Loss halves value of City Site
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.CITY SITE Estates, the troubled property company, saw almost 50 per cent wiped off its market value after it announced sharply increased losses and warned that it 'could be some time' before it will be able to resume paying dividends, writes Heather Connon.
The group lost pounds 18m in the year to September, against pounds 3.4m in the previous year. Although it made a pounds 353,000 operating profit, following a pounds 1.6m loss last time, this was wiped out by a pounds 15.3m property provision and a pounds 3m write-off of goodwill following the disposal of a subsidiary.
Its shares, which reached a high of 280p in 1989, closed down 11p at 13p, giving the group a market value of just pounds 2m.
Louis Goodman, the managing director, said the company had agreed the terms of the sale of a 'major property' that will be announced soon.
Net assets fell from 174p to 109p a share, or 9p on a fully diluted basis. The losses have wiped out the group's distributable reserves.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments