Ilford Purchased by Pemberstone Ventures Ltd

[RattyMouse]

There's too much negative speculation here. The key phrase in the press release is "Our new owners will assist us to connect more effectively to this younger generation in the future, and we will prioritise this as our main goal over the next five years."

Companies have to change and move on, this is most probably a positive development for Harman, the five directors who bought and rescued Harman will eventually retire and that would raise ownership issues for the company. This way allows for a far better chance of continuity and a viable future for Harman.

Ian

What does Pemberstone know about film? What is their expertise in this area?

How long does Pemberstone intend to own Harman? Two or three years? Why would such a short term ownership of Harman benefit anyone except those who can turn a quick profit from the sale?

Pemberstone is a private equity company. They have no long term interest in owning any film manufacturing company. None.

 

[Peltigera]

What does Pemberstone know about film? What is their expertise in this area?

How long does Pemberstone intend to own Harman? Two or three years? Why would such a short term ownership of Harman benefit anyone except those who can turn a quick profit from the sale?

Pemberstone is a private equity company. They have no long term interest in owning any film manufacturing company. None.

They have a vested interest in Harman being worth more than they paid for it. They are unlikely to be interested in 2 or 3 % profit - they will be looking to make the company worth a lot more. That means skilled staff and full order books.

 

[Ian Grant]

What does Pemberstone know about film? What is their expertise in this area?

How long does Pemberstone intend to own Harman? Two or three years? Why would such a short term ownership of Harman benefit anyone except those who can turn a quick profit from the sale?

Pemberstone is a private equity company. They have no long term interest in owning any film manufacturing company. None.

Harman/Ilford has always been run by their senior management regardless of the actual ownership, that won't change except that Pemberstones will most likely also have their director(s) on the board. They will be relying on the expertise of existing Harman employees but they may well have additional expertise that will be beneficial to the company.

It's highly speculative and wrong to make assumptions that they are investing in a short term way.

Ian

 

[RattyMouse]

They have a vested interest in Harman being worth more than they paid for it. They are unlikely to be interested in 2 or 3 % profit - they will be looking to make the company worth a lot more. That means skilled staff and full order books.

I worked for a company in the past bought by private equity. They bought our company and essentially closed it down, selling off bits and pieces of us to our competitors. They made their money, got their profits, but left a trail of human carnage behind.

The last 6 months of my time at this company were spent literally throwing away parts of the company, filling up 30 foot long dumpsters day in and day out until there was nothing left to throw out. 90% of my coworkers all lost their jobs. I spent 6 years working there trying to build this company up and my final days were throwing it all away.

Talk about depressing.

Your answer is very much rose colored. Private equity can extract value from a company rather than build it up.

 

[RattyMouse]

Harman/Ilford has always been run by their senior management regardless of the actual ownership, that won't change except that Pemberstones will most likely also have their director(s) on the board. They will be relying on the expertise of existing Harman employees but they may well have additional expertise that will be beneficial to the company.

It's highly speculative and wrong to make assumptions that they are investing in a short term way.

Ian

When is private equity ever a long term owner? By the very definition of such companies they are in it for the short term. Do you think Pemberstone wants to be in the film business for the long haul?

We already know one senior Harman owner has left the company with this transaction. Have more left? Have they all left?

 

[alanrockwood]

How much land does the Ilford facility sit upon and does anyone know how much it is worth? I know that this is lease by Ilford and now owned but it still may be the key why this transaction took place.

An important insight!

 

[MDR]

Pemberstone is also heavy into property development, Ilford/ Harman might just be the Price to pay to get the whole shebang. Regarding the previous Posts and civil Airports property developers love Airports and kill them quiet often. A lot of smaller Airports in the UK were closed and redeveloped (real estate) many smaller Airports are about to be closed so that they can be developed. The developers and the Mayors are often very Close and the latter do everything to facilitate development.

Regarding the future of Ilford if they can make enough Money to be attractive and a crown in the companies portofolio I see a longer future should the profits not be great even once I see a bleak future. I hope for the best so if you want Ilford film and paper to survive you have to buy their products the more you buy the longer they will exist.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

Harman/Ilford has always been run by their senior management regardless of the actual ownership, that won't change except...

...except without Simon.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

From Pemberstones website:

CORPORATE INVESTMENTS
Pemberstone has provided financing packages to a range of companies. Its stakes are structured in a variety of ways to suit the investment opportunity and the partners’ aspirations. Pemberstone is more than a financer, also providing its time, expertise, experience and contacts as a full business partner. As a private business partner, we are not tied to an exit timetable but can take a more flexible view depending on the specific needs and aims of the business and also management’s aspirations.

Some of our current investments include:

Then you can see a whole list of logos. Wonder how long they've had those and how they're doing...?

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

Drip... drip... drip...

 

[alanrockwood]

My former boss (or boss's boss), a CEO who was experienced in mergers and acquisitions, once told me that a typical pattern in an acquisition/merger is that the key people in upper management are around for about a year and a half. His analysis turned out to be prophetic when his company was sold. Harman/Ilford might end up being an exception to the rule, but I wouldn't be the farm on it.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

I sincerely hope this is great news for us wanting to see Ilford survive and even thrive. Simon leaving is a bit disconcerting but only because I hate to see things like that change. Sure wish he'd chime in. Nonetheless this investment is about making the company stronger and more profitable which will most likely result in serious streamlining.

My little dorm freezer is chock full of more film than I can likely shoot in the next 10 years and I'm sure they'll be some B&W film still made when I run low. In the meantime I might buy 10-20 pro packs of FP4+ to add to the freezer to keep myself happy...

