$20m float for whose benefit.
Printable View
$20m float for whose benefit.
wonder if they'll have shareholder benefits [8D]
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/3/...ectid=10439288
and it's a terrible day down here too. Perchance, could you add a feature to enable us over 30s to read text. Anything under type font size 11 is getting harder to read these days.
Wouldn't the likes of Burger King and McDonald's cranking out a line of "super premium" burgers simply destroy an unknown quantity like Burgerfuel?
I like the concept of a super premium burger, it fits well into the "mini-luxury" mold....but the name of the outfit sounds quite corny to me...but then so did Starbucks.
Haven't done any research on this outfit but with the miserable performance of RBD since it floated it would have to be a pretty good story to attract my interest.
Without looking at the internal business and marketing plan one can only undertake intelligent guesses. There are numerous and, same old same old, reasons for founders floating their companies. My guess is RBD was and is overloaded at HQ with food marketing stuff, expensive infrastructure and Amercian parents who need their retirement funds. BF currently has neither but wait and see re internals. When I looked at RBD something told me to say clear. Well, they started at $2 and went south never to return - funnily that (probably a merchant bank got into the picture as in Feltex's case - I can't recall).
Further - as a guide - what's happened with Burger Winconsin and Hell's Pizza jumping the moot. All fit into ladedaemonian's "mini-luxury' idea. Now, if they were selling to the over 60s, that market will make up 25% of our population come 2020 - then I'm in.
More.. how does the felt chain stack up against competitors. I'll stop here. There's really very little to analyse. I'll wait for the prospectus if the Aussies dont' take them out before hand (are we entering the late 80s framework again. The insurance companies will shortly have bags for money looking for a home come 1st July. Far more money chasing ventures that X and Y and beyond don't have the resources to buy their over inflated product prices).
To compare Burger Fuel with Restaurant Brands in terms of quality businesses is, in my opinion, quite misguided. Burger Fuel, where I happen to dine at at least once a week is a strong and growing brand, neither Hell Pizza nor any others have filled the gap in terms of a quality yet affordable and convenient food chain. Having once looked at buying a franchise, cannot disclose figures but can tell that the stores are extremely profitable, have very high turnover with fiercely loyal clientele, and very efficient systems in place such that a monkey could be trained and the burgers would still be served on time. Some kiwis also started a similar chain in London a few years ago and flicked it off for something like 12 million pounds due to the scalability of the concept. Burger Fuel have a strong scalable brand that they have already taken abroad with pilot store in Australian Sydney. If this thing makes it to the NZX, and is priced sensibly I am in for sure. If it is lost to the Aussie's before that then well a damn shame for this country just like every other decent business we have lost. Restaurant Brands on the other hand was not much more than a mismanaged licensee for a few lard merchant brands that lost their appeal to all but a select few about a decade ago - refusing to change with the times, they figured they could stay ahead by serving up the same old rubbish, and now wonder why they turned into a toad....!
Ok. so what's difference. We're going round in circles here on educated guesses.
THERE is a Goat in every town a chance to enlarge the NZX is a good thing but for the knockers so hope burgerfuel gets floated, as for RBD holing a couple of million shares would be good thing if you could afford and there two brands KFC & Starbucks are great earners and Starbucks even has now controls over the coffee MARKET.. [8D]
BurgerFuel definitely have a strong brand in New Zealand. It will be interesting to see from the prospectus how the business model operates - what kind of franchise fees are charged etc.
I can't see McDonald's, Burger King et al competing with BurgerFuel - they sell to different markets. Even if the incumbents introduce 'premium' burgers, they are not going to be able to drop their current brand image quickly.
If the float is reasonably priced it could definitely be worth a look.
I personally think this concept is good for NZ but not overseas. But thats just my opinion.
The term is something like transplanting. That is, just because it works here and you spend a week in Sydney/London checking it out don't mean it's gona work there - witness Warehouse, Telecom, AMP Henderson and Tower to name just the big players
I used to eat regularly at BF and everything about the place was light years ahead of any RBD outlet of any kind. The only reason I don't any more is that there are none this far South! this could be one of those Lynch-type successes. The concept is good and while I'm dubious about 'one in every suburb' claim there is certainly room for expansion. The question for me will be one of price.
I have a vague memory of an gourmet burger chain (I knew of 2 stores) called "Burger Wisconsin" some 20 years ago, they were a real nice burger, just a pity the one near me closed down.
Never tried BF yet.
To get traction would BF be better to buy selected brands with established reputations in selected countries, Icons that go off here don't always go off there,read the report from Hells Pizza since they opened in london, to date it's not as easy as they thought. B.W have a good solid rep.
FG, if the franchise deal was good, why are you not in?Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Flying Goat
To compare Burger Fuel with Restaurant Brands in terms of quality businesses is, in my opinion, quite misguided. Burger Fuel, where I happen to dine at at least once a week is a strong and growing brand, neither Hell Pizza nor any others have filled the gap in terms of a quality yet affordable and convenient food chain. Having once looked at buying a franchise, cannot disclose figures but can tell that the stores are extremely profitable, have very high turnover with fiercely loyal clientele, and very efficient systems in place such that a monkey could be trained and the burgers would still be served on time. Some kiwis also started a similar chain in London a few years ago and flicked it off for something like 12 million pounds due to the scalability of the concept. Burger Fuel have a strong scalable brand that they have already taken abroad with pilot store in Australian Sydney. If this thing makes it to the NZX, and is priced sensibly I am in for sure. If it is lost to the Aussie's before that then well a damn shame for this country just like every other decent business we have lost. Restaurant Brands on the other hand was not much more than a mismanaged licensee for a few lard merchant brands that lost their appeal to all but a select few about a decade ago - refusing to change with the times, they figured they could stay ahead by serving up the same old rubbish, and now wonder why they turned into a toad....!
ANSEWER, because he is a GOAT.. [8D]Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Paddy
FG, if the franchise deal was good, why are you not in?Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Flying Goat
To compare Burger Fuel with Restaurant Brands in terms of quality businesses is, in my opinion, quite misguided. Burger Fuel, where I happen to dine at at least once a week is a strong and growing brand, neither Hell Pizza nor any others have filled the gap in terms of a quality yet affordable and convenient food chain. Having once looked at buying a franchise, cannot disclose figures but can tell that the stores are extremely profitable, have very high turnover with fiercely loyal clientele, and very efficient systems in place such that a monkey could be trained and the burgers would still be served on time. Some kiwis also started a similar chain in London a few years ago and flicked it off for something like 12 million pounds due to the scalability of the concept. Burger Fuel have a strong scalable brand that they have already taken abroad with pilot store in Australian Sydney. If this thing makes it to the NZX, and is priced sensibly I am in for sure. If it is lost to the Aussie's before that then well a damn shame for this country just like every other decent business we have lost. Restaurant Brands on the other hand was not much more than a mismanaged licensee for a few lard merchant brands that lost their appeal to all but a select few about a decade ago - refusing to change with the times, they figured they could stay ahead by serving up the same old rubbish, and now wonder why they turned into a toad....!
Where is the report on Hell pizza in London etrader? CheersQuote:
quote:Originally posted by etrader
To get traction would BF be better to buy selected brands with established reputations in selected countries, Icons that go off here don't always go off there,read the report from Hells Pizza since they opened in london, to date it's not as easy as they thought. B.W have a good solid rep.
Interesting typo Bricks......
The thing I dont understand about this investment is what they need the money for. My understanding of the franchise situation is that the franchisee pays for everything (shop fit out, advertising, percentage of sales), the franchisor just rakes it in (ie, all their costs are effectively paid by the shop owners - the percentage of sales should more than cover head office costs). What am I missing.
Top burgers by the way, love the Bastardo.
because am more tyre kicker than genuine buyer.Quote:
quote:
FG, if the franchise deal was good, why are you not in?
BRICKHEAD, don't give up your day job.Quote:
quote:
ANSEWER, because he is a GOAT.. [8D]
YOU are a GOAT as you tried to infer you where big time buyer only to confess to be a LOOKER.. [8D]Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Flying Goat
because am more tyre kicker than genuine buyer.Quote:
quote:
FG, if the franchise deal was good, why are you not in?
What are you missing? You're missing the big picture, mate (It's a great opportunity for two guys and their advisors to pull 20 mil, that's the big picture)Quote:
quote:Originally posted by CJ
The thing I dont understand about this investment is what they need the money for. My understanding of the franchise situation is that the franchisee pays for everything (shop fit out, advertising, percentage of sales), the franchisor just rakes it in (ie, all their costs are effectively paid by the shop owners - the percentage of sales should more than cover head office costs). What am I missing.
Top burgers by the way, love the Bastardo.
