Charles Jillings, CEO of Utilico, energized by strong economic momentum across Latin America. Watch the video 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.
Bucky 0 share no vote. Lots to say.
Is there a minimum number of shares you need to hold to obtain a vote
Pont taken fran, but the difference I see with Interserve and Thomas Cook and others is that those were failing businesses. Here we have a business that has a 100 + year resource that has proven value backed up by crop trials and TORPS to the tune of 13mta. There is a sound business that'll be throwing off a wall of cash. The problem is simply funding to access the resource. If there wasnt a sound business here then AAL wouldn't be buying it for several hundred million quid (when you add the debt to the 5.5p)
That's a very different proposition and why I think another party might well emerge and why a no vote (and maybe the party will emerge pre-vote0 is worth the gamble. Otherwise, as I say, better take the 5.5p om Monday morning.
Got it in one.
secrets
Secrets, yes it sticks in the throat that some execs have been very generous to themselves 9Fraser and the Cat) but regardless of how they got 'em, they have 'em and it'll sting Fraser if his 7 million quid payout is wiped out. That would be a small bit of karma. Better still if the company is liquidated or falls into the hands of another party other than AAL in admin.
Better still of course if the BOD find the funding. It's still disingenuous to cite previous PI participation in underwritten placings versus PI appetite to raise funds when their alternative is getting wiped out. JPM advised on the funding and looked how that turned out, so their advice/opinion on PI funding isnt worth ****. They didn't even try. Lets vote NO, and see how hard they try when their 7M and 2M quid is heading down the pan.
Long term, agree with you on the last point. Fortunately my point of entry was low and I did think that someone else may emerge from the shadows with a higher bid but as time goes by this looks less and less likely. I think what happened at Interserve is a lesson in what happens when a deal is voted down.
“I'm voting NO and then lets see how hard Fraser tries to save his 7 million quid payout/125 million shares and Scrimshaws 2 million quid payout/44 million shares.”
To be fair, RS has purchased the majority of his shares, Failer, sorry Fraser hasn’t. However, the biggest winner here is from a former director who spent not a single jot on his shares.
Answers on a postcard.
secrets
Fran, if that's the case, why wouldn't Scrimshaw be more categorical with his view on what happens in the event of a NO vote. Maybe the administrators would be called in before March 31, but I don't think they'll be waiting in the car park in Scarborough on the 3rd. There is time for someone to step out of the shadows.
If I was holding millions, then maybe I'd think differently, but most PI holdings are now worth very little. Cashing in at 5.5p is not going to make a big difference. It's certainly not going to give me enough back to reinvest and recoup my losses. If this company survives, even with massive dilution, I have a chance of recovering my losses. So the gamble is worth a NO vote.
Anyone who doesn't want to vote NO should sell their shares on Monday for 5.5p. If you're concerned about a no vote or want to vote yes to the deal, why bother continuing to hold. You wont get the 5.5p if the vote is yes until mid April. You can get your 5.5p by selling on Monday morning.
That's cold fo sho Fran,
my view, and don't forget I don't hold here, is one of vengeance...............!
All the best (in you pre pack , does sound familiar, holding .........! :)
Chris Spencer-Phillips, from ShareSoc, said “Jupiter could come up with an alternative funding package which might encourage Anglo American to offer more."
He mentioned that ShareSoc could also help facilitate that.
I agree with illbetabuck that the Jupiter fund manager is not powerful enough in term of organising or providing further funding. They would push and support such a proposal.
Only Qatar, Norwegian bank, Polygon that have more financial resource could push this forward.
Not understand why the progress on this is so slow, and why key information on this has been kept from shareholders (i.e., the proportion or percentage of ownership left for shareholders ). Why the revised proposal is not acceptable? Why it cannot be improved to make it acceptable?
That is different as they have liabilities due thereafter and may not have funds to meet them. I am merely giving my perspective on what they will be being told by the Insolvency practitioner they will already have engaged based on 20 years as a CFO and having done pre-pack deals on 3 businesses in all of which shareholders were wiped out. You may take a different view.
Fran, they have gone on record as saying they have sufficient funds to see them through end of March, so I don't see why they would have to call in administrators on 3rd march.
They also said the SR would run thru end of March. Why have the SR thru end of March if they would have to call in the admin at the beginning of March.
And why, after the offer, take a few weeks to put the paperwork together for a vote if the vote can only be yes or admin? and why then wouldn't Scrimshaw say that if it's a no vote the administrators will be called in the very next minute/day?
