Wer kauft NuFarm ? - 500 Beiträge pro Seite

[jerobeam]

Hat jemand Lust sich über NuFarm auszutauschen ?

Einer der weltweit größten Unkrautvernichtungsmittelhersteller. Umgarnt von Sinochem, offerte Abgewiesen.
Dann umgarnt von Sumitomo Chemical, die sich einen 20% Anteil gekauft haben (zu $14).
Gewinnwarnung folgte auf Gewinnwarnung, der vorerst letzte Höhepunkt wurde gestern erreicht nachdem die Gewinnprognose nochmal halbiert wurde und covenant breachs bei den Krediten angekündigt wurden.
Die Aktie notiert jetzt knapp unter $4. Sumitomo hat in gerade einmal 3 Monaten mit dem Anteilskauf 70% Miese gemacht.

Werden Sie aufstocken ?
Wird der Glyphosat-Markt wieder besser ?
Wird Monsanto etwas unternehmen ?
Oder kommen die Chinesen nochmal wieder ?

Das der CEO gefeuert wird, ist wohl nur noch eine Frage der Zeit.

[MrRipley]

Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 39.828.254 von jerobeam am 15.07.10 20:03:56

ja, ich, stehen dir kurz vor der Pleite oder was?

[jerobeam]

Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 39.828.377 von MrRipley am 15.07.10 20:29:45

hi MrRipley.
Nein, Pleite ganz bestimmt nicht. Die Frage ist nur wann sich der Einstieg lohnt. Ich habe heute eine erste kleine Position gekauft, bin aber mental durchaus darauf vorbereitet dass die Aktie noch bis $2.5-$3 fallen kann.

Die Produkte der Firma sind weltweit gefragt und erstklassig.

Besonders gut gefällt mir diesees hier



Wirkt vielleicht auch gegen unverdiente Nobelpreisträger

[MrRipley]

Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 39.828.985 von jerobeam am 15.07.10 22:06:32

Ist Nufarm mit Monsanto vergleichbar?
Alleinstellungsmerkmale und Monopolstellung?
Gentechnik?

Nufarm, ein im Börsendschungel unbekannter Wert, was mich sehr erfreut.

[jerobeam]

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/opinion/alls-far-fr…


All's far from well down on the farm as Nufarm withers

* Bryan Frith
* From: The Australian
* July 21, 2010 12:00AM

NUFARM'S response to the ASX suggests that the company has inadequate management information systems or inadequate management, or both.

The company has an appalling record. It has announced at least five earnings downgrades over the past 18 months -- including downgrades shortly after its two most recent capital raisings -- a $300 million institutional placement in May last year, underwritten by RBS and JPMorgan, at $11.25 a share and, in May this year, a $250m 1-for-5 entitlement offer at $5.75 a share, underwritten by UBS.

On both occasions, Nufarm had confirmed its previous guidance at the time the issues were announced, so the downgrades came as a shock.

It's worth having a brief look at the record.

In December 2008, at the annual meeting, Nufarm confirmed earlier guidance of an operating profit for the year to July 31, 2009, of between $220m and $230m.

On May 15, 2009, when the $300m placement was announced, the company believed that guidance could be achieved. But only weeks later, on June 16, Nufarm said that on then current projections it expected to miss the $220m bottom end of the range by about 15 per cent. That would have taken it down to $187m.

On July 24, Nufarm announced an approach from Sinochem and in response to an ASX query said there was a risk the profit might be more than 10 to 15 per cent below the newly revised guidance, which would have taken it down to $159m to $168m.

On August 27, in response to an ASX price query, Nufarm disclosed that it was then expecting an operating profit in the range of $135m to $145m, a further decrease of 13.6 per cent to 15 per cent. In the event, Nufarm met its July 24 guidance, reporting a 2009 profit of $159.6m. The directors said they were confident of a much improved result in 2010. In December, at the annual meeting, chief executive Doug Rathbone said the company remained confident of a considerable improvement on 2009.

That month, Nufarm rejected an offer from Sinochem, which reduced its offer price from $13 a share to $12 a share after conducting due diligence, opting for a deal with Sumitomo Chemicals to acquire a 20 per cent shareholding, via a tender offer to shareholders at $14 a share, to be followed by a $250m equity offering.

On March 2, when shareholders voted on the Sumitomo deal, Nufarm shocked the market by disclosing that it was expecting a loss of $40m for the half year, but also expected a strong recovery in the second half, to produce a full-year profit in the range of $110m to $130m. The forecast assumed at least average climatic conditions and subsequent demand in the key selling regions and a gradual improvement in glyphosate margins.

