This article was written by

Follow

Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have no stock, option or similar derivative position in any of the companies mentioned, but may initiate a beneficial Long position through a purchase of the stock, or the purchase of call options or similar derivatives in YETI over the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Seeking Alpha’s Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.

Compensation picks are one of the more misunderstood mechanisms in the AFL draft system. They sit somewhere between a consolation prize and a strategic asset. The AFL awards them to clubs that lose key players through free agency without bringing equivalent talent through the door. For supporters trying to make sense of why their club suddenly holds an extra second-round selection, or why a rival has jumped ahead in the draft order, compensation picks are usually the answer.

This article breaks down how they work, when clubs receive them, why they have become such a significant part of list management, and how clubs use them in practice.

The basic idea behind compensation picks

When a player leaves a club through unrestricted or restricted free agency, that club loses an asset without receiving anything tangible in return. Trading at least gives the losing club picks or players. Free agency does not.

To soften the blow, the AFL introduced a compensation system in 2012 alongside the free agency rules. The principle is simple enough: if you lose a meaningful player to a rival without acquiring a comparable replacement, the league hands you a draft pick to help rebuild. The pick comes from thin air, slotted into the draft order rather than taken from another club, which means no one is directly punished for the recipient’s gain.

For fans wanting to look more closely at how these picks shape draft strategy, sites covering NRL predictions & tips often track the running tally of compensation selections each off-season, since they can shift the balance of an entire draft class.

How the AFL decides the value of a compensation pick

The league does not publish a precise formula. What we know is that the AFL Football Operations department weighs several factors when determining the band a compensation pick falls into. These factors include:

• The departing player’s salary at their new club
• Their age
• Their service with the losing club
• Whether the losing club has signed a free agent of similar standing

Compensation picks are graded into bands. The bands run from first-round compensation through end-of-first-round, second-round, third-round, and fourth-round compensation. A club that loses a 26-year-old All-Australian on a million-dollar contract will receive a far higher pick than one losing a 31-year-old fringe player on a modest deal.

The compensation is also offset. If a club loses a star but signs a free agent of equal value, the compensation can be reduced or wiped out altogether. The AFL is trying to compensate net losses, not gross ones.

Restricted versus unrestricted free agents

The type of free agency matters too. Restricted free agents are players with eight years of service who fall within the top 25 percent of earners at their club. Their original club has the right to match a rival’s offer and keep them. If the offer is matched, no compensation is needed because no one has left.

Unrestricted free agents have either ten years of service, or eight years plus a salary outside the top 25 percent. Their club cannot match offers, which is where compensation picks become most relevant. The vast majority of compensation selections handed out each year stem from unrestricted free agent departures.

A few notable examples

The history of compensation picks tells the story better than any explanation can. When Lance Franklin left Hawthorn for Sydney in 2013, the Hawks received pick 19 as compensation. Hawthorn had just won a premiership and would go on to win two more, partly because their list was deep and partly because they used assets like that pick wisely.

When Tom Lynch left Gold Coast for Richmond ahead of the 2019 season, the Suns received the first selection of the 2018 national draft as compensation, valued as pick number three overall after academy bids were factored in. Gold Coast turned that pick into Jack Lukosius.

When Jeremy Cameron departed GWS for Geelong, the Giants received pick seven as compensation, which they bundled into trades to acquire other players. Each case shows the system working as intended: a club loses a major piece, and the league hands them something they can either use directly or trade.

Why compensation picks change list management

Before free agency and compensation picks existed, clubs had less flexibility to plan around player movement. A club could lose its best player and receive nothing if that player simply held out and waited for a trade that never materialised.

The current system has changed how list managers think. A club at the bottom of the ladder now has options when a star wants out. They can trade the player and try to extract a haul from a rival club, or they can let the player walk through free agency and bank on a compensation pick that might be just as valuable. The choice depends on what other clubs are willing to offer in trades, how the player feels about the destination, how the AFL is likely to grade the compensation, and where the club sits on the ladder.

This dynamic has made the trade period more interesting, not less. Clubs now bluff each other with the threat of free agency, knowing the compensation pick acts as a floor on the value they will receive.

The criticism and the counterpoint

Compensation picks are not universally popular. Some commentators argue the system favours clubs that fail to retain their best players, effectively rewarding poor list management. Others point out that compensation can be unpredictable, with the AFL’s grading process sometimes producing picks that feel either too generous or too harsh given the player involved.

The counterpoint is that without compensation, free agency would be a one-way door. Star players would walk to bigger clubs in bigger markets, and struggling clubs would have no path back. The compensation pick system is the AFL’s attempt to keep the competition balanced, even if the execution is imperfect.

What to watch for at the next trade period

Each off-season, a handful of free agent decisions tend to dominate the news cycle. Watching how clubs handle these moments tells you a lot about their list strategy. A club that quickly accepts a free agent’s departure and starts planning around the compensation pick is operating differently from one that scrambles to negotiate a trade.

Compensation picks have become part of the language of the AFL trade period. Watch the grading announcements in the weeks after free agency closes, because that is when the next year’s draft order really takes shape.

This article was written by

Follow

Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have a beneficial long position in the shares of GOOGL, META, XOM either through stock ownership, options, or other derivatives. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Seeking Alpha’s Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.

The owner of Mr Kipling, Bisto and Sharwood’s branded foods reported a profit rise of almost 13% for 2025

The owner of some of the UK’s most cherished and iconic food brands heaped praise on standout performer Mr Kipling on Thursday, as Premier Foods served up financial results that comfortably surpassed City profit forecasts.

Mr Kipling — the brand synonymous with its “exceedingly good cakes” strapline, which has been in continuous use since 1967 when the range first launched — achieved its “biggest year ever” in 2025.

The stellar performance was driven by a fresh addition to the teatime treat category: cake tubs, as reported by City AM.

Alex Whitehouse, chief executive of the £1.8bn company, attributed the success to capitalising on a “bitesize trend” in packaging specifically engineered to facilitate sharing.

“When people want to treat themselves, they want it to be worthwhile, so indulgent, but they might only want a small amount. This is one of the reasons we believe this range has done so well, as they are catering to the trend to treat yourself, with a small, bitesize treat.”

Previous product innovations have included Mr Kipling-branded birthday cake tarts, lunchbox slices, and breakfast bakes.

“Boosted by these innovations, this has been Mr Kipling’s biggest ever year”, Whitehouse added.

The FTSE 250 company posted a pre-tax profit of £181.9m, representing a rise of nearly 13 per cent, comfortably beating market expectations. Headline revenue climbed 2.5 per cent to £1.175bn for the year to 28 March. Full-year headline branded revenue climbed 3.4 per cent overall, accelerating to 4.7 per cent in the second half of the year as newly launched products gained momentum — among them the Fuel10k yoghurt and granola brand.

Clive Black, at Shore Capital, said “Premier has beaten out 2026 trading profit expectations due to balanced progress across the firm, innovation, UK [market] share gains …. And good M&A”.

The St Albans-headquartered firm employs 4,000 staff across 13 UK sites, and also produces Bisto, alongside the Homepride, Lloyd Grossman and Sharwood’s cooking sauce ranges. In September, it acquired the Merchant Gourmet ready meals brand.

Its two bakeries, located in Stoke and Barnsley, churn out 220m packs of cakes and pies annually. Other Premier sites include the Ambrosia creamery in Devon, the Moreton bakery in Wirral which makes Mini Rolls, its savoury products factory in Worksop which makes OXO and Bisto, a central warehousing hub in Tamworth, and a finance base in Manchester.

Premier’s shares responded positively, rising nearly 3 per cent to 203p — the stock’s strongest position since May last year.

Black further noted: “We see this highly successful proprietary branded British food manufacturer as being fundamentally undervalued”. He suggested 250p “would be a fairer base” for the stock.

Q4: 2026-05-13 Earnings Summary

EPS of $0.57 misses by $0.01

 | Revenue of $57.77M (10.23% Y/Y) misses by $4.19M

This article was written by

Follow

FTSE 100 commercial property developer Landsec is set to scale up its investment in UK retail property, as chief executive Mark Allan insists there is no slowdown in consumer spending

Landsec, Britain’s largest commercial property developer, is set to pivot towards retail property, bucking pessimistic sentiment in the market by indicating there is no slowdown in consumer spending.

The FTSE 100 company oversees a property portfolio where office rents have climbed sharply, as elevated construction cost inflation and interest rates constrain supply, while demand surges. It now aims to increase its investment in retail property.

“Growing our investment in major retail destinations remains our highest conviction call, given its high income yield and the attractive income growth on offer for the right assets,” the company stated in its full-year results.

The developer controls a portfolio of Britain’s largest shopping centres, including Bluewater in Kent, Liverpool One and the Westgate in Oxford, as reported by City AM. Its properties also include MediaCity in Salford, and it is also working on residential developments in Mayfield in Manchester.

Yet Britons’ purchasing power is declining, as inflation concerns triggered by the Iran war have compounded existing cost-of-living challenges facing households.

In April, consumer confidence dropped to a two-year low and retail footfall declined by more than 10 per cent.

However, Mark Allan, Landsec’s chief executive, stated he has not witnessed this fall-off in consumer spending at the firm’s retail sites.

Landsec’s latest data demonstrates “strong growth in spending and footfall, so no slowdown at all,” Allan remarked when unveiling the company’s results. He continued: “I think that’s largely a function of a concentration of spending into fewer locations rather than being indicative of what’s happening perhaps across the wider market.

“But we see no slowdown in activity there at all, and most importantly for us, no slowdown in leasing demand.”

Total retail sales at Landsec locations are up 6.3 per cent compared to the 1.1 per cent nation-wide average growth recorded by the British Retail Consortium.

Major brands such as Uniqlo, Sephora and those under the Inditex umbrella – which includes Zara and Bershka – have opened more outlets at Landsec sites than anywhere else, he said.

“Retail offers the most compelling returns in terms of existing income and growth potential,” he added.

Construction costs for London offices have surged by 41 per cent over the past five years, according to Landsec data.

While both retail and office property have seen rents rocket owing to constrained supply, Landsec claims its initial income yield from retail is 200 basis points higher than the return on an investment in office property.

The company stated its most recent London office development programme is due to complete within the next few months, and it has no intentions of investing in new offices.

Last year, Landsec revealed plans to reduce its exposure in office property from £6bn to approximately £4bn, though the firm has confirmed it will remain substantially invested in its existing office portfolio. The firm recorded a pre-tax profit of £346m in the year to March, down 12 per cent from the previous year, while rental income rose by five per cent to £562m.

Landsec’s share price climbed by 1.6 per cent on Thursday to 580p, leaving the stock down six per cent in the year to date.

Operator

Thank you for standing by. My name is Jay, and I will be your conference operator today. At this time, I would like to welcome everyone to the Accelerant First Quarter 2026 Earnings Call. [Operator Instructions] I would now like to turn the conference over to Ray Iardella, Head of Investor Relations. You may begin.

Raymond Iardella
Head of Investor Relations

Thank you, operator, and welcome, everyone, to Accelerant’s First Quarter 2026 Earnings Conference Call. Joining me on today’s call are Jeff Radke, Accelerant’s Chairman and CEO; Linda Huber, CFO; and Ryan Schiller, Head of Strategy. The remarks will be followed by a Q&A session.

Yesterday, we issued a press release related to our first quarter 2026 financial results, filed our Form 10-Q and have also posted our updated investor presentation. All of these can be found on our IR website at www.investor.accelerant.ai. Before we get started, I’d like to remind you that our remarks today will include forward-looking statements, including those regarding our future plans, objectives, expected performance and in particular, guidance for second quarter and full year 2026.

Actual results may vary materially from today’s statements. Information concerning risks, uncertainties and other factors that could cause these results to differ is included in our SEC filings, including those stated in the Risk Factors section of