Ailing construction giant Fletcher Building slashes earnings guidance as housing sales slow - share price tanks

Business / news

Fletcher Building is warning that profits for the year to June could be as much as $140 million lower than it forecast less than three months ago

13th May 24, 10:08am by David Hargreaves

It all goes from bad to worse for the country's ailing construction behemoth Fletcher Building [FBU].

Following the news at the half-year result announcement in February that both its chairman Bruce Hassall and chief executive Ross Taylor were falling on their swords, the company's now announced that profits for the year to June might be as much as $140 million less than forecast in that February announcement.

And the company told NZX that market conditions across its materials and distribution divisions have weakened throughout the financial year.

In early trading on the NZX on Monday the Fletcher shares were down 51 cents - or 14,5% - to $3.00. The share price is down about 37% since the start of 2024.

Fletcher said in respect to its business operations, in New Zealand, market volumes to date in the second half of the year have moved about 5% lower than they were in the second quarter of the year, while in Australia market volumes to date in the second half of the year are about 10% lower compared with the second quarter of the financial year.

"There has also been a notable slowdown in house sales in the New Zealand market and an end to the house price momentum seen through the first half of FY24," the company said.

In February, Fletcher Building forecast earnings before interest and tax (EBIT) before 'significant items' of between $540 million and $640 million.

The new, updated, forecast is for between $500 and $530 million.

If we compare the potential top end of the original forecast ($640 million) with the bottom end of the new forecast ($500 million) it means the new forecast is as much as $140 million, or 22% lower.

If we look at the 'midpoint' of the original forecast, it was $590 million, while the new 'midpoint' is $515 million. So, that's a $75 million - or 13% reduction.

The company said it expects that net debt at June 30, 2024 will be in a range of $1.9 billion to $2.0 billion. "The company’s liquidity profile remains robust, with $2.8 billion of debt facilities in place and liquidity at 30 June 2024 is expected to be $0.8 billion to $0.9 billion," the company said.

Acting chief executive Nick Traber said that given current conditions, "our focus has been on managing things within our control", in particular: customer service; costs and margins; cash flows; capital allocation; funding; and closing out the remaining legacy construction projects.

"Fletcher Building has many strongly positioned core business assets that have demonstrated resilience in current market conditions. Our immediate priorities are to optimise the performance of each of our businesses, close out legacy issues and tightly manage risks to maximise our ability to deliver shareholder value. Our people are integral to achieving this and I would like to thank each of them for their ongoing efforts as we navigate the tougher market environment."

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.

48 Comments

by HouseMouse | 13th May 24, 10:28am 1715552916

Who would have thought!

by ChrisOfNoFame | 13th May 24, 11:08am 1715555318

There would have been many that believed the bad news was all out. However, the share price action gave clear signals the market wasn't convinced. One hopes that those who bought the dip had stops to exit before getting hammered.

by Jonny.Foe | 13th May 24, 10:33am 1715553229

Shocked I tell you. We have been sliding down the screed, here comes the cliff.

by Te Kooti | 13th May 24, 10:38am 1715553521

There is a solid MBA case study here if anyone feels like writing it up.

by ChrisOfNoFame | 13th May 24, 10:50am 1715554257

It could be titled: "Why fiefdoms are not good business".

by IT GUY | 13th May 24, 12:18pm 1715559494

Looking forward to the "Risk Management by Spreadsheet" section.....

by Grattaway | 13th May 24, 10:55am 1715554533

Pretty sure it has been written a few times before

You would think that Govt could get some very sharp pricing on new social housing in the current environment

even real bang for the bucks infrastructure

If Fletchers bottom line is tanking are other big players in trouble?

by ChrisOfNoFame | 13th May 24, 11:04am 1715555040

"If Fletchers bottom line is tanking are other big players in trouble? "

Those with debt and falling sales absolutely are! The winter is looking bleak across the entire spectrum - not just building - and jobs losses will mount as businesses are forced to reduce costs for the new environment.

(Have I mentioned that the RBNZ should have started the normalization of interest rates back in Nov '23 to avoid this carnage? Why, yes, I think I have. Boom / Bust cycles are only fun for ghouls and fools, and those with inflated egos that think they know best.)

by Murray Falconer | 13th May 24, 2:28pm 1715567308

Have I mentioned that the RBNZ should have started the normalization of interest rates back in Nov '23 to avoid this carnage? Why, yes, I think I have.

