The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring Jeremy Skillington, CEO of Poolbeg Pharma has just been released. Listen 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.
No matter what, I think we are nearer the end than the beginning. The SP will eventually get to it’s rightful place. For the vast majority of LTH’s they won’t be selling a bean until either OO is sold or Imutex is sold/listed, so it’s all quite inconsequential, however, its rather frustrating! I also believe that CF has been a little bit coy with the truth. I think he knows more than he lets on and he should imo, I’d be worried if he never knew about the Link shares. The presentation he gave middle of June he stated “he expected Acacia” to be out “middle of next week”. If he told the truth and said the selling could go on for a least a couple of months the SP would have taken a hammering. Hopefully today is the start of the rerate but we shall find out all in due course. GLA
yes agree the truth no one really know its just logical hypothesis from more detailed reasearch i posted on the 3rd July. We have the added problem of flippers, traders and Fear and FOMO to content with. My only strategy is these times in this company is not to Sell them cheap END :)
Really interesting Deep, there must also be some placing flipping alongside daily trading etc or that volume would surely be gone by now?
typo again sorry - 'Acacia would be on behalf of link and their partners,' should read 'Starboard and their partners to the agreement'. Apologies all
J427 - They would never have reached 5% with 24m and that threshold is for listed companies domiciled outside of the UK but listed on the UK Market. In this case (if it is them) it would have been slightly above 3% which had been a point of debate with Jimzi on here a while ago. In short I believe they should have disclosed a 3% position in the UK listed (share issued) company in accordance with the rules. Jimzi didn't think they had to but that aside what we do know from the agreement between acacia and Starboard was that any investment in the previously link held shares aquired by Acacia would be on behalf of link and their partners, so we can assume that if a large purchase was made by Acacia's funders it could be split down.
Do Starboard LP hedge fund have to report reduced holdings when selling as they >5% holding ?
The corruption of modern day American style Capitalism..
Cathal did say they refuse to interact so it wouldn't surprise me.
Jimzi - I'll have that.. we can agree on that small point at least. Cheers DJ
Well in a spirit of reasonableness , you defo have a point.
Its so overly complicated and secret and deceitful, that also adds up.
Clearly this is a bargain style trade but it its defo possible a transfer of stock on T2 is equivalent to the normal cash settlement terms - not seen it before but I;m sure there's loads of reporting tricks we don't know about.
And being overseas, it means no TR.
The speed and inaccuracy of events - I think the trade was before the reported threshold crossing date - the 5th and 8th respectively, points to a pre-agreed transaction which adds gravitas to your theory.
The good news is they want the current price and given the parity of prices, its close.
They made enough money on here and the 14 others to pay back Starfund.
Getting the stock at a huge discount to price off of woodford's distressed selling.
Starfund get huge returns on the loan to Acacia almost like a "call" for their fund.
All are happy other than the shareholders - but neither side gives two 5h1ts about them.
In all areas of the market their are parasites.
Finance in many areas is legalised stealing just look at the banks history.
Numpty no probs - I like a mystery and before people have a go when i say at a discount 12.2p on the day (5th June), I mean given the SP trading range that day nothing more..either way hope it helps..
Deepjoy
Thank you for your research and time spent today and plausible insights
GL
That is what I thought.. basically buy 25m Shares in Orph in lieu of exercising debt warrants in Acacia and what ever coupon they were at. Is it is this they would be in the money no matter what the orph SP was . Not a legal eagle but the whole supplemental agreement is worth a read..
Nice research. Sounds plausible. To offload 14 companies so fast they had debts to pay most likely on loans and this was the way forward. Not many companies would look to do deals with acacia now on AIM.
Maybe this was there one and done.
Sounds very plausible also tells you alot about Acacia as a company. Not many businesses will be lining up to do deals with them. Maybe this is their get rich quick scheme one and done.
I am not saying this is what happened but it would appear to me at least possible given the terms.... any constructive thoughts welcome? Only trying to help the debate
I've spent a couple of hours this morning trying to decipher the terms of the purchase agreement for Acacia. Why ?I only did not not to revisit old ground but to try to establish whether there were any clues around the mystical 25m trade on the 5th June, which has not been TR1'ed but had a sale price of 12.2p.
We know Acacia issued a TR1 disclosing they had 13m left a few weeks ago now and yet we have a clear overhang. I agree with the majority view that Acacia are out. However, given they took possession of 38m shares on the 5th june and one working day later disclosed they only had 13m then some entity took possession and it would appear have been selling ever since (at a seeming loss). I think the 25m went to Starboard value LP (in the US) as part of a warrant agreement between them and Acacia from 2019 ans Fed 2020.
I note that Acacia research corp website has an SEC filing section and within the current report (25th June) there is copy of the agreement to aquire the Woodford holdings. Of particular note is the existence of a supplemental agreement exhibited to this filing which sets out the escrow payments Acacia have to make to Starboard for their historic warrant deals, and specifically with reference to the Woodford deal.
Within this is the following :
For purposes of this Agreement, the following definitions shall apply:
(i) "June 2020 Approved Investment Escrow Release Amount" means, with respect to any given June 2020 Approved Investment Escrow Release Event as defined in clause (I) of the definition thereof, the amount of cash as specified in clause (II) of the definition thereof.
(ii) "June 2020 Approved Investment Escrow Release Event" means, as applicable:
2
(a) (I) the consummation of an Approved Investment occurring following the June 2020 Approved Investment; then (II) the amount of such Approved Investment;
(b) (I) the Company's receipt of written confirmation by or on behalf of the applicable Starboard Fund that it has properly received shares of Common Stock issuable pursuant to an applicable Conversion Notice; then (II) the Stated Value (as defined in the Certificate of Designations) attributable to the Conversion Amount (as defined in the Certificate of Designations) as indicated in the applicable Conversion Notice (as defined in the Certificate of Designations); and
(c) (I) the Company's receipt of a written notice by the Designee electing to effect a voluntary release of cash; then (II) the cash amount specified by the Designee in such election notice.
**conclusion for consideration -Section B above strikes me as meaning that Starfund can take settlement in the form of common shares in Orph or any of the other companies sold in lieu of cash payment. Therefore would be logical to assume that Starfund got the shares , not only at discount on the day (12.2p) but were in effect well in profit by executing a previous warrant held in Acacia. That may explain why they are in the money selling at this