Yeah 7 million more than hell
I understand that in that it is similar to 42 below, but in 42 belows case they actually needed the cash, in this case, it appears to be a simple cashing out. Since the company doesn't need the cash, it suggests they aren't sure the expansion will go as planned so they better at least get some cash out first.Quote:
quote:Originally posted by DCski13
What are you missing? You're missing the big picture, mate (It's a great opportunity for two guys and their advisors to pull 20 mil, that's the big picture)Quote:
quote:Originally posted by CJ
The thing I dont understand about this investment is what they need the money for. My understanding of the franchise situation is that the franchisee pays for everything (shop fit out, advertising, percentage of sales), the franchisor just rakes it in (ie, all their costs are effectively paid by the shop owners - the percentage of sales should more than cover head office costs). What am I missing.
Top burgers by the way, love the Bastardo.
Are they selling existing shares (cash goes to them) or new shares (cash goes to company - which they will no doubt take out in big salary/consultants fees)
[/quote]
Are they selling existing shares (cash goes to them) or new shares (cash goes to company - which they will no doubt take out in big salary/consultants fees)
[/quote]
Hey CJ. There's No difference! (So where did you get your degree, The Open Polytech or Otago Polytechnic?)
Are they selling existing shares (cash goes to them) or new shares (cash goes to company - which they will no doubt take out in big salary/consultants fees)Quote:
quote:Originally posted by DCski13
[/quote]
Hey CJ. There's No difference! (So where did you get your degree, The Open Polytech or Otago Polytechnic?)
[/quote]
Mr DCski you don't want to show of to MUCH these statements have a habit of back firing.. [8D]
Gee Bricks, that's the smartest thing I can recall you ever saying.
Reminds me of back when I did a few years as a lawnmowing contractor, I was having a chat with some "kid" who was studying commerce at university, I told him "...Yes, I have a commerce degree, so if you study hard enough, you too, may get to mow lawns in the future"
ARE you still mowing lawns or you have moved on and up interesting.. [8D]Quote:
quote:Originally posted by kura
Gee Bricks, that's the smartest thing I can recall you ever saying.
Reminds me of back when I did a few years as a lawn mowing contractor, I was having a chat with some "kid" who was studying commerce at university, I told him "...Yes, I have a commerce degree, so if you study hard enough, you too, may get to mow lawns in the future"
Quote:
quote:Originally posted by BRICKS
Mr DCski you don't want to show of to MUCH these statements have a habit of back firing.. [8D]
The grass is green. The sky is blue :D
Still do the odd lawn, but if I earn too much, the nasty people at WINZ will reduce my benefit.
Thats the attitude...Quote:
quote:Originally posted by kura
Still do the odd lawn, but if I earn too much, the nasty people at WINZ will reduce my benefit.
One the cash goes to the company (company has additional cash to spend), one it goes to the shareholder (company has no additional money to spend). Is that not different.Quote:
quote:Originally posted by DCski13
Hey CJ. There's No difference! (So where did you get your degree, The Open Polytech or Otago Polytechnic?)Quote:
quote:
Are they selling existing shares (cash goes to them) or new shares (cash goes to company)
(I bought mine over the internet - as if I am going to waste 3-5 years not getting paid)
I was in sydney two weeks ago they have one opening in the cross
SILLY little Scuffer .. [8D]Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Scuffer
I was in sydney two weeks ago they have one opening in the cross
Is that all you indulged in at the cross? There are a few "poorly packed kebab" places on the cross aren't there?[:p]Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Scuffer
I was in sydney two weeks ago they have one opening in the cross
Sorry. *picks up bag and leaves*
Ok, I concede I lost the plot in explaining that one very well... guess it goes like this.(I'll go down the company line)...the company issues shares and receives the cash .... and then the cash ends up with the founders after everything else has been deducted (advertising and promotion, corporate salaries, founders remuneration and incidental HO expenses)Quote:
quote:Originally posted by CJ
One the cash goes to the company (company has additional cash to spend), one it goes to the shareholder (company has no additional money to spend). Is that not different.Quote:
quote:Originally posted by DCski13
Hey CJ. There's No difference! (So where did you get your degree, The Open Polytech or Otago Polytechnic?)Quote:
quote:
Are they selling existing shares (cash goes to them) or new shares (cash goes to company)
(I bought mine over the internet - as if I am going to waste 3-5 years not getting paid)
It was a fair enough question, a few years ago there was 2 companies having an IPO about the same time, one was merely the existing owners wanting out, the other wanted the funds to expand the bizz (I put some dollars down on the latter company that wanted to grow)
The first company was FTX, the second PPL (need I say more)
Albeit franchisees stump up a lot/all of the cash when opening a new site, opening up in new markets is an entirely different situation. In fact, franchisors can often can take years to make money in a new market. Both Subway & McD's are a case in point. Neither organisation made decent returns until they had reached a critical mass in the NZ market - no small feat.
