Does anyone know this company? It was highlighted in this weekend's paper and I wonder if it is about to fall a lot more ( eg with the prospect of a Rights Issue, etc), and that might be a good time to get in - when they have some cash.

Are they beholden to Supermarkets, I wonder - could this mean they have little "pricing-power"? - That's something that any go-go business needs, perhaps along with a USP - although this is hardly likley in the "food" industry, is it?

RNS not terribly reassuring, with a possible rights issue on the cards might be time to move on.

Joint Venture and Trading Update

PREMIER FOODS REACHES AGREEMENT ON JOINT VENTURE TO GROW HOVIS, ENABLING DEDICATED FOCUS ON GROCERY AND CONFIRMS 2013 RESULTS IN LINE WITH MARKET EXPECTATIONS

· Bread business to become a stand-alone joint venture between The Gores Group and Premier Foods
· Bread business valued at enterprise value of £87.5m. Premier Foods retains a 49% stake ensuring significant participation in future value generation
· Transaction provides short-term cash inflow to Premier Foods of approximately £28m to be invested in Grocery business
· Combined £45m cash injection by the shareholders into the joint venture unlocks a £200m five year investment programme for Hovis
· Premier Foods Trading profit for the year ended 31 December 2013 in line with market expectations

more..

The chart is starting to look interesting again.

In auction +8.3%

I'm sorry to say that I've been a holder of these shares for years... I don't own too many equities but these I have and are firmly in the red on.. No degree of rally excites me about these.

There was volume on the stock earlier when I looked at 56p,
but a chart inspection and I had to pay 56.75 for the purchase a couple minutes later.

---

Bought some more under 59p

order book much stronger this morning

A good move up this morning and holding now after the usual 1/3 retracement

the reason for starting strong this morning

Goldman Sachs lifts Premier Foods to buy from neutral, target raised from 75p to 90p.

Interim Management Statement

Premier Foods today reports the Company's Interim Management Statement for the three months ended 30 September 2014.

· Increasingly demanding market conditions result in branded sales reduction of 4.1% in Q3
· New organisational structure in place to improve agility, focus and accountability
· Trading profit expectations for 12 months to December 2014 towards lower end of market expectations
· Mr. Kipling relaunch delivering encouraging share gains
· Exciting range of new product launches now in market

Starting to look promising.

Lynda Bellingham Oxo advert to be repeated at Christmas

I was sent this by a friend earlier who is stateside - just out tonight !





Hormel Foods Hungry For Corporate Activity


12th November 2014


Business Desk Latest*


Hormel Foods Corporation (NYSE:HRL) are weighing up a takeover of Uk based
Premier Foods (LON:PFD).The corporation have been keen for some time to find
a foothold in the Uk & Eu markets and senior company executives believe a bid
for Premier Foods would fit the bill across a number of fronts.Hormel,who are
best known for brands such as the iconic 'Spam' and 'Skippy' have been steadily
growing their business and portfolio over recent years and are now in a position
to be more aggressive in terms of acquisition and takeovers.One analyst connected
to the company revealed that steps are now underway for what he termed
'bolt on acquisitions' to be made swiftly.Premier Foods are best known for brands
such as 'Oxo' and 'Mr Kipling' in the Uk,and employ around 4000 staff.

Premier Foods accused over 'pay and stay' practice

Premier Foods, one of the UK's biggest manufacturers, has been asking its suppliers for payments to continue doing business with the firm.

One supplier said the practice - known as pay and stay - was like "blackmail".

Newsnight understands the struggling company has received millions of pounds from its suppliers in this way.

Premier Foods said it was confident the scheme did not break any rules under competition law. The government said it was "concerned by recent reports".

Shameful. I've long argued on PFD threads and elsewhere that its business model is doomed anyway - this disgraceful demand for protection money, blackmail payments, slush money, bribes, demanding money with menaces, or whatever you want to call it, to keep the company afloat only confirms they ain't going to survive by normal means.

Hormel might wish to distance themselves from any expression of ongoing interest, for a while (though if they seriously want Premier, they might not mind a bit of damage to the share price).


"At Hormel Foods, our top priority is maintaining the highest ethical standards throughout all levels and locations of the company."

"In the current challenging environment, the support of all of our suppliers is crucial."

"Newsnight understands many suppliers have paid a total in the low millions so far."