What are normal interest rates? Why should debt be priced so low since it encourages people to leverage up - isn't debt correlated with risk/instability? My point is, maybe interest rates should never have been so low (and not just the covid rates) and to lower them now would just be can kicking on the road back to normal/stable financial system.

by ChrisOfNoFame | 13th May 24, 4:04pm 1715573063

Taking your logic a step further - why not just fix interest rates at 20%? By your logic - that'd solve all the problems? ;-)

On a more serious note - interest is the 'cost' of borrowing. If people borrow excessively - then is it the cost of money that is the problem? Or is it what people are borrowing for? (Hint: The huge rises in NZ's private debt have gone largely into real estate.)

by Murray Falconer | 13th May 24, 8:58pm 1715590681

Taking your logic a step further - why not just fix interest rates at 20%? By your logic - that'd solve all the problems? ;-)

To play the game, no it may not solve all the problems. That said, we certainly wouldn't have had the massive house price inflation (not part of CPI, grrr) so housing would be more affordable relative to people's ability to save from wages (an improvement in my view).

If people borrow excessively - then is it the cost of money that is the problem? Or is it what people are borrowing for?

I think both are a problem, but the cost of money is only a problem if you're borrowed excessively to begin with. People are people and love a sale, I would argue debt has been on sale which has led to some of the excessive borrowing. As you say, a lot of the debt has ended up in real estate (as opposed to businesses) courtesy of the RBNZ risk weightings and what I consider favourable government tax and benefit policies such as the accommodation supplement.

by ChrisOfNoFame | 13th May 24, 10:56am 1715554570

And if you think there won't be further downgrades then I have a bridge to sell.

Once the bad news is all out - and the RBNZ has come to realisation that the OCR is a stupid tool in the hands of stupid people - FBU might be worth a punt.

But it would be a punt! NZ government want the cost to build reduced and imported products (apparently) are the answer. Quality be damned. In any event, FBU will be hit by falling sales / margins due to increased competition.

(edited: when I said 'punt' - I was referring to long term holders looking for growth with a decent, and increasing, yield. For technical analysts, FBU is an excellent trading stock!)

by nktokyo | 13th May 24, 11:13am 1715555586

Hopefully the government stands their ground on allowing cheaper and just as good building supplies to be approved here. F**k Fletchers and their rebate-milking, blacklisting, dirty ways of doing business.

by Te Kooti | 13th May 24, 11:17am 1715555854

The construction and building supplies industry is rotten to the core, both here and in Australia. Very few will be shedding a tear for Fletchers, more amazement at their incompetence.

by interesting1234 | 13th May 24, 12:01pm 1715558488

It's almost as if people couldn't continue borrowing with cheap debt forever to fund ever-increasing prices of houses and building materials. Who could have ever possibly predicted this (sarc)

by Nzdan | 13th May 24, 12:57pm 1715561852

But but but I thought house prices cost $xxxx amount because that's just how much they cost to build.

Nothing to do with ever increasing levels of debt allowing the cost of land, materials etc to rise to match the increase in purchasing power.

_{also (sarc)}

by HughJorgan | 13th May 24, 11:27am 1715556479

Personally I’d like to see ITM tank as well.

The whole industry needs to default so that it can be built to facilitate construction rather than prohibit builders using alternate suppliers.

Doni think this event with FBU will help construction prices come down? I doubt it. Probably the opposite.

by NoRegrets | 13th May 24, 11:29am 1715556546

Over managed and under delivering. Needs all the entitlement costs taken out and a stronger focus on customers. Hasn’t changed its spots in 40 years. Probably best outcome for shareholders is a takeover from offshore.

by HouseMouse | 13th May 24, 11:37am 1715557060

It amply demonstrates that large private entities can be just as complacent, mediocre, inefficient and non-agile as public bureaucracy.

by dumbthoughts | 13th May 24, 11:35am 1715556933

The real question here is how does yours truly get one of these jobs in the likes of Fletchers management (heck even the Warehouse Group would do) or local/national government where you can seem to endlessly fail upwards for enormous amounts of money and even greener pastures when you finally get kicked out or fall on your sword.