When opening up in a new market there is a lot of infrastructure to set up. e.g. supply chain,site construction, Head office support etc etc. Then of course there is the marketing. Getting say 3-6% advertising levy of a couple initial sites is just not going to cut the mustard as far as growing a brand in a market QUICKLY.
Of course we are yet to see the prospectus, but based on the PR that has been released to date re BF, it seems to be clear that the owners are wanting to expand, rather than "get out" (at least for the medium term!).
It had not opened still being fitted out, but yes you are right some of the takeaways are pretty rough but the cross is not as seedy has it used to be, I will keep my private indulgences to myself thanks, i'm new to this site and am finding it enlightening to say the least but I did wonder if bricks was the type of guy to steal a toddlers ice cream and kick the poor kids puppy, I do hope I'm wrong.Quote:
quote:Originally posted by moe
Is that all you indulged in at the cross? There are a few "poorly packed kebab" places on the cross aren't there?[:p]Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Scuffer
I was in sydney two weeks ago they have one opening in the cross
Sorry. *picks up bag and leaves*
Hey Scuffer, you are not too far from the truth with Bricks :D
I'm not having a go at him I just felt like i'm the new kid on the block and I patted a dog and it bit me but hey he is probably a nice guy and was having a bad day.Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Bling_Bling
Hey Scuffer, you are not too far from the truth with Bricks :D
DONT you mean Moe he is the one talking to you,, I would just say your a new DILL.. [8D] RegardsQuote:
quote:Originally posted by Scuffer
It had not opened still being fitted out, but yes you are right some of the takeaways are pretty rough but the cross is not as seedy has it used to be, I will keep my private indulgences to myself thanks, i'm new to this site and am finding it enlightening to say the least but I did wonder if bricks was the type of guy to steal a toddlers ice cream and kick the poor kids puppy, I do hope I'm wrong.Quote:
quote:Originally posted by moe
Is that all you indulged in at the cross? There are a few "poorly packed kebab" places on the cross aren't there?[:p]Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Scuffer
I was in sydney two weeks ago they have one opening in the cross
Sorry. *picks up bag and leaves*
All Bricks post are like thatQuote:
quote:Originally posted by Scuffer
I'm not having a go at him I just felt like i'm the new kid on the block and I patted a dog and it bit me but hey he is probably a nice guy and was having a bad day.Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Bling_Bling
Hey Scuffer, you are not too far from the truth with Bricks :D
.....wait, however I do remember 1 post where he put a coherent English sentence together and it was non-abusive!
BOB, BOB your sideshow has been out of action for some time we know your been in jail for a holiday was it good, You must get back to your meat company going to stop killing and start milking the cows so good to hear from you REGARDS.. [8D]Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Sideshow Bob
All Bricks post are like thatQuote:
quote:Originally posted by Scuffer
I'm not having a go at him I just felt like i'm the new kid on the block and I patted a dog and it bit me but hey he is probably a nice guy and was having a bad day.Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Bling_Bling
Hey Scuffer, you are not too far from the truth with Bricks :D
.....wait, however I do remember 1 post where he put a coherent English sentence together and it was non-abusive!
BRICKS, this place is not the same without you mate. LOL
Is anyone interested in buying shares in this company now that the IPO is officially a go-ahead?
---------------------------------
BURGERFUEL TO LIST ON NZAX
Gourmet burger chain BurgerFuel plans to list on the NZAX after raising $15 million with an issue of 15 million shares at $1 each.
Investors will also get a one-for-five option to buy additional shares at the same price in 18 months. Funds raised will be used for expansion in New Zealand, Australia, Europe and the US. BurgerFuel presently has 19 outlets in New Zealand and one in Sydney.
The company's 70,000 VIB members (very important burger connoisseurs) will have first bite at the share offer until June 25 when the prospectus will become available to the wider public.
NOW all you KIWI`s can put your money where your moth is and don't forget they sell Mr Chips and the KFC store is just around the corner so good eating and have a happy TIME.. [8D]
NOW all you KIWI`s can put your money where your mouth is and don't forget they sell Mr Chips and the KFC store is just around the corner so good eating and have a happy TIME.. [8D]
There is a lot of blue sky priced into the offer.