How is this shown in the company's accounts? What is it lumped in with? And what does that area of the accounts look like without this sneaky boost?

i'm amazed their sp has fallen only 7% today .... what a bunch of blatant crooks

Blackmail, surely not once it's out in the Open. But n'less it stinks and whilst in ( Other businesses / other circumstances)... similar payments may be requested, it's very difficult for any supplier to resist....concluding that they can put a penny here-n-there on Sales - But rarely do!
One suspect this Co is on a slippery slope, as Markets twist and turn - any thoughts?

EDIT- cynic - that's a good comparison . . . makes I think.
One might suspect that as an existing supplier, any suggestion of bribery would not hold - and as such, surely the opposite will be true too. . So, I suspect ( but cannot know ) that whilst this all smells bad, it may not be illegal ( therefore the law will need change, will clinch their position ). However, looking behind the Demand is the need for the Co. to survive and just maybe this was the only way they could fund new developments - as far as investors are concerned this might the last-chance saloon . . . . but then what do I know?

what is the difference between this sort of blackmail - you can dress it up as other if you so choose - and bribery if the boot was on the other foot?

Premier Foods in mafia-style extortion shakedown?

December 6, 2014, 4:10 AM CST | Written by Christian Nordqvist | Economics / FinanceNews

After being caught allegedly shaking down its suppliers for investment money, otherwise they would be ‘de-listed’, Premier Foods plc, the maker of Ambrosia, Mr Kipling Cakes, Loyd Grossman, Sharwood’s, Oxo, Bisto, and Batchelors, has seen its share value slide.
Vince Cable, Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills has filed a complaint to competition authorities about the heavily-indebted, St. Albans-based British food manufacturer.

Mr. Cable was shocked at Premier Foods’ behavior after hearing it had sent letters to its suppliers asking for investment money as a pre-condition to remaining on its suppliers list. If anybody wants a clear definition of “extortion”, this must surely be it.

News about the shakedown letter from Premier Foods to its suppliers was revealed in a BBC Newsight TV show. Suppliers described the practice simply as “blackmail”.

According to Newsnight, suppliers have handed over millions of pounds in “investments” in this way.

Definition of Extortion: the practice of obtaining something, especially money, through force or threats. Synonyms: blackmail or shakedown.

According to Premier Foods, the practice is not in breach of any competition rules. However, the Government expressed deep concern about the report.

The BBC, which has seen a letter sent by CEO Gavin Darby on November 18 to suppliers, said:

“We are aiming to work with a smaller number of strategic suppliers in the future that can better support and invest in our growth ideas. We will now require you to make an investment payment to support our growth.”

“I understand that this approach may lead to some questions. However, it is important that we take the right steps now to support our future growth.”

When one of the recipients of the letter inquired by email about the requested annual payments, a Premier Foods executive replied:

“We are looking to obtain an investment payment from our entire supply base and unfortunately those who do not participate will be nominated for de-list.”

Bob Horsley, who has been a supplier to Ambrosia in Devon for over a decade told Newsnight he thought it was like blackmail. “What they are saying is, ‘Unless you pay this money, you can’t do the work.’”

Mr. Horsley, who opted not to pay up and risks being de-listed said:

“I’m just a layman, but I can’t see how that is right.”

Strong-arm bullying for money not uncommon

This kind of supplier-shakedown is not uncommon in British business, apparently. According to the BBC, major UK retailers including John Lewis, Argos, Debenhams and Halfords have sent similar letters.

In a letter to the Competition and Markets Authority, Mr. Cable wrote:
“I am very concerned that this practice is becoming commonplace and is placing considerable strain on already hard-pressed small businesses. I am writing to you, therefore, to request that the Competition and Markets Authority considers the available evidence of these so-called “pay-to-stay” clauses employed by, amongst others, Premier Foods.”

“I appreciate that you can only act if there is sufficient evidence that this issue meets your prioritisation principles.”

Director-General of the Institute of Directors Simon Walker said such practices, at a time when “public faith in business is painfully low,” are simply unacceptable. He added that it “. . . puts a bullet in the chamber for those who think the heavy-hand of regulation is the only way to change the culture of corporate Britain.”

Mr. Walker added that lawmakers are right to be concerned. He is worried that some “bad apples” trigger state intervention in UK business, which will be hit by a flood of new regulations.

“Holding small businesses and suppliers at gun-point is a sure way to catch the attention of policymakers and regulators. Premier need to consider their arrangements closely. We encourage them to think of the long-term damage they could be doing to their suppliers, their brands, and business in general,” Mr. Walker said.


source link (article includes tv footage video, for those who missed it)