Perhaps becoming more investable?



FEVR – has been falling for some time now.
It’s P/E has halved over the recent times and it has experienced a lot of negative selling pressure.
However, it appears that a forward P/E of 27 ish is reasonable considering the early growth position of FEVR in the United States and in particular it has struck the relationship in the Tequila Market and promoting gin in the USA.

Kevin Havelock a NED at FEVR and has a long history in the drinks history shelled out £289K on the stock at a price £21.77 and I guess I have a relative bargain at an entry point of £18.56.
Still relativity counts for nowt if it keeps falling.
I see also that Smithson added FEVR to it’s list recently also at around £21.

Time will tell.


It was massively over hyped an massively overvalued. When I queried the value (at about £30) I was told it was justified because it might get taken over by Coke. A share price which levitates above intrinsic value on very vague takeover hopes is a clear sell.


At £30 perhaps yes – at £17-18 – with a market just starting in the US and an alliance with the largest Tequila brand, maybe it still is, but maybe it has a strong growth future, despite the tailing off of the growth in the UK, its main market.

Time will tell – the Trading update was more positive about the US and ROW than anticipated back in July, hence today’s hike.



FEVR Fevertree roaring away. Up 4.87%. Wonder if its been tipped today !!!

Looks like it could break out and fill the gap at 2300…then would meet resistance at 2425/2250…

Other boards say its been touted as a takeover by Diageo or Britvic.


Roger - Let’s hope so, I’m up 22% and some more wouldn’t go amiss in a relatively short space of time.



So do you still believe it was a good investment at £18?

No, I thought not.


Hugh, I do and it is an even better one at 1459 the price on my screen just now.

Thank you for the sarcasm, perhaps you will some day post something constructive.



I think it’s pretty ‘constructive’ to warn shareholders and investors that a share trading north of £30 is massively overvalued and will fall, if that view is well founded and proves to be correct. But perhaps you’re one of those sad private investors who only wish to read ‘positive’ views about shares they own. In which case, why look at a discussion board where both positive and negative opinions are (or ought to be) welcome?


Hugh – let us cool it M8 – non of this matters – I post regularly – your point is valid at £30+ and that was never in dispute – I figure Fevertree has a global future and that like many companies there are stumbling blocks along the way and there will be growing pains in the US and in the emerging world as well. On balance though I think the franchise is very strong, the image of the company is very rich and the balance sheet is rock solid.
In time this should show through, hence my view that 14XX is a good entry (it is now over 1500) and 1800 whilst not as favourable, is within range.

Games – no offence there old dude !


Fine and point taken. But one reason I don’t post much on these boards is because most of those looking own the share and a very large proportion only want to hear positive opinions and aren’t shy at yelling at those who have a different view. Personally I’m the opposite way around: if I own a share and therefore obviously think it’s likely to outperform (take Halma for example, about which I have posted here) I am way, way more interested in an informed but negative view than I am in some clueless clown saying "this is going to the moon, next stop £[meaningless figure inserted here] etc. The guy with the informed negative view challenges my own thinking - he (or she) might be wrong, but at least I’m forced to think about why that’s so, and why I’m still correct.

I don’t dispute that Fevertree created a great brand and a good business, but it was subject to ridiculous levels of hype as an investment and when people say the valuation is justified because it might be taken over (i.e. it’s not justified as a stand-alone business) its time to get out.


Hugh, I’m in both camps, hop to ULVR and you will see I have posted critical and +ve views on the company. Halma was a good choice.



Then we agree in general, if not on the specific of this share. But you did say “perhaps you will some day post something constructive” and I don’t accept that a negative view on a share isn’t a constructive view.


Correct Hugh – heats off - on with more constructive comments – see next post.



My constructive view, which has proved to be correct (and therefore of greater value than a ‘positive’ comment which has proved to be wrong) was that this share was overhyped and over valued and that when people justify a valuation with vague takeover hopes, the share should be avoided.

I think that’s perfectly constructive for those who don’t wish to live in an echo chamber.


Hugh – I thought you had reformed your approach. The assessment of the valuation of a company doesn’t take place in the matter of a week or so. Don’t you think the main reason for the fall is the overall market hammering over the last short period?
You are so intent on being right – in the stock market it is very difficult to be right.
Let us look at Fevertree in a few years time to see where it is going and let us see if the current range of 1400 where it sits now and 1800 at the time of writing at the start of this discussion is relevant.
It might be at 500 who knows, it might go bust, or it might be at a number that dwarfs either of those levels.

Games – End of discussion



That’s what you said. I simply pointed out that someone saying a share is over valued and why is equally constructive as some one else saying why they think it’s undervalued, and if the former proves to be correct even more so, and surely even you would have to accept that a fall from £30 to £14 is hardly a little blip.