In April, when the $250m equity issue was launched, Nufarm confirmed that it expected to achieve its latest guidance, but last week, true to recent form, Nufarm halved the full-year forecast to a range of $55m to $65m. As a result, the net debt has blown out by $100m, to $450m, and the company belatedly disclosed it was in breach of its interest cover covenant and had been forced to seek a "temporary adjustment" to the interest cover ratio from its bankers.

The ASX requires companies to make disclosure when the profit is expected to vary by more than 15 per cent. Not surprisingly, the ASX wanted to know when Nufarm first became aware that the profit would be more than 15 per cent lower than the previous guidance.

In response, Nufarm said the final quarter was typically the key sales and profit-generating period (it made the same point in 2009 in relation to its series of profit downgrades close to balance date) and that, contrary to its assumption, the climatic conditions in the key markets were unfavourable.

Nufarm claims the impact of those unfavourable conditions "was not, and could not be" fully appreciated until the preliminary financial data for June was received and analysed, which took until mid-July.

The data for May did not "specifically" indicate there would be a departure from the previous guidance and it was not until the July results were examined that the company was aware the result would vary by more than 15 per cent from guidance.

So by mid-June, when the May results would have come to hand, Nufarm didn't know its earnings would be more than 15 per cent lower than the guidance yet by mid-July it expected it would be 50 per cent lower. That is, Nufarm didn't know the likely profit outcome until two weeks before the end of the final quarter.

It suggests, at the very least, that the company's management information systems are hopelessly inadequate.

Nufarm knows the importance of the final quarter and it could therefore be expected that it would have gone to great lengths to try to ensure that its information systems would enable it to have a timely grip on how things were panning out.

That would suggest at least weekly management accounts yet, from its responses, Nufarm appears to have been working only monthly accounts.

Moreover, the unfavourable climatic conditions during the quarter could not have been a surprise as they would have been observable throughout the period. Nufarm must have known that would have an adverse impact on its earlier guidance but it seems to have been unable to quantify the impact until the 11th hour.

Nufarm has now implicitly conceded that its information systems are deficient. It says it is concerned at its ability to identify, and react to, changed market conditions and is revisiting the systems it has in place.

But for their chronic over-promising and under-performing, there must also be a question mark over senior management, in particular Rathbone and chief financial officer Kevin Martin who has been responsible for finance, treasury and tax matters since 2000.

It should be remembered that in December 2007, China National Chemical Corp decided not to proceed with an offer of $17.25 a share and in December last year Sinochem reduced its offer from $13 a share to $12 -- in both cases after conducting due diligence.

It's suggested that in both cases the Chinese were much more bearish than Nufarm about the outlook, in particular for the price of glyphosate.

Nufarm's shares have plunged following the latest earnings downgrade and were down to $3.25 on Monday. They rallied 17c yesterday to $3.42, on a favourable broker report, but at that price shareholders who took up the recent entitlement offer at $5.75 a share are down $2.33 a share, or 40 per cent.

Sumitomo must be deeply unhappy as its 20 per cent stake cost it $685m and is now worth only $191m: a loss to date of a staggering $494m, or over 70 per cent.

[jerobeam]

http://sl.farmonline.com.au/news/nationalrural/agribusiness-…

Is Nufarm up for private equity?
22 Jul, 2010 11:19 AM

ALL eyes are on private equity following TPG and The Carlyle Group's $2.7 billion winning bid for Healthscope, and everyone is waiting to see what the cashed-up private equity groups will do next.

One company that is in the doldrums – and perhaps fits the bill due to its questionable management profile – is Nufarm.

The company has such an issue with transparency that analysts say it is difficult to put a real valuation on it, according to The Australian Financial Review.

For example, RBS Morgans values it at $3.62 on a discounted cash flow basis, compared with Merrill Lynch's $4.47 and Goldman Sachs JBWere's $7.95. Nufarm is trading at a price to earnings multiple of 16.3, compared with an industry average of 19.1 on Merrill Lynch's numbers.

Nufarm, which has about $300 million of debt due for refinancing by the end of December, is frantically trying to renegotiate a debt covenant relating to interest cover. But longer term, the sector remains attractive and Nufarm does have a distribution network in most global agricultural markets and a large portfolio of product registrations.