For these reasons I conclude that there is time to save the company with a plan B after the vote. And maybe there is someone (Polygon?) hoping for a no vote as that will give them leverage to cut a great deal for themselves. Any deal that keeps the company independently trading is likely to be a better deal for holders in the long run than AAL's 5.5p.
Yep Fran............... absolutely ..... :()
and...........
All the best (best get they're skates on for a better deal for themselves then hey ........... :()
Russell Scrimshaw, chairman of Sirius, said: “We continue to face a stark choice that in the event of this transaction being unsuccessful, it is likely that the business will need to be placed into administration, which would result in shareholders potentially losing all of their investment.”
------
As FFC says "likely" and "potentially". Not guaranteed and not a certainty. Because there'll still be a month after the vote to sort something out. The SR was supposed to last until end of March. If there ever was one (and that's debatable) it barely lasted into early December.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, would this shower of **** have tried a little harder to find a plan B if they weren't being promised continued employment with their Aussie chums and a 19 million payout to share on completion of the sale to AAL. You bet they would. It's all very convenient and cosy.
I'm voting NO and then lets see how hard Fraser tries to save his 7 million quid payout/125 million shares and Scrimshaws 2 million quid payout/44 million shares.
We're being stitched up by the Aussies. Make them fight and work a little harder, or see them sink with the rest of us.
I fear a no vote will result in administration within hours, if not immediately. If the Anglo American deal is voted down and the directors have no other deal well advanced and their cash flow forecasts show they can not meet future liabilities as they fall due, they have no option other than to call in an administrator immediately.
Rugby.............!
not a massive fan, and don't understand the rules, but England.........!
All the best (may the best O2 team win :()
https://www.radiotimes.com/news/sport/2020-02-08/scotland-england-six-nations-2020-tv-live-stream/
Wow that is a lot of posts!! I think medical help is required here. Alas it may be too late is he PAAA in another name or did he die ?
Oh might add that the voice of insanity is now a tie between FFC and Longtermview, both trying to outdo Mr Stop Brexit by shouting the same vote no, vote no rant ad nauseam
-------
BTW thanks for the clinical diagnosis. A VOTE NO has to be an option, maybe the only option to focus the BOD to continue to pursue an alternative that is good for holders. The 5.5p is good for them as it secures their jobs through to production and they'll continue to pick up salaries and ever increasing bonuses and share options as the mine progresses. We pick up nothing except a big fat loss.
It is high risk as we might end up with nothing, but we might also end up saving our investment. Worst case scenario at least it might screw up Frasers cosy deal with AAL/
Any chance you could just watch 'n wait right here then...............?
nope........... ok........... kinda figured........ :()
All the best (just waiting on AAL I suppose, or a n other :()
City wire funds insider, quote,
"shares crashed last month after the failure to secure government backing for its Yorkshire mine project"
dyor
"It may seem strange, but I have no financial interest here.
However, failure is a learning experience, just as success is.
How investors behave is a fascinating subject." IBAB............. lol.......
Your MTRO obsession has *bored* you now then.......... ?
All the best (Subject............ right back at ya :)
https://www.lse.co.uk/profiles/illbetabuck/ piechart tells of obsession.......
“Currently, the Chair sounded concerned that the vote may not pass“
They never liked PIs.
The buy some shares, and vote .
Seems strange that you don't admit to the obvious illbetabuck at this stage - that you clearly work for or have vested interests in the AAL bid. Had no clue why you steamrollered onto here but knew it most certainly wasn't for investors benefit. Know now it was clearly to 'soften us up' and seems you are simply trying to portray yourself as the voice of reason. Biggest clue was the 180 degree turn by 'investing' in SXX....the day before the offer came to light. Co-incidence? But of course, with a faceless keyboard warrior, insiderer dealing won't even be investigated, never mind proved.
Oh might add that the voice of insanity is now a tie between FFC and Longtermview, both trying to outdo Mr Stop Brexit by shouting the same vote no, vote no rant ad nauseam. We know you are happier stitching yourselves up out of spite or misguided notions that some white knight *might* reveal themselves but can you leave the rest of us to make our own decisions based on whatever facts or hunches we feel suits our own positions.
“You are confusing interest with concern.
That said, as a human being I do not want to see the project fail and staff lose their jobs.”
Bucky that makes no sense.