 

[alanrockwood]

From Pemberstones website:

CORPORATE INVESTMENTS
... As a private business partner, we are not tied to an exit timetable but can take a more flexible view depending on the specific needs and aims of the business and also management’s aspirations...

.

Read it very carefully. It could mean a number of things.

 

[Sal Santamaura]

...We already know one senior Harman owner has left the company with this transaction. Have more left? Have they all left?

This morning Mr. Elton replied to my inquiry with the information (already posted in this thread) that Simon Galley exited the business at the point of sale. He said he'd pass on my "best wishes for a great future in whatever you do" greeting to Simon.

I responded to Mr. Elton's reply with a follow up question about the other three former owners, namely whether Misters Brierly, Harris and Taylor had also left HARMAN or if they (like Mr. Elton) stayed on. Just moments ago, Mr. Elton answered that Mr. Taylor has remained and the others retired.

 

[xo-whiplock]

I see this as a restructuring of Harmon that allows a comfortable way to give an "out" to management wanting it or needing it, and repositioning of other key management leaders to take the company in the direction needed; and with the help of a professional resource and financing to fund the aspirations of Harmon's directors who see the need to revise their marketing and product delivery. The tree must be pruned for more better fruit to be produced. With more fruit, more mouths can be fed using the same amount of water and sunlight.

 

[BrianShaw]

Drip... drip... drip...

You can say that again!

 

[MartinCrabtree]

Just for kicks I sent Ken Rockwell a message saying he missed the news of the day. Here's his response. And why I am concerned for the future of Ilford.

Thanks, but that's not photo news, its business news. Ilford sold out to Harman years ago, so no one cares who owns it now.

Thank you!


Ken


Sent from iPad 2

I know he is loved and appreciated here. So it won't hurt to let him know it is indeed "photo news." 17 pages in under 24 hours begs to differ. I considered an e-mail bomb but they track that stuff too easily now.

 

[Hatchetman]

It's strange how for a pessimist like myself (and by coincidence my 18 year "career" has been in finance) this news inevitably has me thinking about my photographic future. It's one of those sobering developments that reminds me of how precarious the future of non-digital photography is. I mean, we know how iffy things are at Kodak, and now this? Honestly without Kodak and/or Ilford, realistically I'm out.

The news has really hit me hard as well. Photography was my one hobby, a haven from a job I can't stand. Gets me wondering....is there a future at all? I guess probably somebody will make a decent film and a few types of paper, but man.....HOW DEPRESSING.

 

[MattKing]

I doubt that there is much of a market for Harman, except as a going concern. Private equity takes all sorts of forms. Some of those forms include long term investors interested in steady growth and profits. Some of the big pension plans and, dare I say it, Warren Buffet are not all that different from some private equity firms.

Just because there are disaters like that which befell Polaroid doesn't mean that all the players are that way.

Subject of course to the value of their lease, I expect Harman would be used to generate continuing and increasing profits.

I'm just disappointed that we didn't have a chance to throw a party for Simon - he leaves and there isn't any cake!

And I do hope the new owners consider it a wise investment to continue the support of APUG.

 

[flavio81]

I think we should stay reasonable. The guys are supposedly investors, and they are purchasing the company looking for a profit.

The BIG question here is if the profits are to be made by:

a) manufacturing and selling film
or
b) sale of the real estate involved

If Pemberstone Ventures is interested in (a), then we can rejoice, this is excellent news for us.
If Pemberstone Ventures is interested in (b), well, start stocking the freezer and give all power to Adox, Foma, and Ferrania.

It all depends on how profitable is the business. If Pemberstone is investing in (a), then they will make it more profitable and this means it could be sustained longer in time, which is good news for us as well.

We all liked Simon but if there was a sale, it's natural that his exit is because he is not anymore an owner. Simple as that, no need to think there is something mysterious or wrong here.

 

[Hatchetman]

Four senior managers off the payroll instantaneously...that has to save at least 500,000 pounds right off the bat.

 

[pdeeh]

I would be properly amazed if a UK company the size of Harman paid their directors that kind of money. But their company reports should reveal maximum remunerations

 

[Steve Smith]

Probably about half that.


Steve.

 

[pdeeh]

I think we should stay reasonable. [snip]
We all liked Simon but if there was a sale, it's natural that his exit is because he is not anymore an owner. Simple as that, no need to think there is something mysterious or wrong here.

I agree about being reasonable, but on the other hand insane speculation is a lot of fun.

However "it's natural that his exit is because he is not anymore an owner" is only an opinion.

The only facts we can be sure of are that Harman have been sold, Simon and some other directors don't work for them any more, and (most sure of all) we know nothing about the whys and wherefores of the sale except what has been stated in the press releases and other communications by the company.

Everything (EVERYTHING) else is speculation.

I'm glad the lizards didn't get Simon though, and hope he is very happy in Acapulco.

 

[pentaxuser]

We all liked Simon but if there was a sale, it's natural that his exit is because he is not anymore an owner. Simple as that, no need to think there is something mysterious or wrong here.

The Harman statement said he exited the company when it was sold. It may be as you state but this wouldn't automatically follow, would it? Otherwise all the other previous owners would have gone as well. Clearly they haven't as they have all the current expertise and it is in the new owners interest to keep that expertise.

Maybe Simon's expertise can be done without and if he was happy to leave then Pemberstone was happy to let him go but there are other possibilities to explain a sudden departure that it would seem that we should not discount until we know more. However I wouldn't expect us to get anything other than that simple statement of exiting the company

pentaxuser