Burger Fuel own 1 store - probably loss making - in Sydney, 1 store in Auckland, a wholesale distribution business and the franchise rights. In the 9 months to December 2006 (Why are these results so old?) the company lost about $150,000, having made a small profit in NZ and lost a larger sum in Sydney while incurring setup costs over there.
Given the NZ profits are NZ$132k before tax for 9 months, the bulk of their earnings probably stem from the single original company owned store. Excluding up front franchise fees, their royalty stream is probably about $1m pa at the moment. That doesn't pay for a lot of overhead. With a fairly long operating history, I was however surprised at the paucity of financial data.
I was also suspicious of the low tax rate incurred on the NZ earnings - just 4.53% - which hints that either aren't profitable on an operational level or they have lost money in prior periods as well.
The sizzle comes from expectations of global success. They point out that just a small global penetration results in many stores (and we can surmise a lot of royalties although the prospectus is pretty light on hard data other than some specious what if conclusions).
If they have any sort of success, the $60m price tag the float assigns itself may be justified. I'd find it difficult to pay $60m for a company that is losing money, has an unproven international expansion policy and limited profit potential in their home market. I think the promoters got greedy with their pricing and would consider a price that values the company at half the offer more realistic.
Best wishes to the promoters and potential investors. It is nice to see a local company with ambitions. Too rich for me.
The hog now believes that BRICKS and MacDunk are long lost siblings, separated at birth in a heart-wrenching twisted saga of lost love and lives unfulfilled. They both started out in similar lives but soon BRICKS gave away the chance at education and literacy settling instead for the complex and challenging life that is cleaning catch-tanks from fishing boats. MacDunk on the other hand went straight to the udder, as they say, and worked his way up to head share-milker, eventually cashing in his seven cows and marrying the ex-Carter Holt assistant tea-lady whom he initially got drunk on cheap wine in the hope of finding out what brand of biscuits Carters habitually bought for smoko breaks (his plan being to invest the bovine proceeds in a biscuit-producing operation). Now, the two siblings are bought together once more but this time life is quite different. Currently, no fewer than eight universities are vying for access to the pair to establish some coherent and conclusive position on the question of nature vs. nurture. How will it turn out? Did MacDunk invest in the right biscuit company, or did he put his bun in the wrong oven? Will BRICKS cement a solid relationship at last with MacDunk of memories old? We will just have to sit tight and wait to see ...Quote:
quote:Originally posted by BRICKS
BOB, BOB your sideshow has been out of action for some time we know your been in jail for a holiday was it good, You must get back to your meat company going to stop killing and start milking the cows so good to hear from you REGARDS.. [8D]Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Sideshow Bob
All Bricks post are like thatQuote:
quote:Originally posted by Scuffer
I'm not having a go at him I just felt like i'm the new kid on the block and I patted a dog and it bit me but hey he is probably a nice guy and was having a bad day.Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Bling_Bling
Hey Scuffer, you are not too far from the truth with Bricks :D
.....wait, however I do remember 1 post where he put a coherent English sentence together and it was non-abusive!
Similar things were said about 42below??Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Halebop
There is a lot of blue sky priced into the offer.
...
If they have any sort of success, the $60m price tag the float assigns itself may be justified. I'd find it difficult to pay $60m for a company that is losing money, has an unproven international expansion policy and limited profit potential in their home market. I think the promoters got greedy with their pricing and would consider a price that values the company at half the offer more realistic.
Not sure about expansion into Europe either. GBK (the UK copy of the NZ store) was bought for £10m a few years ago (about 8-10 stores) and the new owners want to expand in UK and Europe (do a search on Gourment Burger Kitchen - they were in the Hearld in the past 2 weeks).
Selling burgers to the US? I think they probably have that base covered.
As far as NZ goes, there is lots of growth potential. Tauranga is about to open its second store and i think they have a few more opening before christmas.
once Sydney is established, there are plenty of options there as well.
CJ there are a lot of "ifs" in there for $60m. The thing with Sydney is that it's not once established it's if profitably established.
I could imagine New Zealand easily supporting 40 or 50 stores but even if it were 100 stores (and that would take 5, 10 or more years) the royalty stream would perhaps be about $6m pa in today's dollars less overheads (currently around $3m with public company costs yet to be added). Hardly a reason to pay $60m now.
Taking a 10 year view and given a less than proven pedigree you'd probably want to earn returns of at least 15% per annum, then the business would have to be worth about $240m in 10 years time. If the market assigned a higher than normal average PE over that time - say 20 - the company would need to earn $12m after tax, about $17.1m before tax. Overhead would have to be substantially higher to support a pan-tasman infrastructure, much higher stores numbers and 10 years worth of inflation - say triple current overhead and add 35% for inflation - about $12.2m pa. (this compares well enough with ASX listed RFG, perhaps its on the light side allowing for inflation on top of the RFG numbers). So the company would need to gross $29.3m. If 20% of revenues were fee rather than royalty related, they would need to generate $23.44m from royalties, implying system sales of $390m, implying 250 to 300 stores (also allowing for 35% inflation in sales figures). That's a very demanding rate of store unit growth before factoring execution risk on top. ...I'm not saying they couldn't do it, just that the pricing doesn't reflect a harsher and pragmatic reality.
...But then it this appears to be a float targeted at burger lovers rather than investors. Maybe in 10 years times we'll have a bunch of aged 20 something "Burger" millionaires...
The hog now believes that BRICKS and MacDunk are long lost siblings, separated at birth in a heart-wrenching twisted saga of lost love and lives unfulfilled. They both started out in similar lives but soon BRICKS gave away the chance at education and literacy settling instead for the complex and challenging life that is cleaning catch-tanks from fishing boats. MacDunk on the other hand went straight to the udder, as they say, and worked his way up to head share-milker, eventually cashing in his seven cows and marrying the ex-Carter Holt assistant tea-lady whom he initially got drunk on cheap wine in the hope of finding out what brand of biscuits Carters habitually bought for smoko breaks (his plan being to invest the bovine proceeds in a biscuit-producing operation). Now, the two siblings are bought together once more but this time life is quite different. Currently, no fewer than eight universities are vying for access to the pair to establish some coherent and conclusive position on the question of nature vs. nurture. How will it turn out? Did MacDunk invest in the right biscuit company, or did he put his bun in the wrong oven? Will BRICKS cement a solid relationship at last with MacDunk of memories old? We will just have to sit tight and wait to see ...
[/quote]
WELL there is one thing for sure is that BRICKS will not have a relationship with THE HOG because he has had his nose up his REAR so long now that he cant tell BLACK from WHITE and we don't have to sit tight to SEE.. [8D]
I rather put my money with RBD with the SP at these levels. AT least RBD has a div and are under valued. Burger is too much risk at $60 M. I still cant believe they valued it at $60 M ..LOL
Honestly can anyone see this as more than a pipe dream, but aim for the stars good luck to them.
I never said it was a good investment and have said that to others as well.Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Halebop
CJ there are a lot of "ifs" in there for $60m. The thing with Sydney is that it's not once established it's if profitably established.
I beleive the "dream" is similar to 42 below but I dont think that they will get the global penitration to have the same result.
I beleive any money they use to go to the USA or Europe (especially UK - GBK will have 150 stores in under 5 years here) will be more than a waste of money, it will be a cashflow drag.
However, their burgers are still good and I think that is the way i will be supporting them (ie. by eating rather than investing).
Good burgers ay.
I'll give them a go.
As for the shares ha ha
I find it real interesting to see their "valuation" of the co and I think I even heard someone from BF making ref to the 42below story. i.e. we are going to build this up as much as we can with loads of hot air before selling to some large corporate....
current valuation is over $3m per store......
no thanks
UK dreams....... havent they heard of GBK
They don't even own all the stores.... The company in its current form would be lucky to get between 1-2 million in the current open market.
Warty that's the most beautiful story ever told. I wept :(Quote:
quote:The hog now believes that BRICKS and MacDunk are long lost siblings, separated at birth in a heart-wrenching twisted saga of lost love and lives unfulfilled. They both started out in similar lives but soon BRICKS gave away the chance at education and literacy settling instead for the complex and challenging life that is cleaning catch-tanks from fishing boats. MacDunk on the other hand went straight to the udder, as they say, and worked his way up to head share-milker, eventually cashing in his seven cows and marrying the ex-Carter Holt assistant tea-lady whom he initially got drunk on cheap wine in the hope of finding out what brand of biscuits Carters habitually bought for smoko breaks (his plan being to invest the bovine proceeds in a biscuit-producing operation). Now, the two siblings are bought together once more but this time life is quite different. Currently, no fewer than eight universities are vying for access to the pair to establish some coherent and conclusive position on the question of nature vs. nurture. How will it turn out? Did MacDunk invest in the right biscuit company, or did he put his bun in the wrong oven? Will BRICKS cement a solid relationship at last with MacDunk of memories old? We will just have to sit tight and wait to see ...
