If you would like to ask our webinar guest speakers from WS Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund a question please submit them 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.
When the debt is £3-£4 billion beer tokens, what difference does £350 thousand make?
Yes ok, it might make funding the debt slightly easier, but wouldnt it be better in the long term for The AA to stay on the stock market, and fund this themselves.
You do talk a load of rubbish 3300, RAC has 8 million members and Green Flag has 5 million so saying that no one calls them is stupid.
not a bad tactic to put pressure on Shareholders to accept 35p.
IMO GLA
What’s everyone’s opinion on this deal collapsing altogether? Seems very strange to ask for another 24hrs after 4months?
Is that what all those investors who brought in at the float price thought? Long term investment? Of course they did and look how they have been rewarded. I agree with Jed, something just does not feel right.
Sorry I don't think it's that simple. If that's the bid and it's all agreed why hasn't it been made now or confirmed.
Today we have had all the details in the Mail and yet it still goes on, something not right here and someones's not happy.
Guys you're deluding yourselves I'm afraid: there will only be a 35p bid and it'll be accepted because it's all there is and AA. are in a load of trouble.
The SP will go to 33 when bid is confirmed and that's your lot.
OR it'll be rejected and the SP will dip even more. The dream is dead here I'm afraid.
I hope you are right but I think you are wrong.
Pretty sure in a deal in the 100s of millions the BoD would of already tested the water with major share holders before they even mention the 35p figure.
If this goes for more than 35 it will be down to a late third party offer coming in.
I think yesterday's rns with offer 35p details in was done in agrement with the consortium to see what sort of response they would get from the likes of ABC and it wasn't good and it would be rejected when the confirmed deal / offer was made today. So maybe tomorrow we will see the 37p-40p they need minimum to get this offer through. It's all games ,after all would they want to lose the deal for another 3p-5p after 3 months work and costs?
We have seen in many other takeover deals fall through and there has been costs of £10m-£30m involved.
“(b) announce an offer on less favourable terms than the Proposal”
This is just standard wording. I wouldn’t read anything into that at all. In fact it is just as likely that they would increase the offer in response to shareholder reaction. My own feeling is that the offer will be unchanged at 35p.
Arguably there are two conflicting sets of director duties. On the one hand, directors need to promote the success of the AA for the benefit of its shareholders as a whole (which arguably they are doing if (a big if) it is truely the rescue package some papers have made the bid out to be). On the other they must exercise independent judgement and exercise reasonable skill, care and judgement. Not sure why refinancing so onerous that the board appear very much against it. Rox, PaulOz and myself all follow or have shares in AML. They refinanced recently but their perceived risk meant interest at 10.5%. Were AA quoted similar rates and, if so, could the AA afford this rate? At the very least I hope the board seriously looked at this during the various extensions. Not trying to provide answers, just a balanced and slightly more detailed view. Hope ABC and others fight strongly on our behalf, as their Sunday tweet I posted suggested the offer was well under value.
I think the bod's would get more respect and support if they said sorry it's got to be minimum 45p or deals off, and then raise their own money.
After all if the consortium is going to raise some £300m and then take the profits or sell the company again in 1-2 years for £1 a share why can't the current board.
The reason you never see a grumpy AA patrol is because the vast majority of us love the job we do and most patrols have been in the job for many years.
Its only ever been what goes on behind the scenes that puts us down. Most of us balance the love of the job against the pressure and for me the love for what I do still wins.
£300M.
Sorry
IMO the best we could ask for is a share price of 48p and £300 for refinancing support. At this level I believe the major investors would accept the deal. This will have a neutral impact on the offer. The problem is the BOD's job is to protect the business not investors.
i hope we see an improved offer, the BOD should have laughed them out the room at 35p. 50p minimum
The RNS does make reference to changing the mix. My take on that suggests they could be asking to change the suggested spends on shares and amount for refinance support providing the overall offer amount does not change. The only issue could be is that could affect the share price up or down.
Jed, I agree it seems strange and has echos of the flybe takeover where competing parties joined forces and at the last ,imute cut their offer and shafted investors! Hope we have a more honourable outcome here.
What happened there, should read
the statement must have been agreed by the consortium before AA put out the rns.
I still find it strange that the AA bod's went to the point of issuing a statement yesterday with all/ most of the deal contents in it that as yet hasn't been agreed, they staement must have been agreed by the consortium before AA put out the rns.
It looks to all like the consortium have been putting in more and more delays to squeeze the bod's and make them desperate to take what the consortium offer, and the AA bod's have now said 1 more day and that's it the deals off.
If the consortium still cannot decide what they want to offer after 3 months there's something very wrong. It could be time for AA to raise their own money.
Are they trying to squeeze more cash out of the takeover buyers?
Yeah I read that in the RNS, however a lower offer certain not would not wash..
I have always wanted to write that! Ha ha