I'm fed up of getting up in the morning, delivering results for my customers and only being paid modestly for a hard day's graft.

I want huge piles of cash for having the Turdas touch ... to borrow from the best Irish band (sorry U2) "everybody else is doing it, so why can't we?"

by Te Kooti | 13th May 24, 11:42am 1715557337

You probably work hard, speak your mind and have a set of values - so totally unsuited for managerial class.

by HouseMouse | 13th May 24, 11:52am 1715557978

Lol

by dumbthoughts | 13th May 24, 11:54am 1715558068

That's very kind of you, but then again what did Del Boy once say "a conscience is nice, but business is business".

In all seriousness, it does blow my mind how many smart, talented, innovative people I meet who run great businesses, or do good work in the community, none of whom ever seem to make it into this nebulous "management class" (which is a problem across public and private sectors) that seems to adept at draining cash from the system with little-to-no appreciable benefit for the average pleb on the street.

The Warehouse Group is a great example of this. Most of the management has been stinking up the joint for years (including that imported CEO who is as much use as a pair of sunglasses on a bloke with one ear) and what have they managed to do for all their millions of pay and rewards? Destroy shareholder value, and not much more. FBU being another one.

by Te Kooti | 13th May 24, 12:01pm 1715558496

Management is more about politics than ability. The ability to toe the line, deny reality in the face of overwhelming evidence, avoid answering questions, not questioning your bosses decisions, not challenging, servitude and compliance are what you need.

by dumbthoughts | 13th May 24, 12:22pm 1715559762

Very true. I'm being a bit facetious with my comments - I'm "worldly" enough to know that it's really the political manoeuvering that gets you to where you need to be. Same goes with the likes of management consultants, who are just their to sell back to an organisation its own ideas from an internal perspective in order to be able to cop flak for any pushback and provide a point of blame deflection.

by HouseMouse | 13th May 24, 12:03pm 1715558593

Good points.

And we could also have a conversation about board directors. Often journeymen (and women) clicking their late-career tickets in a very lucrative way. It’s often jobs for mates. And from what I have seen, they are often lacking in the ability to think outside the square and be truly strategic (they all call themselves ‘strategic’ but many aren’t, in terms of the proper meaning of the word)

by Colin Cameron | 15th May 24, 7:58am 1715716729

Also like Theresa Gutting did to Telecom but hey we got to have inclusion. Also that Dutch imported CEO of Fonterra that cost them 6 million a year and everything he did Fonterra has now sold at billions of loses and helped China build its dairy herd all on our genetics. Or Zespri how they helped overseas farmers plant gold kiwifruit but now complain that 5000 hectares of gold minum is illegal in China. Duh you top paid management are absolute F...wits.

by interesting1234 | 13th May 24, 12:03pm 1715558627

That, or the set of values would get shouted down in management by those around and above until confirmity or resignation on principal.

by MikeM | 13th May 24, 1:07pm 1715562463

Ask Judith Collins. At the helm of the greatest ever election failure and somehow managed to hold on to her job until Luxon arrived on the scene. She's got it down to a fine art.

by Jack Lumber | 13th May 24, 9:30pm 1715592630

People get promoted relative to their level of incompetence very often. NZ is so small it’s a boys club.

by WestieAJ | 13th May 24, 11:39am 1715557192

They should have used their investment grade rating ( while they still had it) to borrow long to fund low interest rate 5 year mortgages for their Fletcher Living customers. If your product is unaffordable then you have to do something to change that.

by HouseMouse | 13th May 24, 11:54am 1715558053

That would be far too strategic!!!

by HughJorgan | 13th May 24, 12:29pm 1715560150

The problem is you’d be borrowing long, say 20Y USPP and lending short, say 5Y max, to the occupants. The duration and volume required just wouldn’t marry up to be efficient.

by Dale Smith | 13th May 24, 1:41pm 1715564508

Fletchers, the early days:

Start at 2:39 Grandad Gets Sent To A Spanish Jail | Only Fools and Horses | BBC Comedy Greats (youtube.com)

by Kjeldorian | 13th May 24, 3:11pm 1715569880

If $500m EBIT is ailing then I wish my business was ailing as well.

