Cobus Loots, CEO of Pan African Resources, on delivering sector-leading returns for shareholders. Watch the video 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.
should cleared the distress sellers.
more buys than sells,
hopefully we can head over 120p now,+++++
glta, hold tight from here
Lthamigo thanks for that, it's made me very nervous about purchasing with the 212 platform, it cost me a lot of money not to get all my shares in the one go, I trade on 3 platforms, though 212 looks cheap , though it's nearly impossible to work out how much they save you in trading fees, I suspect one day someone will tell us they are ripping us all off inside those share price spreads as that's how they make their money LOL.
GLA
TheTrosky I appreciate all your hard work in putting all that together for all us here or just me, though strangely you have not shown any links to back up what your saying here, if your that categorically certain to what your stating here then please supply all the appropriate percentage links and statements of shares needed for that to actually happen to the remaining shareholders, I suspect most don't actually exist, you came off the other day with you saying the HMRC allows a 90% write off of delisted company shares, and now your changing it to , that was all about a 90% granting to shareholders in healthy companies, " so which is it then" , it surely can't be both, or is that a porky pie here, you need to do your homework better because your post look so elegant professional and believable here, so you see I was paying attention , and if you had paid more attention to your own former post then you'll see your own statements don't actually match up to what you've previously written here.
I don't know for sure what will happen after delisting, though I bet it's not as bad a picture as the one your painting here, though that's ok, it might make people DTOR here for themselves and then make their own minds up for themselves, as all those ienergizer statements have said ,there are all types of risk before delisting and especially after delisting, they make it clear that nothing is guaranteed, though if that is completely or badly true in monetary terms then why did the company say the shareholders are better off in a delisted company, you could be right, this could be a bad deal after delisting, though my money after careful analysis and due diligence tells me that this could very well be a fantastic opportunity to multiply my money many times more, with my investment only tiny in comparison to my net worth, I'm serious when I say my 20000 shares could come back as a £100000 check from anil,, and if not I would reasonably expect around a £4000 dividend check per year, and if not then I'm stuck in a company with 20000 share that one day will need to be purchased by someone for many times more than what I've paid for them, I can afford to wait, I can afford to lose everything here, though that isn't a reasonable assumption to make here, as this whole sector is ready to grow exponentially here, so it's more likely than less likely that I will get a massive check for my shares one day. I'm confident ok, and believe me when I'm this confident I'm normally not to far away from my first thought and observation that this could easily come back as a £100000 check one day.
Though please please DYOR and never ever buy on anyone's recommendation here.
GLA
Whether in a publicly held or privately owned company It’s illegal for a majority shareholder to intentionally prejudice the position of a minority shareholder. Additionally I fail to understand why Aggarwal would even attempt to do so when it’s likely he will own 90%+ of the business once this delists …assuming that it is EICR that are currently hoovering up the shares.
Good luck and as always DYOR.
Gtx - try a better broker.. t212 are a nightmare and you dont actually own the voting rights or anything.. could be a problem when delisted.
Boring.
Gtx1, I suggest you carefully re-read what I've said before and actually pay attention.
For example, without the need for minority shareholder approval Aggarwal could exchange his existing Ord shares for 'A' Ords, giving him the same rights over capital but different rights over dividends. Going forward IBPO could then just declare a dividend to holders of the 'A' Ord shares. It's not uncommon to see different classes of Ord shares in unlisted companies being paid differing dividends. Aggarwal does not need 90% of the votes to affect these changes. IBPO and Aggarwal would be beyond the scope of UK law to prevent these changes.
As regards to agreeing a 90% discount with HMRC , that has absolutely nothing to do with delisted companies. It relates to share options being granted in healthy companies.
When are you going to understand that the minority shareholders interest is irrelevant. The 90% threshold does not prevent a transaction from taking place. The transaction can go ahead. The only difference to the purchaser is that if they don't get 90% acceptance they can't force the minority shareholders to accept the deal on offer and relinquish their shares. However, in practise, it makes little difference because the purchaser of Aggarwal's shares would have sufficient shares to exercise full control over the business without the support of the minority shareholders (most resolutions only need either 50% or 75% of the votes). The minority shareholders could be totally marginalised have absolutely no say in the running of the business.
There is no stalemate. Once IBPO delists, Aggarwal will have de facto 100% control of the business and can do whatever he pleases because all of the current minority shareholder protections afforded by the LSE's listing requirements and the UK's Takeover Code will have been stripped away. The minority shareholders would need at least 25%, if not 50% of the votes in many cases, to block Aggarwal.
I reiterate AXA isn't blocking; it's trying to maximise the value of its stake without flooding the market and demolishing the share price still further. If you want to buy the remainder of AXA's stake, they'd be more than happy to sell it to you for 70p and pursue Aggarwal through the courts for the difference.
