Donate to Remove ads

Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators

Thanks to johnstevens77,Bhoddhisatva,scotia,Anonymous,Cornytiv34, for Donating to support the site

Unilever (ULVR)

Share latest information on individual companies and hot news discussions. LSE Main Market companies only
Forum rules
No penny shares or promotional posts
Bouleversee
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4652
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 5:01 pm
Has thanked: 1195 times
Been thanked: 902 times

Re: Unilever (ULVR)

#442747

Postby Bouleversee » September 16th, 2021, 12:52 pm

scrumpyjack wrote:Some interesting comments on Unilever in the FT.

They point out the poor performance since 2019 when Alan Jope became CEO and for the two years before that. They say investor confidence has been eroded because of the focus on ‘stakeholders’ not shareholders. Exane BNP Paribas told its clients Unilever “is too good an asset to be left to continue to flounder”. Its stake in Hindustan Unilever, its separately quoted Indian subsidiary is worth nearly half Unilever’s market value, and Barclays reckons Unilever's sum of the parts discount has widened to about 25%. Exane thinks if Unilever were valued in line with its peers the price would be £78.10, twice its current price.

In spite of all this they seem to think shareholder activism (eg Elliott etc) is not going to get anywhere.

So perhaps best to be patient and hang on?


Who do they mean by 'stakeholders'? They certainly haven't done much for shareholders recently. I'll continue to hold what is for me a large holding but I'm losing on the last top up and don't feel inclined to add. Something needs shaking up. I'm not impressed by the latest laundry and dishwashing encapsulated products; change for the sake of but not so good as predecessors i.m.o. With prices rising so much, I think many will buy supermarkets' own versions instead. Perhaps there isn't so much choice in India.

Dod101
The full Lemon
Posts: 16629
Joined: October 10th, 2017, 11:33 am
Has thanked: 4343 times
Been thanked: 7534 times

Re: Unilever (ULVR)

#442755

Postby Dod101 » September 16th, 2021, 1:35 pm

'Stakeholders' usually means employees, suppliers and even customers I think, as well as the shareholders, even although were it not for shareholders there would be no business, but then I think that is the point of the term, all those are required to make a viable business.

Dod

ADrunkenMarcus
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1584
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 11:16 am
Has thanked: 672 times
Been thanked: 478 times

Re: Unilever (ULVR)

#442812

Postby ADrunkenMarcus » September 16th, 2021, 7:31 pm

scrumpyjack wrote:They point out the poor performance since 2019 when Alan Jope became CEO and for the two years before that. They say investor confidence has been eroded because of the focus on ‘stakeholders’ not shareholders. Exane BNP Paribas told its clients Unilever “is too good an asset to be left to continue to flounder”. Its stake in Hindustan Unilever, its separately quoted Indian subsidiary is worth nearly half Unilever’s market value, and Barclays reckons Unilever's sum of the parts discount has widened to about 25%. Exane thinks if Unilever were valued in line with its peers the price would be £78.10, twice its current price.


Zo is het levens!

Fix or be fixed...

Best wishes


Mark.

idpickering
The full Lemon
Posts: 11274
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 5:04 pm
Has thanked: 2468 times
Been thanked: 5760 times

Re: Unilever (ULVR)

#442872

Postby idpickering » September 17th, 2021, 6:49 am

bluedonkey wrote:I was thinking of adding, though I do agree the share appears to have gone nowhere over the last several years.


Me too. I'm not fussed about the SP movement tbh, just like ULVR as a business, and holding them offers a, hopefully, firm base to my portfolio.

Ian.

Dod101
The full Lemon
Posts: 16629
Joined: October 10th, 2017, 11:33 am
Has thanked: 4343 times
Been thanked: 7534 times

Re: Unilever (ULVR)

#442874

Postby Dod101 » September 17th, 2021, 7:05 am

The last time the share moved upwards was at the time of the threatened buyout but there never seems to be a lot to excite, a strength but at the same time a weakness.

Dod

idpickering
The full Lemon
Posts: 11274
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 5:04 pm
Has thanked: 2468 times
Been thanked: 5760 times

Re: Unilever (ULVR)

#442966

Postby idpickering » September 17th, 2021, 11:46 am

Dod101 wrote:The last time the share moved upwards was at the time of the threatened buyout but there never seems to be a lot to excite, a strength but at the same time a weakness.

Dod


I hear you Dod, but imho, the lack of excitement is one of ULVR's strengths. I sometimes wish all my shares behaved in the same fashion/manner as them though. You get what you pay for I guess. ;)

Ian.

TheMotorcycleBoy
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3245
Joined: March 7th, 2018, 8:14 pm
Has thanked: 2222 times
Been thanked: 587 times

Re: Unilever (ULVR)

#443510

Postby TheMotorcycleBoy » September 19th, 2021, 10:30 am

My issue with the ULVR right now is the pace of the share buybacks. Yes, they are arguably being executed at the correct price.

