Member Info for redknight1

GedW asked for a list of the significant shareholders. Huntingtower was listed at 8.6%, 186m shares.

The last time I looked, this holding was in the name of McLellan IT. This was the RNS dated 2 August:

"2 August 2011

Pinnacle Telecom Group plc ("Pinnacle" or "the Company")

Substantial Interests in Shares and Total Voting Rights



Correction

The number of Ordinary shares issued under the acquisition of MacLellan IT Ltd is 186,046,491 and not 186,041,228 Ordinary shares as previously announced in RNS Number: 4434L on 1 August 2011.



Substantial Interests

As a result of the acquisition of MacLellan IT Ltd, Pinnacle received notification today that MacLellan IT Ltd is the beneficial owner of 186,046,491 Ordinary Shares of 0.10p each in the ordinary share capital of the Company, representing 9.06% of the issued ordinary share capital."

That means that Huntingtower have acquired McLellan IT, which presumably was the shell (owning 186m PINN shares) after the IT business was acquired.

Huntingtower is a highly acquisitive Investment Company, viz:

"Investment and advisory firm Manfield Partners has acquired WaverleyTBS, a supplier to the on-trade drinks sector, from Heineken UK.

WaverleyTBS supplies 31,000 national and independent free trade outlets throughout the UK. It supplies a full of range beer, cider, spirits, wine and soft drinks.

The company generated GBP500m of sales in 2009 and employs over 1,100 people in two main distribution centres and various sales points across the country.

The acquisition was made through Huntingtower Investment Group, a newly created company.

Manfield and third party funds have invested alongside WaverleyTBS’s existing management team, led by Jonathan Townsend.

Managing director Jeremy Blood, a Manfield partner and previously managing director of Heineken UK, will join Huntingtower’s board as chairman.

This is the third transaction that Manfield has completed since its inception in 2009."

So Huntingtower is a subsidiary of Manfield Partners. You can read about Manfield Partners here:

http://www.manfieldpartners.com/

Jeremy Blood was the interim CEO of M&B and as you can see, he has connections to Joe Lewis. Lewis is an astonishingly rich individual who lives "offshore". He was the absent third party in McManus and Magnier's attempt to take over Manchester United before the Glazers bought their shares and took over.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/retailandconsumer/8767120/Mitchells-and-Butlers-chief-executive-Jeremy-Blood-has-close-links-with-bidder-Joe-Lewis-business.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Lewis_(British_businessman)

So my bet is that Tavistock Group want to add PINN to their burgeoning portfolio of "value" investments. Huntingtower is the stalkhorse for the present.

My conclusion, which I have advocated for some time is that:

PINN is at serious ri

Thanks for the question that prompted mu discovery Ged. I also sent you the shareholdings in reply to your email through the Forum.

When did McLellan IT sell their stake to Huntingtower Investment Group Ltd?

Was this announced?

Does it presage a bid?

Is it Huntingtower keeping the share price down....?

Otherwise, they remain very vulnerable to a bid and indeed for all we know may already be being manipulated down by a predator, viz the steady 500k sells.

The best suitor would be Daisy Group where Matthew Riley has achieved AB's vision and more in a shorter time frame.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Riley

They would be a great partnership. We shareholders would then have the choice of accepting a double your money bid in cash or swapping for Daisy which will, IMO be a FTSE250 company before too long and whose SP has held up far better than PINN.

For example, while we worry about Renfrewshire, Daisy has just been appinted to the Government's framework agreement for such contracts and is in pole position to win what PINN has to fight for with limited resources.

Daisy Group plc

Awarded position on Government's PSN Services Framework

09 July 2012

-- Secures two year position on the Government Procurement Service's Public Services Network Services Framework

-- Develops strong offering to the public sector

-- Supports the Group's wider organic growth strategy

Daisy Group plc (AIM: DAY), a leading provider of business communications, announces that is has been selected as one of the 14 organisations to deliver Communication Services within the Government Procurement Service's Public Services Network (PSN) Services Framework.

The PSN framework is a 'network of networks' that enables the delivery of public services from any location by any provider across central government departments, non-departmental public bodies, the NHS, local authorities and voluntary sector charities.

A position on the framework is only awarded if a number of stringent obligations are met. These obligations cover governance, technical interoperability, service management, commercial approach and information assurance. Daisy is one of only 14 suppliers who will be able to deliver Communication Services under the framework agreement. These services include traditional and IP based voice services, internet services, hosting, co-location, audio conferencing and system maintenance.

The framework is set to run for an initial two year term with two one-year extension options.

Matthew Riley, Chief Executive Officer of Daisy Group plc, said:

"We are delighted to have been successful in gaining a place on the PSN Services framework for the next two years. This not only gives Daisy Group the opportunity to be one of only a small number of companies tendering for a significant pool of contracts, but also illustrates that the services we provide meet the standards that the PSN sets."

"We look forward to being an integral part of the Government's drive to reduce costs and revolutionise the way in which the Public Services accesses ICT services."

PINNACLE TO CONSOLIDATE AND BE TAKEN OVER....

Sadly, I've come to the conclusion that PINN is a sitting duck and I would not be surprised if they haven't already had informal bid approaches.

I respect AB's wish to make it into a £50 million business (turnover, that is), but for various reasons this might be easier to achieve as part of a bigger entity.

Although we all know the underlying business is going from strength to strength, as evidenced by the doubling of Gross Profit, there is still no maiden profit and EBITDA merely crept up to £100k.

Yes, I accept that rationalisation of the acquisitions has produced one-off costs, which mask the strong underlying performance, but these businesses were acquired by a ************** equivalent to 0.57 per PINN share and the shares have never even approached that figure.

The addition of Threadneedle to the team produced an immediate result in the AB video and, we are told, a load of financial insttution meetings, but the hard fact is that the SP is now LOWER than when they were appointed.

There has been some incremental change in coverage and the BBC ran a report on the results, but yet again that report was carried only in Scotland.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-18607478

I have huge admiration for what AB has achieved so far, but he is worked off his feet and he is stretched far too thin, viz the unexciting CEO's report in the recent results.

I'm sure this is his big chance to make him secure for the rest of his life and the main reason why I bought shares 3 years ago was the partnership between AB, Bill Allen (who built Thus into a billion pound FTSE100 company) and Tom Black who did a similar job with Detica.

The trouble is that every time we seem to be on the verge of lift-off, something holds the sp back and it just can't break 0.45.

AB's target might be 3p but right now that is unrealistic and I believe a sighter at 0.75 would be hard to resist.

The harsh truth is that we are entirely in the thrall of the Market Makers, who are just sitting, waiting patiently for us to get fed up one by one and either liquidate or reduce our holdings.

Neither Threadneedle nor the PINN Board seem able to do anything about this. Wringing hands and gnashing teeth isn't enough.

I am now firmly of the view that the only way PINN could resist a bid would be by way of consolidation. The experience of Condor has changed my view on this. Their share price had been falling steadily, despite huge prospects, so they did a 1 for 20 consolidation. The day after it was effective, 26 June, the shares fell sharply to an adjusted 44p but in just over 2 weeks they recovered to touch 100p and strongly break the long term downtrend.

So I think PINN should consolidate 1 for 100 at say 30p and, with developing good news they should go from strength to strength.