You, on the other hand, don't have a legal leg to stand on for any shares you purchased since the RNS; you have been made fully aware (through the RNS) of all the potential risks once IBPO delists. Furthermore, nowhere in the RNS has Aggarwal given a commitment to treat the minority shareholders "fairly" after the delisting nor does the RNS state that the minority sharehodlers will continue to rank pari passu alongside Aggarwal as regards dividends, profits or any subsequent buyout (indeed it goes to great lengths to emphasise that they won't have any such guarantees).
Speculate all you please; caveat emptor applies.
I don't know if any of these institutions holding these share will hold or sell here in the next few weeks, or have they already sold a certain percentage already, thus the 30p SP low, I'm not complaining as I picked plenty up at 34p on that day,though I was restricted to only 2000 shares by the 212 trading platform, they eventually changed it to only 10000 shares after me contacting them, but in the mean time I bought more on Degiro , I was furious as I had to pay more with the lost time, again I asked the 212 trading platform about only being able to buy 10000 shares, again they said I could buy another 10000 shares if I wanted, I couldn't understand or believe this was happening, that buying delay cost me dearly, still I managed to grab 20000 shares at a average of 40p , I had no idea that the 212 trading platform would have this restrictive buying roadblock in it, I suspect it was the share price collapse that may have caused this , it actually shocked me. and disappointed me. though I got a reasonable amount of these shares and I will consider getting more on any weakness here.
Even at this price does anyone think that Anil Aggarwal or anyone else will offer less than the current share price in any buyout , if they do it will be deemed corporate theft , just grab the dividend if it appears and be thankful we're getting a massive dividend in comparison to the very low share price.
Please DYOR, GLA
So Gtx1, that's you and VernetLes who plan to hold ( and no doubt fancy few more down here :-) so that's just two of you that can see the massive potential for the future...I'm sure that there are many, many people with the same idea! People are watching this like a hawk just ready to swoop and will clamor to pay well over £1 as it moves there quickly as the next two weeks vanishes.
A Purchase TR1 tomorrow would be fun or even better...a cancelation notice!! :-)
I will be absolutely delighted if I'm allowed to keep my shares in this company on a long term basis, and if not then I'm sure the exit strategy will be much more than the average 40p price I've paid per share overall, there could potentially be a huge increase in revenue and profits in the coming years, with artificial intelligence and very substantial B2B new contracts coming our way, we're seeing that right now with more to come in this massively growing B2B sector.
GLA, please DYOR.
I too saw AXA at 5.5%.
It doesn't matter to me if they sell up because they are clearly being bought up in the market and the vast majority of retail are only day trading.
I've voted for the delist on the basis that true value will be realised
Though over 15% of the shares still held by these institutions thus far, so if they continue to hold them they can block any possible forced low share price offer .
Gla
Hereshopin I checked that exact place on ienergizers site last week and it was 11% , and now yes it's 5.5% now, so it must have been them dumping into the market, they are slow at updating these things, now will they keep these shares or dump the rest in the coming weeks, ??? If they do well that would mean a return to lower levels, and if kept then they are taking there chance like the rest of us in a delisting.
GLA
Threeput AXA have very limited room to manoeuvre here regarding their 11% holding, a lot of share owning companies don't hold in unlisted companies and will have to sell into the market, though when you own a massive 11% holding then a quickly convened meetings need to take place to decide what to do about this situation, I imagine that they have decided to
just bear and grin from in this most difficult situation, a hope like myself that the dividend is paid out, for what I've paid its not a sacrifice in any real way. I genuinely feel sorry for any small investors paying top dollar for these shares and only to see them crash like this, I'm confident that a Phoenix will arise from these ashes sooner rather than later, so stay put I say, though don't make any decisions on My say so here,
GLA
would Axa hold unlisted equity ? It says this on the website about real estate but doesn't say the same about equity shares ?
"We take equity stakes in listed and unlisted real estate, generating rental income and capital appreciation. Our scale and network gives us unparalleled abilities to source and deploy capital. We provide regional and country-specific strategies for clients."
TheTrotsky let's look at it like this, if and when Anil Aggarwal takes ienergizer private do you think he will offer AXA £5 for their shares and offer me £1 , ? very very unlikely ,though not impossible, Anil our CEO in theory could mess everyone around for years and pay no dividends at all to AXA or us or even himself, ? !!! Again very unlikely , though not impossible,
It's a case of making any decision on holding these shares after delisting and just using a reasonable assumption to the risk involved here, and with the available protection afforded by our biggest shareholder AXA, they are our biggest protection available here, by virtue of taking anil himself to court in the uk or otherwise , and if should be fail to live up to his public statement around getting a better deal for this companies shareholders, yes he could just be talking about his own selfish interest here, though he's no Donald Trump , so maybe just maybe he has some reasonable plan to substantially enhance share holders financial interest here, why else have we not heard a massive outcry from AXA around the destruction of their massive shareholding here, they must know something will transpire after delisting, and if not maybe they have just accepted that they will get a big dividend twice a year, that would suit me fine here, and as I said sooner or later this company will get taken over by a massively valuable company and probably from America or even India itself, there's plenty of multi billionaires in india that can afford this company.