It's what is being signalled that I think is all wrong. That is, why aren't they actually using this cash to grow. They could for example be investing in alternative foods for example buying Beyond Meat (BYND) which is currently at Market cap of $7.1B.

Matt

dealtn
Lemon Half
Posts: 6072
Joined: November 21st, 2016, 4:26 pm
Has thanked: 441 times
Been thanked: 2324 times

Re: Unilever (ULVR)

#443599

Postby dealtn » September 19th, 2021, 3:38 pm

TheMotorcycleBoy wrote:My issue with the ULVR right now is the pace of the share buybacks. Yes, they are arguably being executed at the correct price.

It's what is being signalled that I think is all wrong. That is, why aren't they actually using this cash to grow. They could for example be investing in alternative foods for example buying Beyond Meat (BYND) which is currently at Market cap of $7.1B.

Matt


No thanks. if I wanted an investment in BYND I can do that myself. Why would I need a company to do that for me? Unless there are significant synergies I don't see the logic.

simoan
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2089
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 9:37 am
Has thanked: 462 times
Been thanked: 1456 times

Re: Unilever (ULVR)

#443605

Postby simoan » September 19th, 2021, 4:10 pm

dealtn wrote:
TheMotorcycleBoy wrote:My issue with the ULVR right now is the pace of the share buybacks. Yes, they are arguably being executed at the correct price.

It's what is being signalled that I think is all wrong. That is, why aren't they actually using this cash to grow. They could for example be investing in alternative foods for example buying Beyond Meat (BYND) which is currently at Market cap of $7.1B.

Matt


No thanks. if I wanted an investment in BYND I can do that myself. Why would I need a company to do that for me? Unless there are significant synergies I don't see the logic.

I completely agree. Unilever have had their own meat-free range for years, called the Vegetarian Butcher. They can buy in the know-how and use their in-house production and marketing to do the rest. The reality is that they would have to pay well over $10 bn to buy a company with a market cap of $7 bn in today’s market, which will just end up with them writing off lots of goodwill down the line.

All the best, Si
Last edited by simoan on September 19th, 2021, 4:11 pm, edited 2 times in total.

scrumpyjack
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4809
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:15 am
Has thanked: 605 times
Been thanked: 2673 times

Re: Unilever (ULVR)

#443606

Postby scrumpyjack » September 19th, 2021, 4:11 pm

I would rather their scientists were thinking up and developing such products themselves rather than paying $7 bn in goodwill for someone else's unproven idea. Eventually that $7 bn has to be written off. They've already got 35 billion euros of goodwill and intangibles in their balance sheet because they have been doing far too much of that sort of thing in the past.

TheMotorcycleBoy
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3245
Joined: March 7th, 2018, 8:14 pm
Has thanked: 2222 times
Been thanked: 587 times

Re: Unilever (ULVR)

#443615

Postby TheMotorcycleBoy » September 19th, 2021, 4:42 pm

dealtn wrote:
TheMotorcycleBoy wrote:My issue with the ULVR right now is the pace of the share buybacks. Yes, they are arguably being executed at the correct price.

It's what is being signalled that I think is all wrong. That is, why aren't they actually using this cash to grow. They could for example be investing in alternative foods for example buying Beyond Meat (BYND) which is currently at Market cap of $7.1B.

Matt


No thanks. if I wanted an investment in BYND I can do that myself. Why would I need a company to do that for me? Unless there are significant synergies I don't see the logic.

I did say "for example" !

My point is the buybacks, buybacks and more buybacks suggest a lack of imagination. And FWIW the market sentiment would appear to reflect this viewpoint.

Matt

TheMotorcycleBoy
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3245
Joined: March 7th, 2018, 8:14 pm
Has thanked: 2222 times
Been thanked: 587 times

Re: Unilever (ULVR)

#443616

Postby TheMotorcycleBoy » September 19th, 2021, 4:44 pm

scrumpyjack wrote:I would rather their scientists were thinking up and developing such products themselves rather than paying $7 bn in goodwill for someone else's unproven idea. Eventually that $7 bn has to be written off. They've already got 35 billion euros of goodwill and intangibles in their balance sheet because they have been doing far too much of that sort of thing in the past.

I would rather their scientists were thinking up and developing such products themselves rather than buying back their own shares!

ADrunkenMarcus
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1584
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 11:16 am
Has thanked: 672 times
Been thanked: 478 times

Re: Unilever (ULVR)

#443617

Postby ADrunkenMarcus » September 19th, 2021, 4:44 pm

TheMotorcycleBoy wrote:My point is the buybacks, buybacks and more buybacks suggest a lack of imagination. And FWIW the market sentiment would appear to reflect this viewpoint.


I like some of the moves they have made into beauty and prestige products. They need to go further and harder!

On a 5% free cash flow yield, Unilever is the cheapest of my individual shareholders and vies with Domino's Pizza Group for the title...

Best wishes


Mark.

ADrunkenMarcus
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1584
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 11:16 am
Has thanked: 672 times
Been thanked: 478 times

Re: Unilever (ULVR)

#443620

Postby ADrunkenMarcus » September 19th, 2021, 4:57 pm

TheMotorcycleBoy wrote:I would rather their scientists were thinking up and developing such products themselves rather than buying back their own shares!


