If you google Standard Life and Vidacos Nominees it is clear that Vidacos Nominees often holds shares for Standard Life - they are frequently declared as agent/holder on the same declaration notice. YF and Vidacos also seem to crop up together with remarkable frequency. I suspect the Standard and YF/Meridian holdings are within the various Vidacos Nominee accounts, so it's not Citi holding directly.
Exists to protect the identity of the owner if the shares. They include II's and PI's. Chariot have told us many II's have bought in - we will not know until they disclose. We do know that Citigroup were at 6m and now at 18m. If it is now all PI's I would be very surprised. I cannot see YF finance or meridian capital or standard life - which nominee account are they hiding behind? I can see Paul welch and James burgess - two former ceo's
No surprise with the RNS as they tend to be very dull and never highlight the positives in enough detail..
It will be interesting how the present the new venture when it is announced, could be any of the following..
" we are pleased to announce we have secured more acreage in Mauritania, this acreage will give us better options in this country "
" we are pleased to announce we have secured some exciting new acreage in Mauritania, this acreage will give us better options in this country and we feel acquiring this acreage will increase the value of our portfolio . We are very excited with the potential of this asset and we feel this substantially increases our chances of a discovery in this country ."
I've been asking for some other clarification as well - Larry stated some of the funding was needed for 3Ds in Brazil as a better price was offered but this doesn't appear in the RNS just acceleration of 3Ds ? If the price was the deciding factor what was the difference and why is it not shown in the placement RNS.
Maybe but to state ownership by a Specific business at a specific level is guessing.
Large value blocks in nominee accounts are just as likely to be Pi. From HNW individuals.
Not that I want to take anything away from Pegasus research , its nice to see ... I still think PI have a significant shareholding .
What I say isn't going to make sense or perhaps have a point it's just a comment ...and its a bit off topic here..but placing 25pc of shares into ii. Hands seems sensible tactically if you want to change your holdings structure , particularly if your PI community are disgruntled ... Maybe there is no game changing deal and it was a ruse to adjust this risk...maybe not .. Who knows...but from a "corporate " perspective its a lot tidier.
separate question , they stated on the PI call that funds from the farm in were delayed , hence the working capital tie up, when was it they said it was delayed until?
Whenever it is, this means that they expected the date of the mystery transaction to happen before then... Just curious on that window.
One of you questioned them on this specifically - it was an excellent question .. Which was met with waffle from recollection and then a vague estimate of date. ( no change there then)
Correct me if I am wrong but the nominee accounts are totally different than an actual business investing .
Nominee accounts are mainly pi. Holdings , they are/were created as a vehicle for you and I to trade without requiring the paper certificates . The companies you state don't have increased holdings , they only hold the shares for you or I .
Simply put, The business attached to the accounts are holding the stock for individual investors .
Of course Any shareholders on your list without the " nominee " pre/suffix attached is a business that has invested. No cloak and dagger stuff here though . although yf and meridian are tight ...
....it would seem that the majority of Shares in CHAR are owned by PIs
NOTE: If you ever want to demand a general meeting only 5 % of the shareholders need to agree. ( of course it can't be for frivolous reasons)
Datafeed and UK data supplied by NBTrader and Digital Look.
While London South East do their best to maintain the high quality of the information displayed on this site,
we cannot be held responsible for any loss due to incorrect information found here. All information is provided free of charge, 'as-is', and you use it at your own risk.
The contents of all 'Chat' messages should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Limited, or its affiliates.
London South East does not authorise or approve this content, and reserves the right to remove items at its discretion.