[jerobeam]

http://www.smh.com.au/business/weedkiller-a-toxic-dilemma-20…

[jerobeam]

McGauchie puts floor under Nufarm

DONALD McGauchie caught a falling knife the other day and at this stage in the game he's looking good.

McGauchie was appointed chairman of Nufarm 10 days ago and wasted little time buying shares in the group that makes chemicals to protect crops from pests, weeds and disease.

Since Nufarm issued a downgrade on July 14, its scrip has fallen from $5.24 to as low as $3.20.

McGauchie apparently believed enough was enough and put 12,000 shares - bought at $3.33 a piece - into a super fund.

Yesterday Nufarm scrip closed at $3.76. Hats off to the former Telstra chairman!

[jerobeam]

http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/Nufarm-ag…

Nufarm's phoenix phase

David Leyonhjelm

Published 2:36 PM, 26 Jul 2010

Despite the volume of commentary about agricultural chemicals company Nufarm and its unexpected series of profit downgrades, nobody seems to have noticed that the company is essentially the same as it was when its shares were over $12 and everyone thought Doug Rathbone could walk on water. It is the market environment that has changed, not Nufarm.

Rathbone is a brilliant businessman and there are thousands of people who owe their careers to him. But he built Nufarm based on a business model that no longer works. His failure, as recent events indicate, has been an inability to find a new model fast enough.

Nufarm achieved success based on the cost-competitive manufacturing of off-patent agricultural chemicals. But Rathbone not only knew how to drive costs out of production – he also knew how to persuade the research-based companies to give him access to their technology ahead of his rivals. Thus, as patents approached expiry, the company would regularly be first on the market with a generic competitor.

The company has never really pretended to be good at product innovation or marketing. From time to time it has picked up unique technology as a result of an acquisition, but struggled to benefit from it. The only thing it really knows is making chemicals in large quantities. Nufarm's idea of a good marketing strategy is to order a second bottle of wine during negotiations with distributors.

The high point was probably when it became the exclusive Australia distributor for the crop protection products of Monsanto and BASF, in 2002 and 2004 respectively. The deal with Monsanto was particularly significant as it included the Roundup brand of glyphosate. In crop chemical terms this is the equivalent of owning Coca-Cola.

But that also signalled a major change in the market environment. Monsanto’s strategy was to wind down its involvement in crop chemicals in favour of genetically modified crops. Much of this focused on resistance to glyphosate, known as Roundup Ready, but it caused a drop in demand for various other crop chemicals. Moreover, the other major crop chemical companies were also diverting research and development resources into genetically modified seeds. That meant fewer new chemicals and patents to expire.

On top of that was an explosion in low cost-chemical producers. In China, literally hundreds of plants began producing not only glyphosate but just about every other crop chemical known, patented or not. Nufarm might be a low-cost producer but it operates in a high-wage and regulated environment. It also does not receive a government subsidy for every litre of product it exports. And purchasing glyphosate from China is limited by its agreement with Monsanto.

In fairness, the company has not been standing still. In 2006 it acquired the Australian rights to Monsanto’s Roundup Ready canola, and it has been building up a global portfolio of seed companies. But this will only yield benefits in the long term.

There is some good news: competition in the glyphosate market has become so fierce that in late June the 20 biggest Chinese manufacturers got together at a meeting in Hangzhou and agreed to increase prices. The Chinese government has also decided to stop subsidising exports, while demand for glyphosate continues to rise as Roundup Ready crops are planted more extensively.

But there is no getting away from the fact that Nufarm needs to find a new competitive advantage. Even if the Chinese raise glyphosate prices, there are producers in India waiting for their opportunity. And there seems to be nobody in the company with Rathbone’s skill at convincing the research and development chemical companies to give Nufarm an inside position, assuming that might still be possible. Nufarm is not the small upstart it was when that strategy was first tried.

Perhaps the best thing to come out of the profit and share price collapse is that Rathbone – despite recent reports of share sales – may now stick around long enough to fix the company in which he has invested so much of his life. It is difficult to envisage anyone else having his capability, drive and market understanding.

There will be a price to pay. Nufarm’s corporate governance has been dodgy for years and the company's debts have been a concern for just as long. These will need fixing. But there may also be a solution in the form of the unfortunate Sumitomo Chemical, which just acquired 20 per cent of the company at $14 a share.

Nufarm's products tend to be not only innovative and patented but well marketed. With the help of Nufarm, they might be produced relatively cheaply as well, and perhaps sold under more than one brand. It would be a change of strategy, at least.

