

Underperformer ? Depends what you are looking at I suppose..lOOK AT THE DIVIDEND YIELDS LAST 5 YEARS.

Five Year Summary

	2012 $000	2011 $000	2010 $000	2009 $000	2008 $000
Financial performance
Group operating revenue	106,202	122,087	129,822	137,321	114,759
EBITDA	13,8801	12,4211	16,6622	19,752	18,927
Net profit after tax	6,462	4,749	7,820	10,056	9,757
Financial position
Total equity	48,211	50,547	53,309	58,008	54,931
Total assets	90,244	99,999	100,958	119,564	11,9092
Intangible assets	35,708	38,315	38,306	45,932	46756
Net (debt) / cash	-11,746	-19,074	-17,446	-26,840	-32,596
Capital expenditure	3,651	3,659	2,209	2,611	4,313
Equity ratio	80.4%	72.6%	75.3%	68.4%	60.1%
Shareholder statistics
Number of shares	66,606,265	66,606,265	66,606,265	66,606,265	66,606,265
Dividend per share	10.00c	10.00c	11.00c	11.75c	11.70c
Share price at year end	$1.09	$1.56	$1.58	$1.20	$1.42
Earnings per share	9.70c	7.13c	11.70c	15.10c	18.30c
Net dividend yield	9.20%	6.40%	7.00%	9.80%	8.20%
Gross dividend yield	11.30%	8.30%	9.90%	14.30%	12.20%
Net tangible asset value per share	18.77c	18.36c	22.50c	18.10c	12.30c

Been a lot of warning signals.
Methven have in the past have talked the talk,but never been able to walk the walk.!
[hope I got that right?]
A long time ago I pointed out Rick Fella failed to return my phone call.I said at the time that was bad business practice.
Sorry to see Milford get it wrong,but they are not the only ones,as I think there are other intos on MVN's registry.
Again thanks to winner69 for his great posts that have kept us away from this underperformer.

[buns]

Even though the current yields are higher than they were when dividend payouts were 15% higher? Gotta look at the capital value bud. The TSR there is about 6% over 4 years, annual compound growth you could just about get from Jap bank deposits.. Yes, this is an under-performer.

Underperformer ? Depends what you are looking at I suppose..lOOK AT THE DIVIDEND YIELDS LAST 5 YEARS.

Five Year Summary

	2012 $000	2011 $000	2010 $000	2009 $000	2008 $000
Financial performance
Group operating revenue	106,202	122,087	129,822	137,321	114,759
EBITDA	13,8801	12,4211	16,6622	19,752	18,927
Net profit after tax	6,462	4,749	7,820	10,056	9,757
Financial position
Total equity	48,211	50,547	53,309	58,008	54,931
Total assets	90,244	99,999	100,958	119,564	11,9092
Intangible assets	35,708	38,315	38,306	45,932	46756
Net (debt) / cash	-11,746	-19,074	-17,446	-26,840	-32,596
Capital expenditure	3,651	3,659	2,209	2,611	4,313
Equity ratio	80.4%	72.6%	75.3%	68.4%	60.1%
Shareholder statistics
Number of shares	66,606,265	66,606,265	66,606,265	66,606,265	66,606,265
Dividend per share	10.00c	10.00c	11.00c	11.75c	11.70c
Share price at year end	$1.09	$1.56	$1.58	$1.20	$1.42
Earnings per share	9.70c	7.13c	11.70c	15.10c	18.30c
Net dividend yield	9.20%	6.40%	7.00%	9.80%	8.20%
Gross dividend yield	11.30%	8.30%	9.90%	14.30%	12.20%
Net tangible asset value per share	18.77c	18.36c	22.50c	18.10c	12.30c

[BIRMANBOY]

Do not agree at all..I'm interested in what it pays into my bank a/c every year and that is well over most other shares on the nzx. If you are after growth in share price thats a different matter. This was referred to as an underperformer so please do it the courtesy of being accurate and specifying what it was and where it was underperforming. Clearly it is NOT underperforming when you look at it as a dividend producer.

Even though the current yields are higher than they were when dividend payouts were 15% higher? Gotta look at the capital value bud. The TSR there is about 6% over 4 years, annual compound growth you could just about get from Jap bank deposits.. Yes, this is an under-performer.

[buns]

Well if you want to put it that way, you are swapping $1 something (price of a share) for about 10c (dividend)? Of course you need to take into account the share price/underlying asset.

If you own a $5m house which returns $500k in rent (10% return), would you be happier if the price of that house dropped to $4m with $450k rent (12% return)? The yield has gone up but you have just lost $1m and another $50k a year which could again be invested and so on.

I also covered this in the TSR calc, that shows that if you purchased the share 4 years ago and then sold this year, you would now have $1.06 cents in your bank account for every $1 invested. If you left that $1 in your bank account (ignored MVN), you would have over $1.10 and could have saved a bunch of time.

Do not agree at all..I'm interested in what it pays into my bank a/c every year and that is well over most other shares on the nzx. If you are after growth in share price thats a different matter. This was referred to as an underperformer so please do it the courtesy of being accurate and specifying what it was and where it was underperforming. Clearly it is NOT underperforming when you look at it as a dividend producer.

[BIRMANBOY]

You are undoubtedly sincere in your opinion but are working off a false premise. This false premise is that underlying share(house) price is of material importance. If you never sell its immaterial and the facts remain that the return is predicated simply on the dividend as a percentage of your buy in price. If you buy as a growth/dividend share as you say the dividend benefits are negated by the share price....IF YOU SELL at a lower amount than you buy in for. Share price recently was 1.50...now at 1.20...I own at 1.11. The trick is to buy dividend producers at low points in the cycles so you are not only getting strong dividends but are also protected from SP erosion. Your vision is impeded by selective interpretation of the facts. It would be akin to me saying....RYM, DIL and XERO are underperformers. To a dividend seeker they are because they produce bugger all to little dividends. Growth stocks they most certainly are and would never be referred to as underperformers by me since I see the big picture. All I am saying is apply the same courtesy in return and recognise that some stocks are good for some and not for others ...but that does not neccessarily make them "underperformers".

Well if you want to put it that way, you are swapping $1 something (price of a share) for about 10c (dividend)? Of course you need to take into account the share price/underlying asset.

If you own a $5m house which returns $500k in rent (10% return), would you be happier if the price of that house dropped to $4m with $450k rent (12% return)? The yield has gone up but you have just lost $1m and another $50k a year which could again be invested and so on.

I also covered this in the TSR calc, that shows that if you purchased the share 4 years ago and then sold this year, you would now have $1.06 cents in your bank account for every $1 invested. If you left that $1 in your bank account (ignored MVN), you would have over $1.10 and could have saved a bunch of time.