by GenerationY | 13th May 24, 3:23pm 1715570627

Why do businesses use EBIT when they likely have a huge interest expense? Am I missing something - shouldnt we be reporting and focused on NOPAT or Forecast Cashflow from operations?

by GenerationY | 13th May 24, 3:25pm 1715570729

I just went and had a look at the actual release and there is no information given on NOPAT or Cash Flows so I'm guessing its not great news..

by lt84 | 13th May 24, 3:26pm 1715570780

Most of the Fletcher shareholders are probably Nats voters so they reaped what they sowed a messed economy

by VancouverKiwi | 13th May 24, 4:50pm 1715575854

The majority of shareholders are pension and investment funds, which due to their mandates must hold x% of their fund in NZX-listed businesses usually relative to size. (The top 10 shareholders can be viewed on the companies office website)

Unfortunately, as a result basically every NZ'er with a Kiwisaver account will have a portion of their funds (and any other funds they hold) in Fletcher shares, meaning a lot of us here will suffer from this

by Grattaway | 13th May 24, 6:08pm 1715580492

This is what i find a bit scary

a global slump, recession or what ever - even if only NZ will decimate lots of retirees savings

and it will cause major loss of confidence which will also have long term consequences to saving habits

by ChrisOfNoFame | 13th May 24, 7:00pm 1715583658

"Unfortunately, as a result basically every NZ'er with a Kiwisaver account will have a portion of their funds [...] in Fletcher shares, meaning a lot of us here will suffer from this."

Not "every". My "aggressive" doesn't. And I can't imagine that other similar funds would either. (My fund does have its dogs though ... but nothing as bad a FBU.)

NZ index linked funds, though? Guaranteed.

by VancouverKiwi | 14th May 24, 8:35am 1715632544

Fair comment and good observation, indexes will need to based on being a top-50. I note that Fletchers is at the higher end of ESG ratings (not making a comment on this either way, just an observation) in ANZ so it is possible socially responsible indexes/ funds may have an outsized exposure, although uncertain and would need to review fund-by-fund

by ChrisOfNoFame | 14th May 24, 11:59am 1715644740

If you're interested in an alternative to index based investing, try this: Buy the index but exclude any and all stocks that have been a) falling for the past 18 months or more and b) have had flatlining for 5 years. What's left is the cream - floating slowly to the top. (You'll nee to review every 3-6 months to check you still have the optimum mix.)

by Colin Cameron | 15th May 24, 8:16am 1715717818

And those funds select the board and ceos so really when you have an incompetent board it means the fund managers really don't have a clue. Hence why I don't have a kiwisaver. Back myself over any shiny shoe brigade any day of the week

by DIYman | 13th May 24, 7:23pm 1715585010

Not sure why the anti ITM posting.

There are many prices out there for the same thing, you just have to find the best price. Fortunately M10 have a special deal that ITM and others like Carters don't have.

I needed specific LVL stick of timber for some house alterations, price at mitre ten was $101, price at Bunnings , same specification stick from the same factory, was $74. Miter ten gave 15% off bringing it down to $64. The guy behind the desk said depending on what kind of account I had at Carters it was probably $50.

I discovered the same with insulation, a supplier in Christchurch was 15% under the M10 price, and they beat it by another 15%,

by HughJorgan | 14th May 24, 12:08am 1715602091

You honestly think price matching each item at the counter is a good solution?

If you are a builders with ITM you are not allowed to shop with another merchant and you are not allowed to source your supplies direct with the manufacturer.

by nigelh | 14th May 24, 9:02am 1715634179

I think it's too much hassle for the average builder to shop around and have multiple accounts. This is an aspect that ITM, Placemakers (FB), Carters etc rely on. I do what you do but I'm an ad hoc purchaser of building materials.

ITM not allowing you to purchase from other merchants I'd think would fall foul of some law but maybe ITMs contract takes care of this.

Can understand not be able to source direct from the manufacturer otherwise it's pointless having distributors.

The average builder is unlikely to read the contract so would just accept what's in ITM's contract without trying to negotiate changes (not that I'd think they'd have any success)

by endlesslearner | 16th May 24, 11:42am 1715816556

Fletcher's debt in a deflationary environment is a real headache. As prices drop, the debt's value increases, making it way tougher to pay off. This situation really puts the squeeze on their finances and growth