[jerobeam]

Scheint als wäre, Kursmäßig zumindest, so etwas wie ein Boden ausgebildet worden.
Schaun'mer mal. Der Yen wird jetzt wieder schwächer, wenn Sumitomo ein Schnäppchen machen will, müssen sie bald handeln.

[jerobeam]

14 Sep, 2010 09:44 AM
NUFARM shares found some inspiration yesterday amid rumours in the market that the canny Phil Mathews investment vehicle had taken a substantial position. But the truth is that, while Mathews Capital is thought to be on the Nufarm register, it is not the new 6.73 per cent shareholder.

Interestingly, an agreement that prevent Japan's Sumitomo buying more of Nufarm without Nufarm's consent expires today. A separate agreement that prevents it from taking advantage of market creep provisions to buy up to 3 per cent more shares expires on October 15, The Australian Financial Review reports.

Conjecture on Nufarm's future continues, and there are whispers private equity is among interested parties taking another look at the beleaguered company.

Of course, much will depend on Sumitomo, which is said to be a "concerned but comfortable" holder of 20 per cent of Nufarm. It's thought Nufarm and Sumitomo are preparing to announce further progress in their development agreement.

[jerobeam]

Truth finally emerges about Nufarm breaches of debt covenants

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/truth-finally-emerg…

[ooy]

Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 40.228.953 von jerobeam am 29.09.10 07:50:35

Oh man, da ist sogar eine Insolvenz denkbar...

[jerobeam]

Sumitomo to write down Nufarm stake

Published 1:58 PM, 2 Oct 2010 Last update 1:46 PM, 2 Oct 2010

Sumitomo Chemical Company Ltd will make a ¥40.6 billion ($501 million) write down its stake in embattled agrichemicals group Nufarm for the three months to September, according to the Weekend AFR.

"We are supporting (Nufarm chief executive officer) Doug Rathbone," Sumitomo executive officer Ray Nishimoto told the paper.

"I have heard a lot of criticism about management but at this moment we do not have any problem," he said. "From our point of view we expect that they are continuing discussions with their strategy."

Sumitomo is Nufarm's biggest shareholder, following the purchase of a 20 per cent stake in the company in April at $14 per share. Nufarm shares closed at $3.72 on Friday.

But Mr Nishimoto said Sumitomo remained committed to its alliance with Nufarm, which would enable collaboration on product development and distribution channels.

[jerobeam]

Wer kauft Nufarm ?
- der "Independent Order of Odd Fellows" (zum Teil...)


Nufarm Limited Announces Holding Interest Of IOOF Holdings Limited
Monday, 4 Oct 2010 01:37am EDT

Nufarm Limited announced that IOOF Holdings Limited is interested in 13,332,705 shares of Nufarm Limited, representing 5.093% of the total voting power.

[jerobeam]

Nufarm share surge strikes barrier

* John Durie
* From: The Australian
* October 12, 2010 1:19PM

BULLISH news on the US farm sector and a Chem China takeover in Israel have boosted Nufarm's stock price.

But still the stock can’t top the apparent $4.25 a share barrier on its price.

The stock opened up sharply on the news, climbing 11.3 per cent to $4.22 a share before easing to trade up 5 per cent at $3.99 a share.

The US Department of Agriculture released figures overnight tipping an early rebound out of recession for the farm sector with farm income to grow by 24 per cent to $US77.1 billion ($78.7bn).

Separately, Bloomberg reported Chem China is acquiring a 70 per cent stake in Israeli-based farm chemical company Makhteshim-Agan Industries, raising hopes it might look at Nufarm again.

At the very least the latter would indicate some consolidation in the sector as global demand appears to be increasing.

But it seems the punters are not convinced because each time Nufarm goes close to the $4.25 a share mark it seems to back track.

The company is looking around for senior executives to fill management ranks as part of its recovery but market credibility is close to zero, which means -- with the notable exception of Perennial -- most big funds have sold out of the stock.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/opinion/nufarm-shar…

[jerobeam]

Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 40.263.416 von jerobeam am 05.10.10 08:19:49

IOOF Holdings Ltd increased its interest in Nufarm Ltd on October 11 from 13.3 million (5.1pc) to 16.1 million shares (6.2pc).

[patrik85]

Agrarwerte sind ja zuletzt gut gelaufen, vielleicht hat NuFarm Nachhohlpotential?

[jerobeam]

Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 40.787.048 von patrik85 am 02.01.11 21:16:32

zum Jahresauftakt schon einmal +6% ...