I hope Peter Jackson is reading this thread, he could buy the movie rights, it would make a ripping yarn. Sean Connery to play MacDunk and Shrek to play Bricks [?]
PLACEBO, SEAN CONNERY is not good looking enough to play MACDUNK.
Placebo the CLOWN............ Which is just NORMAL.. [8D]
Here's the family patriarch:
http://www.learnenglish.org.uk/trivi...s/scotland.gif
The only things missing are his caber, his pipes, his wee dog called Kiltie, and the massive chip on his shoulder :D
Is this what Bricks and MacDunk see when they look in the mirror?
Placebo has such thin SKIN you can see through HIM.. [8D]
Not bad PLACEBO try again. I am still better looking than that.:D:DMacdunkQuote:
quote:Originally posted by Placebo
Here's the family patriarch:
http://www.learnenglish.org.uk/trivi...s/scotland.gif
The only things missing are his caber, his pipes, his wee dog called Kiltie, and the massive chip on his shoulder :D
Is this what Bricks and MacDunk see when they look in the mirror?
Just found out. Apparently it will be the first IPO in NZ that you can pay by credit card.
Thats great just what NZ needs more debt sounds like an act of desperation, the news report had a few would be investors saying they were going to buy in they didn't look like warren buffet.
YOUR right avoid this IPO.. [8D]Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Scuffer
Thats great just what NZ needs more debt sounds like an act of desperation, the news report had a few would be investors saying they were going to buy in they didn't look like warren buffet.
...not old enough either [:p]Quote:
quote:Originally posted by duncan macgregor
PLACEBO, SEAN CONNERY is not good looking enough to play MACDUNK.
I am not to sure on that one roughly the same i think. I have more hair on my head than he has. He was voted the worlds sexiest man. my only claim to fame was I won a best legs contest.Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Halebop
...not old enough either [:p]Quote:
quote:Originally posted by duncan macgregor
PLACEBO, SEAN CONNERY is not good looking enough to play MACDUNK.
Thought you would like to know that. :D:D:Dmacdunk
Wasn't he just knighted too, so he's Sir Sean? In the same list as Dame Edna :D.
Not sure if that makes him/her Sir Dame Edna or Dame Dame Edna... grateful if someone could clarify [?]
im with Bricks on this one...Quote:
quote:BRICKS-YOUR right avoid this IPO..
I read that Burgerfuel have turnover of 3million dollars and they are trying to raise 60million
analysts said this float is "ambitious"
[8D]
.^sc
If you must invest in the fast food business, then surely RBD at 86c,(taking into account its current problems with pizza hut etc,an iconic brand poorly maintained and marketed but with potential for a turn-around) would be a better place to put your money? With the costs and risks involved in developing Burger Fuel, I can't see why they wont be cheaper than $1 in the future.
were you the guy that shouted the king is wearing no clothes its pretty obvious to all thanks buddy someone had to say it well done :D
Interesting article in herald today, it looks that the public are pumping a lot of money into something and holding a 1/4 share, the owners are going to do very well out of it, almost makes me want to float my business should put a $30 million dollar potential value on a lot of small $1 to $2 mill turnover firms.
Good on them if they can get that off the public smart way of making $
Here at Burger Wisconsin we have been perfecting gourmet Burgers since 1989. That means we have plenty of experience in sourcing the finest & freshest ingredients to give you, our valued customer, the world’s best burger.
For the next 65 years Charlie sold his hamburgers at fairs all over Wisconsin while his creation went on to conquer the world.
I spose its a business
Christopher Niesche's column in the Saturday Herald provides a reasonable summary:
It has 19 stores, all but one of which are franchises. For some reason the latest financial statements aren't included in the prospectus, but they reveal that Burger Fuel New Zealand earned revenue of $4.3 million and made a "trading surplus" of $186,499.
If we add back interest payments and depreciation of $190,045 we get earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation - or something like it - of $376,544. If we then put Burger Fuel International's operating loss to one side, this puts the float on a multiple of 160 times earnings.
That doesn't look enticing, to say the least ...
I've noticed ads for Burger Fuel on TV in the last week.
