This time last year, PizzaExpress was a stock market darling. For nearly 10
years it had been the exception to the rule that restaurant groups make lousy
investments. But today, shareholders have seen the value of their investment
drop to less than half of its peak. And only circling bidders are preventing the
share price falling further.
It was not a fundamental flaw in the business that drove the fall
from grace. Rather, a series of events conspired to create problems for the
chain's management, who are also seen as culpable for taking their eye off the
ball.
"The original strength of the brand has turned into a hostage to
fortune," says Peter Antenen from consultancy consortium Salon. "The purity of
the original format that made it easy to expand is looking thin by comparison
with other emerging rivals."
The terminology is particularly apt, since
the original success of PizzaExpress was based on introducing the British public
to an authentic, thin pizza style rather than the deep-pan version that chains
such as Pizza Hut were offering. It was more than just product that led to its
success. The skill of Pizza Express was in becoming the restaurant of choice for
the British middle class. It provided a close to fine-dining experience at a
reasonable price and customers grew to love it.
Like most great business
ideas, the PizzaExpress concept was straightforward. The skill was in the
execution - consistently providing a good product in pleasant surroundings. "It
was a grown-up offer. The lighting was particularly good and it was always
reliable in a sea of sometimes dodgy independents," says Antenen.
The
decade of dominance, however, has caused the management to lose its grip, with
Antenen likening the situation to that of British retailing icon, Marks &
Spencer. "Competitors were entering the market to make the PizzaExpress offer
look narrow. This put too much burden on the product, the pizza," he
says.
And so the great shrinking pizza debate was started. PizzaExpress
firmly denies that it ever reduced the size of its pizzas, but the public
perception - perhaps because of the larger sizes provided by rivals - was that
the pizzas were getting smaller. Whatever the truth, it was the perception that
mattered, and it damaged the PizzaExpress reputation.
Of all the young
bloods giving PizzaExpress problems, Ask Central has become the biggest threat.
The company has grown from one outlet, bought by brothers Sam and Adam Kaye in
1993, to nearly 150. The chain today is split between its original Ask brand and
the newer Zizzi, and the latter in particular is exposing some of PizzaExpress's
shortcomings. "Zizzi has far warmer interiors and offers wood-burning ovens, but
is much more than just pizza," says Antenen.
The City has been quick to
switch its affections. Analysts believe that Ask is likely to benefit if, as
seems likely, PizzaExpress is taken private and loses its stock-market listing.
Douglas Jack at WestLB Panmure says that Ask offers the best returns in the
licensed retail sector. He is forecasting a compound annual growth rate of 15%
over the next three years.
Ask's rollout began in earnest in the late
1990s. It breached the 100-outlet mark in 2000 and is scheduled to have more
than 170 restaurants by the end of this year. It puts it hot on the heels of
PizzaExpress, which operates 300 restaurants in the UK.
Duncan Lillie, a
partner at property adviser Shelley Sandzer, says Ask has benefited from
PizzaExpress blazing a trail - a kind of first-mover disadvantage. "Where
PizzaExpress is successful, Ask has gone in nearby. Where a PizzaExpress has
struggled, Ask knows to avoid the location," he explains.
Even Ask,
though, has endured some hostility from investors. When the founding Kaye
brothers sold £5m worth of shares at the end of last year, sentiment towards the
company became less friendly. But a good set of financial results in March
helped to reassure, and contrasted markedly with
PizzaExpress.
Fears confirmedThe woes of
PizzaExpress began last spring, when Andrew Saunders, an analyst at Numis
Securities, downgraded the stock. The following working day, CSFB, the broker to
PizzaExpress, also downgraded, saying it expected trading in London to be
weak.
The fears were confirmed in June, when the company said
like-for-like sales for the second half of its financial year would fall by 1%.
The falling numbers of tourists and declining economy were cited as the main
reasons. And things just became worse from there, with an admission in October
that the three months to the end of September had seen like-for-likes slump
4.4%.
Already rumours were growing that this former star of the stock
market would attract a bid, and the share price reached a low of 245p, almost a
quarter of where it had been six months previously. At the start of November the
company admitted the bid rumours were true.
Hugh Osmond, who with Luke
Johnson had started the company's dash for growth in the early 1990s, was behind
this first approach. He had formed a vehicle called Twigway to mount the bid,
teaming up with the owner of the Nando's chicken chain, Capricorn Ventures
International, and Sun Capital Partners.
Osmond and Johnson were former
City analysts who had decided to get their hands dirty and actually run
companies. They brought PizzaExpress to the stock market in 1993 by reversing it
into Star Computers, a shell company that had a stock-market listing. The pair
are well placed to judge the opportunity represented by the falling share price
of PizzaExpress. Osmond walked away from the deal by late November after being
refused full access to the PizzaExpress books and being turned down on his
requests for a £1.25m break fee if his bid was unsuccessful.
A month
after Osmond's bid, it was admitted there were other approaches, including one
from PizzaExpress's executive directors. Chief executive David Page was
understood to have teamed up with French finance house PAI.
But it took
Luke Johnson to table a formal bid at the end of February. His vehicle, Venice
Bidder, is backed by ABN Amro and Hawkpoint, and he has former PizzaExpress
director Ian Eldridge on board as well. The offer was priced at 367p, valuing
the company at £263m. Ironically, he was able to secure a £2.6m break fee if his
deal lapses or he is outbid. CVI has now teamed up with TDR Capital and last
week launched a 387p bid using a vehicle called GondolaExpress.
While the
bids have pushed the share price back towards £4, not all investors are happy.
Mark Wallace, of Analyst Investment Management, estimates the company is worth
at least £6 a share. "Our preferred option is a share buy-back. We would be
disappointed to see the company go," he says.
He points out that the
management have begun to make significant changes already: a new menu and larger
pizzas; no price increases since June 2001; dropping the £1.2m advertising
campaign launched in 2002; reorganising operational management; accelerating the
capital investment in the 140 restaurants that are more than five years
old.
Despite the woes, PizzaExpress is far from finished. At the year-end
it had no debt and nearly £18m cash in the bank. Wallace points out that
although profits after tax were down last year, they were still £25.6m,
representing an adjusted return of 16% on shareholders' funds. Ian Neill, boss
of Wagamama who was a PizzaExpress franchisee until 1996, says: "The company has
still got tremendous legs. The management ought to be trading it rather than it
be taken private."
Even if the company does change hands, there is no
certainty of success. Nigel Popham, an analyst at investment bank Teather &
Greenwood, says the history of brands being rebuilt is not good, but admits: "In
the private sector there is a better chance. The stock market in the next two to
three years will be a jungle."
The consensus view is that the company
will be taken private and eventually, in some form or another, will probably
come back to the stock market. But few believe it can ever repeat the soaraway
success of the 1990s. The reputation of the former darling is too
damaged.
Rise and fall of a
star1965 First PizzaExpress opened by Peter
Boizot in London's Soho.
1993 Luke Johnson and Hugh
Osmond reverse company into shell to obtain stock-market listing. Start of rapid
growth, with share price climbing to more than 900p.
April 2002
House broker CSFB downgrades, share price starts rapid
descent.
June 2002 Company warns sales will be down 1%
year-on-year for second half.
September 2002 Press
speculation about a bid denied.
October 2002 Releases
update reporting that there is no improvement in trading.
Early
November 2002 Company admits receiving a bid approach in 330p to 350p
range.
Late November 2002 Hugh Osmond bid via Twigway
collapses, and rumours of a Luke Johnson bid emerge.
December
2002 Approaches by others, including executive directors,
revealed.
February 2003 Interim results statement says
outlook remains uncertain.
27 February 2003 Venice
Bidder, vehicle created by Johnson and Ian Eldridge, makes recommended cash
offer of 367p valuing group at £263m.
17 March Capricorn
Ventures International, owner of Nando's, and TDR Capital, says it's looking at
bid.
27 March Venice claims 14.4% of
company.
3 April GondolaExpress, CVI and TDR's vehicle,
makes 387p a share offer.