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.
Hi there, I have just sent a message off to the FCA as you suggested listing the same concerns. I voted no through Hargreaves Lansdown. Having been in vog for years as well. It makes me think I am wasting my time with these supposed B.O.D.s No level playing fields here.
I agree with that, which is why I am trying to get a definitive answer to that.
I have not voted by proxy yet as I think attending and being able to vote by hand is the key.
Anyone who has voted by proxy cannot vote by show of hands as well.
Many companies wave through decisions on a show of hands by those attending the General Meeting with no consideration of the number of shares held.
to marketabusepolicy
Amerisur Resources Plc. URGENT
On Thursday 19th December, this Company is holding a Court meeting and a General Meeting immediately thereafter to decide a BoD agreed takeover by GeoPark at a price of 19.21p per share.
This all resulted from an unexpected speculative offer from Maurel & Prom at the derisory offer equivalent to 17p per share (shares plus cash) which the Company stated "Seriously Undervalued" the Company.
The Company then decided to enter a Strategic Review period to determine a satisfactory sale outcome.
The process entertained "multiple participants" which suggested a keen interest to buy.
During the process, the Company decided to exclude any shares plus cash options, thereby limiting the field to those that could muster sufficient cash resources.
This in itself may have been detrimental to all shareholders as the Company decided to recommend this paltry offer.
Paragragh Deleted from email due to poor wording.
Better wording of the paragraph
ONGC Videsh and Occidental are two major oil producers in Colombia who have a serious strategic and financial involvement with Amerisur. It is inconceivable, IMHO, that both these Companies would not be showing a very keen interest in bidding well above the recommended offer.
All these Companies are very involved with Columbian Oil assets.
Amerisur are a very profitable company with no debt and circa $50m in the bank.
This Strategic Process leading to an unacceptable offer is totally unnecessary as it is not a "fire" sale.
Clearly we may vote down this offer, but it does change the fact that the information provided to investors about the process and current trading activity has been NIL!!!!
My question is: if this deal gets cleared to go ahead and you subsequently find some "market abuse" activity, DO YOU HAVE THE POWER TO STOP THIS DEAL?
I will also add that at the last AGM the Company, when asked, flatly refused to provide the voting % for and against. This is very unprofessional.
One of my big concerns is about these voting arrangements and how can we be sure that the votes counted is done honestly.
I have contacted Amerisur by email and received no replies to my questions.
I have contacted the registrars to get an answer from the Company, no answers since 29.11.19.
Please read RNS dated 28.11.19 section Action Required, para one. It is so badly worded especially using the words "in value". What does that mean.
So I am not sure how a show of hands works in conjunction with the proxy votes!
Can you help please.
Apologies all. Maybe FCA can do something! had a call from them today correcting their comments, inviting me to send my concerns to marketabusepolicy@fca.org.uk.
Whether anything comes of it remains to be seen. If they are anything like utility regulators, they will be pretty useless.
I may publish my comments in a new message, though I am just concerned about some of my comments as to whether they be construed as defamatory.
Please send your comments in as it may add weight to a possible investigation.
I have said that there are many P I 's with similar views to mine.
Gambling Addict. Thank you for following this up with the FCA.
Their response really makes you question whether they serve any useful purpose in protecting the interests of investors
Just speaking with FCA now. Not under their jurisdiction. So forget that.
Only choice is to complain to the Company and get legal advice from Citizens Advice for any possible misconduct.
Waste of time.
Has anyone followed Lucypoop's suggestion (over on ADVFN) to email the FCA, questioning the suspicious behaviours of the BoD?
Simple copy and paste.
It's a long shot but if enough conerns are formally registered, then perhaps they will be prompted to closley scrutinise the deal.