Paul Polman's goal of 80 billion Euros in turnover didn't happen. :(

Best wishes

Mark.

scrumpyjack
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4809
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:15 am
Has thanked: 605 times
Been thanked: 2673 times

Re: Unilever (ULVR)

#443642

Postby scrumpyjack » September 19th, 2021, 6:01 pm

TheMotorcycleBoy wrote:
scrumpyjack wrote:I would rather their scientists were thinking up and developing such products themselves rather than paying $7 bn in goodwill for someone else's unproven idea. Eventually that $7 bn has to be written off. They've already got 35 billion euros of goodwill and intangibles in their balance sheet because they have been doing far too much of that sort of thing in the past.

I would rather their scientists were thinking up and developing such products themselves rather than buying back their own shares!


I suspect the reason they are spending it on shares, at the current relatively low price, is that can't think of anything better to employ scientists on developing new products. If that is the case, I prefer buybacks, which makes each remaining share own a larger proportion of the existing business, to blowing it on value destructive acquisitions. Too often buybacks are made at prices which, a couple of years later, look absurdly high. Though that may turn out to the the case with these buybacks :D

vrdiver
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2574
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 2:22 am
Has thanked: 552 times
Been thanked: 1212 times

Re: Unilever (ULVR)

#443696

Postby vrdiver » September 19th, 2021, 9:57 pm

TheMotorcycleBoy wrote:I would rather their scientists were thinking up and developing such products themselves rather than buying back their own shares!

I assume, since they have a finger in that particular niche, that they're keeping an eye on the developing players. I would also assume that they've concluded that the current crop aren't yet at the stage where they make sense to buy, based on their current development and the cost to get them to the next stage. If they buy now, they are saddled with the future R&D costs, regardless of the outcome. If they wait, a clearer winner may emerge that can then be bought; probably more cheaply than if they'd had to fund all the likely contenders instead of just the one.

Larry Ellison (of Oracle) used to say "it's cheaper to write cheques than software". This may be true for developing meat alternatives as well!

VRD

simoan
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2089
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 9:37 am
Has thanked: 462 times
Been thanked: 1456 times

Re: Unilever (ULVR)

#443701

Postby simoan » September 19th, 2021, 10:36 pm

vrdiver wrote:
TheMotorcycleBoy wrote:I would rather their scientists were thinking up and developing such products themselves rather than buying back their own shares!

I assume, since they have a finger in that particular niche, that they're keeping an eye on the developing players. I would also assume that they've concluded that the current crop aren't yet at the stage where they make sense to buy, based on their current development and the cost to get them to the next stage. If they buy now, they are saddled with the future R&D costs, regardless of the outcome. If they wait, a clearer winner may emerge that can then be bought; probably more cheaply than if they'd had to fund all the likely contenders instead of just the one.

Larry Ellison (of Oracle) used to say "it's cheaper to write cheques than software". This may be true for developing meat alternatives as well!

VRD

The reality is much simpler if you look at the numbers. Beyond meat is forecast to have sales of only $ 550M this year and be loss making. Even if it was making a profit it wouldn’t move the dial for a company the size of Unilever with forecast sales of $72 billion.

All the best, Si

csearle
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4762
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 2:24 pm
Has thanked: 4809 times
Been thanked: 2083 times

Re: Unilever (ULVR)

#443744

Postby csearle » September 20th, 2021, 8:43 am

If Unilever have cash that they don't know what do with I'd prefer they just give it to the shareholders so that we can invest it in companies that have a clearer idea of how to employ it. Personally as an investor for income I dislike share buybacks because the effect on income is considerably less direct than simply providing it. C.

simoan
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2089
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 9:37 am
Has thanked: 462 times
Been thanked: 1456 times

Re: Unilever (ULVR)

#443781

Postby simoan » September 20th, 2021, 10:33 am

csearle wrote:If Unilever have cash that they don't know what do with I'd prefer they just give it to the shareholders so that we can invest it in companies that have a clearer idea of how to employ it. Personally as an investor for income I dislike share buybacks because the effect on income is considerably less direct than simply providing it. C.

It doesn't matter what your investment approach is; income only, or much more sensibly, total return as practised by the majority of successful investors.

https://www.fundsmith.co.uk/news/2011/2 ... nd-or-foe/

All the best, Si

csearle
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4762
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 2:24 pm
Has thanked: 4809 times
Been thanked: 2083 times

Re: Unilever (ULVR)

#443804

Postby csearle » September 20th, 2021, 11:48 am

simoan wrote:
It doesn't matter what your investment approach is; income only, or much more sensibly, total return as practised by the majority of successful investors.
Thanks for the interesting link! I would say though that if one's approach is (almost) never to sell shares but to live from the dividend income then the effect of the share buyback is more tenuous than simply receiving a special dividend. C.


Return to “Company Share news (LSE Main Market)”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests