We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
Potentially this share is worthless...there is no deal that I see that will allow this to rise
From the consensus of what a Pre-pack will mean if the vote goes against the deal on Friday, we get to this point:
The vote is lost.
The Lenders state to Interserve you immediately owe us £66m
Interserve state they cannot pay it
So Interserve sell off all parts of the business to the Lenders, then dissolve the PLC
What if at the point where the Lenders say you owe us £66m immediately..
Coltrane suddenly step in a provide the £66m for shares at 15p or less.
Then would we be in a position where the BoD could not sell all parts of interserve to the Lenders and administrate the PLC?
Would this provide Interserve more time and put Coltrane in a position where they could force their deal through after voting out the BoD on the 26th March?
Much bigger volume today. Is the sp about to collapse here?
feileb
There is always a worry.
Nothing is certain at this stage.
It looks like if it is a pre-pack then it will just carry on as before with the same supliers and customers and only the shareholders lose out.
CC2015
There was a lot of debate over the weekend about the affect on Clients and Suppliers.
Most are now in agreement with the Pre-pack Deal that has been planned. Suppliers and Clients have nothing to worry about.
It is only the shareholders that could be left with nothing.
it is dreadful.
the words "material dilution" in the rns was the giveaway.
as people klick on the is going to dive down (probably as cc2015 thought) these shares could go sub 5p as people realise they are actually worth less than 1 penny each and they sell off.
The real question is whether suppliers will continue to work for IRV regardless of successful vote or not.
And whether Clients will give them new business.
If not this all kicks the can down the road another year and we will be back here again.
If current SP is below 15.3p is there any advantage in investing further money in the OO compared to buying now at the current lower SP?
I don't want to take anything from open offer. Now price low IRV want money now from buyer and after 13 march who ever subscribe 19 for 1 without any certainty.
Love_You.
"Do not get me wrong"
Interserve 100% will have a future. If it is a liquidation, administration then the suppliers and everybody will lose. But there are still very profitable parts of the business that would be sold off by a liquidator very quickly.
If it is a pre-pack then it seems that only the shareholders lose and all the suppliers get paid and it carries on as before as a private company.
A pre-pack as we know is very bad news for existing shareholders.
Coltrane I suspect is holding out for a better deal than 5% which is being proposed. He has already manged to get it up from 2.5%.
He has said that he will just lose his stake rather than accept 5%
Hence it all comes to Friday and who blinks first!
As for sharholders Do you sell now or take the gamble?
"Do you feel lucky punk"
If it id s prepack it seeems that the suppliers will noy
I sold !!!
Apparently I can subscribe for about 90,000 shares. Should I ?????????. Or should I just sell at a loss ?
"Have I got this right? To maintain his current percentage holding, Matt241 would need to subscribe to the 19 for 1 offer at 15p a share. His entitlement is 53,200 shares, so he would be paying out an extra £8,140 to protect £400.
Is this a good idea?"
FredBass,
It's 15.3p per new share, but your calculations are spot on!
As for whether this is a good idea, that is for each investor to decide. I am not a shareholder here, but if I were, I suspect that I would have bailed out when this deal was announced.
Met - Kier are looking for a CEO? Now there’s a conundrum I wonder if they are thinking of double digit growth and point of entry into new markets and have any candidates in mind.
Well in Kiers case, the banks have increased their holding as a result of being the bookrunners for a complete fiasco of a rights issue. The story there was that Kier reported last summer everything to be hunky dory, then in the autumn, oops, everything not as rosy as we thought. Then they said that banks were tightening their credit terms to the construction industry (which is believable) so an RI was necessary. But by time that got under way, the sp had dropped below the issue price. A huge number of shareholders didn't take up rights so the banks ended up with the shares. Today they have revised up their debt and still not appointed a CEO. That is just 1 example of calamity in this sector. I am not sure that the banks are invested by choice, this is a house of cards that I guarantee will collapse soon.
So the banks seem to be into FM with Kier, Serco, Mitie, Capita in a big way. Some confidence then in the market, and the Governments outsourcing strategy is required. Tell me has anyone ever compared the size of other countries companies involved in construction, specialist services etc? Is there an underlying reason why the Uks largest companies are so small in comparison. Is it due to the procurement process or are other countries just better than UK companies. Well it could be in the future we have more difficulties in the UK FM sector once IRVs future is resolved. Guess it’s up to the banks to consider this and what it may mean to them in the future, and of course shareholders of these different organisation.
Fred very succinct post.
I had written off my holding here a long time back and they most certainly will not be screwing me for more cash
ATB
Well Kier are getting themselves into a complete mess now, apparently unable to get on top of their debt, revising debt figures upwards every few months (where have we seen that before). I would be very wary about investing in any construction or outsourcing companies at the moment. Especially those that have an element of both. In my opinion, Interserve is the second domino after Carillion. I would expect some, if not all of those companies you mention Pundit, to be in serious trouble in the next few years.
Met - you raise s good issue here regards IRV competitors. What will the future bring to players such as Mitie, Capita, Kier, Serco etc. who will no doubt get caught up in the backwash of all of this. Following the demise of Carillion and IRV what will customers think? Is out sourcing risky, does it really provide efficiencies these days, or has the majority of efficiency savings already been worked through? Let’s do two things 1/ review the SLA and KPI 2/ having got these delivered bring the services back in house and we can be confident of our future supply arrangements.
If I was a probation officer, prison officer health worker etc I would have more confidence in my future working for my employer directly, perhaps in the future I might be able to buy shares in UK Plc?
Kenj and Matt241
Have I got this right? To maintain his current percentage holding, Matt231 would need to subscribe to the 19 for 1 offer at 15p a share. His entitlement is 53,200 shares, so he would be paying out an extra £8,140 to protect £400.
Is this a good idea?
Also LLucan, you have to factor in "trust". If a company does not pay a supplier then another supplier is far less likely to supply them (because they will assume there is a good chance they won't be paid, just the same as the previous supplier wasn't paid).
Fate, but once the lenders directly own the subsidiaries then the supply chain will have not "self-interested plc" between them and the banks. Now we all know how the banks behave (as self-interested companies themselves). Hence without a "firewall" which was the plc Interserve then there really is no protection for the supply chain - the banks will be free to treat them however the banks want. If I was a supplier in this situation I would probably try and get paid what I was owed and then cease supplying anymore goods on credit - because from the ways the banks have behaved in the past there really is good reason to suspect they will not treat the people they deal with ethically.
How can the banks justify not rolling over the debt when Central Bankers has injected $4 Trillion dollars since 2008 and have left rates at 0.5% in the UK (supposedly to encourage lending by the banks). Is everything the public is told a lie? Central Bankers have been banging on about the need for companies to borrow to invest to prevent the general economy from going down the toilet. So how can the banks now be refusing to lend when interest rates are still set at a level (0.5%) which is meant to encourage banks to lend more. If Central Banks really wanted banks to start to cut back on their lending then why wouldn't they raise interest rates (up to 6% or so which is normally the sign that banks need to cut back on lending - because lending at 6% ultimately provides too great a return to the lender and sends the borrower bust, hence why banks would start to cut back lending once interest rates start to rise).
When all hell breaks out next week who will the contagion hit hardest? Will it be outsourcers, the likes of Mitie, Crapita and Serco who feel the pain. Or, are peers in the construction sector going get the flack? In particular anyone with JVs.
Coltrane & Farringdon between them own 34% of Interserve.
They have stated they will vote against the proposed deal and "burn their equity".
I have had a further look and think Bill tucker was correct in that the Lenders own about 10%. Aberdeen Standard Investments own 5%. I can't find any hard data, but believe Employees and Insiders own about 10%.
So it looks like...
Against the deal 34%
For the deal approx 25%
This leaves about 40% of shares with PIs and IIs - does anyone know the split?
I would estimate that to pass the deal, the company will need above 75% of all shareholders to vote.
This is an important vote, but over 75% seems high.
Also based on comments by some existing shareholders posting on these sites, it does not appear that all existing shareholders are prepared to back the deal.
It will be interesting to see if anything changes moving towards Fridays vote.....but a the moment I would have to say that sadly Administration is looking a very strong possibility now.