Are they raising 'brand awareness' to sell burgers or sell shares?
selling a few more burgers either way!Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Sideshow Bob
I've noticed ads for Burger Fuel on TV in the last week.
Are they raising 'brand awareness' to sell burgers or sell shares?
Or turning their reported tiny profit for the last year into a big loss for the current year.....
OK, now I've seen an ad when the end line is 'would you like shares with that!'Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Paddy
selling a few more burgers either way!Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Sideshow Bob
I've noticed ads for Burger Fuel on TV in the last week.
Are they raising 'brand awareness' to sell burgers or sell shares?
I'm out! (Not that I was ever in, I just wanted to use the line!)
Not sure it's publicity machine are earning there keep with that commercial.
They should be trying to sell a "growing franchise" opportunity to sophisicated investors not some student types scrapping together $1k to buy in.
Never tried there food but may try it & observe the setup, & won't be touching the shares in any case.
Wonder what the guys at Burger Wisconsin think they must be quaking in their buns.
I used to play squash at Thorndon Club in early 90s when Stu Davenport had this weird idea about a gourmet burger chain. He put heart and soul into developing products basically from scratch and the brand, opened a shop in Northland (Welly suburb) we all thought he was mad. But there's money in them there buns!
Who are Burger Fuel pitching to? "scrape together $1000 and invest in us" they say. I have never seen a telly ad campaign for an IPO -- are they desperate?
neither
cute ads though.
Closes I had was AZA (ASX) sending us NXS Holders a DVD when they tried to take over NXS (ASX) lol.
shasta mate the burgers are awesome, as are the fries and the beautiful aioli if the Hamilton branch is indicative of the others. That said I won't be buying in.
Placebo there are plenty of examples of Television advertising for an IPO - some companies take a softly "brand" approach while others just pitch the float. It's been done in NZ for quite a while – the earliest local example I can think of is Petrocorp in the 80's.
I agree with Tok3n - Burger Fuel make "cute" adverts. A little more 3 dimensional than the Burger King adverts (pretty girls and funny concept though) and a lot less intuitional than the McD's various segmented campaigns (I'm still taken aback that they have actually started targeting 30 somethings in their marketing - Being Gen X I'm not used to being a targeted demographic - and I think they've missed the mark because my instinctive Gen X reaction is cynicism).
I can just recall the Petrocorp ads on tv - was 86 or 87. I requested a prostectus, but could not apply as I was under 18.Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Halebop
Placebo there are plenty of examples of Television advertising for an IPO - some companies take a softly "brand" approach while others just pitch the float. It's been done in NZ for quite a while – the earliest local example I can think of is Petrocorp in the 80's.
Having seen the 'would you like shares with that?' ad, I will not be asking for a prostectus for this...
The burgers ARE great, and twice the price of 'normal' burgers. Maybe they're targetting the unsophisticated investor who wants to be part of the burger revolution.
Go for it Spoonman.
You might want to go catch a horse so you can
buy more shares!
And good luck.
Easier to sell product through existing distribution channels than have to set up burger shops to sell burgers - that is a key difference.
No - it's the same people who laughed off the ambitious growth plans of Plus SMS because they just couldn't see how the company could turn a profit.Quote:
quote:Originally posted by SpoonMan
Hah doesn't worry me if the old fogies don't get this coy. Means less scaling for me ... Hang on a minute, were you the same people that laughed off the ambitious growth plans of Frucor, who have a similar target market?
Cynical doubters!Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Deev8
No - it's the same people who laughed off the ambitious growth plans of Plus SMS because they just couldn't see how the company could turn a profit.
But Franchisees are paying the Franchisor to set up these shops.Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Onthemoney
Easier to sell product through existing distribution channels than have to set up burger shops to sell burgers - that is a key difference.
I have no doubt the company will do well, whether it is valued at 60m is another matter. (there is a difference but to a shareholder, only the latter matters).
Spoonman - do you have any links to interesting articles on Josef Roberts. i have been meaning to look into him for a while.
Okay what I mean is that you could have 60 stores with 60 potential variances and complexities or one production house with one potential variance and no complexity. You make the product and market it.
Too many variables in setting up a chain of manufacturing stores....
In 1 add the guy try's to catch some horses (with a fish net) to find the money to pay for his shares but only ends up mith a bleeding nose[B)].Quote:
quote:Originally posted by SpoonMan
I don't get the horse thing? reference to cowboys?
The TV campaign is pitch to those with no experience in the NZSE, so alarm bells are sounding to me. Simple, eh?