The latest Investing Matters Podcast with Jean Roche, Co-Manager of Schroder UK Mid Cap Investment Trust 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.
Yes Boonco and all for $13m - or, if we are to believe Sang $5m (plus interest) as $7.5 should still be sitting in a bank account somewhere - ior is that where 4D actually breached their covenants?! Maybe that money has been spent?
In any event to allow a business to go into administration smacks of negligence or incompetence (unless it is pre-meditated) - I really don't know which is the worse?
Pete, I'll need to read the annual report again but if it is just a case of the 13M then given the pipeline assets etc you would think it really shouldn't be that difficult to get it sorted and back operating.
If they can get it out of admin there needs to be a change at the top. I've been a strong supporter and I don't think there was anything nefarious to the boards intentions but Duncan has to fall on his sword. Step back, remain an investor and let someone else run the show.
Oh crap. :-(
Thanks oxford, 'nice' doing business with you, ...vultures.
But for the "going concern" criteria that the administrator will apply, so to reprise an earlier conversation they will have to raise enough not only to pay off Oxford F but also find enough operating capital to get them through the remainder of this financial year AND another 15 months after that.... common sense would suggest that they will have to scale down the breadth of their dev pipeline to reduce operating expenses over that period; maybe selling the IP off to one of their partners - or get those partners to pay for the development?
Yeah my thinking was that even in the current dire market and the hard bargain that potential suitors would inevitably drive, they really shouldn't need to get rid everything in the pipeline to pay OF + bank a couple of years operating costs
Merck could be our 'saviours' rescuing us with small change, good business for them scraps at best for us, as now at the mercy of venture capitalists otherwise and they are never good as an option imo. Just hope our DP isnt offered a place at the top table. :-(
Denfos do you realise any investment in shares is a risk and not secure?
Another conspiracy theory - is this a ploy to ensure that no-one is going to be worried about whether there is to be a 40% or 100% dilution or lose shareholders rights! :0)
MSD are quite likely to obtain rights and patents through a deal with the Administrators, who only want to raise funds to satisfy OF
Oxford have a deal with someone to
sell assets on the cheap. Shareholders get nothing. Interpath Advisory are not a govt. admin and specialize in trying to mediate. Nothing guaranteed and I would not trust Duncan one inch -he set this up. But they are worth reading about if you can tolerate the inanely meaningless marketing drivel. Laughable. No guarantees, especially not with Duncan and Doyle…utter incompetents…but worth looking at Interpath. Me? I see it as a big set up.Incompetence that led to stupid decision for q and a which was possibly all part of the set up. Don’t forget Duncan used to work in the City.
( making tea?)
The company is in administration not liquidation, fairdealer.
Oxford will get cash NOT assets crl.... the administrator protects the company from creditors, it does nopt act for creditors!
Crusty.
That occurred to me.
But if in admin it is all irrelevant. Company is not functioning unless they invoke a protective clause on Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020. Provides moratorium on debt for restructuring and protection by court from creditors.
I still think Duncan is pulling a fast one though. Just my opinion
Crusty that is correct but only 1 step away from Liquidation. Oxford have forced the situation by requiring immediate payment of the Loans. Oxford instructed Administrators as covenants require. Once the Administrators discover no avenue to raise the funds Oxford rightly are owed, a Liquidator will be appointed. There is NO love from Oxford who have a cold attitude towards PI's
Well I believe that the adminstrator will find a way to pay off OF - at least I am hoping so....
Surely 4d must have some cash in the bank.
If Oxford have first claim on company funds but they also need to pay staff and other costs like rent and suppliers
You can't trade if you can't pay staff.
If you don't get why Oxford have pulled the plug
They were due to be repaid in 23/24. Now they get the money early with over a $1m in interest for a loan of just under 12 months
Sang, if they can get enough for assets in pipeline to pay OF their 13M + bank a couple of years operating costs then they should be able to get up and running again with a slimmed down pipeline.
That's the hope anyway.
If it was that easy to sell the assets why didn't 4D do that themselves?
Probably because they didn't want to sell them, were trying to secure finance and didn't think Oxford would pull the plug.
Crusty I agree re. Possibility of pressuring investors at AGM but admin means no vote.
Check out new Corporate and Governance Insolvency Act 2020. Provides court protection from creditors for restructuring and debt moratorium. Could be used by Interpath. Still wouldn’t trust Duncan to give a bean back to shareholders though. Sorry just so angry. It’s not Oxford. They always had the choice.
Oxford were only able to pull the plug because the conditions of the loan were breached.
There was a clause about a materially adverse event (very broadly defined) and the difficulty with the market cap and the cash needed could have constituted a material adverse event.
I wonder what the funding alternative they presented to Oxford was.
I am thinking of writing a book about this- the story of 4D
Have to agree with Boonco here. Reading the rns it appears they thought Oxford would not call it in straight away and have been blindsided. I can see a solution will be had in time.