I accepted your assertion that the inland revenue will accept a reduction of up to 90% of someone's share value in a tax submission, though I would suggest that this is mainly because there actually was a 90% crash in a company's share value, because most delisted companies have failed in some way, and causing that 90% crash in value, though this is definitely not the case with Ienergizer, in fact it's the exact opposite here, this company is thriving and going places, hopefully to a new USA listing .
You say Anil could sell to 3rd parties and then still force this through at a price that suits Anil Aggarwal, well no he can't , because he still can't break AXA,s 11% holding here, why do you think AXA have held that 11% holding here, to protect themselves from this exact outcome. So Anil surely knows that and he will offer AXA and most likely us a better way out to fulfil what Anil says about getting better value from a delisted company, there's no guarantees here, just some share percentage protections, and that's enough for me to sleep easily, so if AXA don't sell at the right price ,then its stalemate here with Anil, I also can't see anil stall everything by offering small shareholders a pittance for there shares, and even if he does ,sure I only paid a pittance for my shares anyway. So as you can see I've removed most if not all of your arguments here TheTrotsky . GLA
Would normally have said that Aggarwal and his associates would be required to notify the company/market if they were buying despite the fact he already controls enough shares to vote through the delisting but I'm not certain what the requirements are when a shareholder already exceeds 50%. Would have thought, given the potential impact on the vote, there would be no exceptions, regardless of the numder of shares already held, but you may be right.
On the flipside, following my cautionary arguments to their inevitable conclusion, I would suggest that he doesn't need to bother because there are "tools" available to him to extract the value from the business once it is delisted without the need to buyout the minorities (but I'm just an old cynic).
VernetLes, IMHO Aggarwal's "ethical business practice" went out the door as soon as the RNS was released. It's not illegal but in my books it's far from ethical and has already crystallised (potentially) large losses for many of the original minority shareholders.
The fact that some institutional investors would even now countenance the potential return of Neil Woodward to the UK market suggests to me that the market doesn't necessarily have a long memory and that Aggarwal could return to the UK market in 3-5 years regardless of what happens from here on out. I'm sure the likes of AXA would think twice before taking a large, illiquid stake in one of his ventures again (if he still controlled more than 50%) but I'm sure there are plenty of people who have made money on IBPO in the past (even some currently) who would not be adverse to "taking a dabble". Like any good "pyramid scheme" it's the ones left holding the shares when the music stops who suffer.
Hereshopin, Even if I had the evidence I couldn't divulge - it would be illegal for me to divulge information about UNLISTED company share transactions (convenient I know but nevertheless true).
I reiterate, that the rights of minority shareholders in LISTED companies are protected by the both the LSE's listing rules and the Takeover Code. The read across from this is that, without such protections, minority shareholder rights in UNLISTED companies are not protected to the same extent (in particular, in the event of a takeover there is no obligation for minority shareholders to be treated equally) and, I would again, direct to you to the RNS where you will note that the BoD have been obliged to make you aware of that fact.
Obviously, it goes without saying that different rules apply in different jurisdictions but, given that the UK is considered to have some of the better shareholder protections (the very same protections that LSE and UK government are considering water down to make the UK market more "competitive") I would suspect that IBPO shareholders will fair any better in other jurisdictions.
PS. The keyword is "obligation". I have been involved, in an advisory capacity, in a few takeovers of UNLISTED companies in the past and all shareholders have generally been treated pari passu out of fairness, not out of legal obligation. If you think Aggarwal can be relied upon to treat you fairly when the easiest course of action would have been for him to make an open offer all of the shares he didn't already own, please feel free to carry on. As Forrst Gump says, "stupid is as stupid does".
Gtx1, You clearly have no understanding of unlisted companies.
The rights of minority shareholders in UK listed companies are SPECIFICALLY protected by both the LSE's listing rules (albeit that IBPO's minority shareholders are not protected from it being legally delisted) and the Takeover Code. Those rights DO NOT extend to unlisted companies and it's perfectly legitimate, and common place, for minority shareholders to be offered, on an individual by individual basis, less than market value for their shares (indeed there's nothing to stop one shareholder being paid more or less than another contemporaneously even when they hold the exactly same number of shares). There's no market for the shares to be traded (IBPO's matching facility is only short term and there is no obligation on Aggarwal to participate whilst it lasts) and the minority shareholders have absolutely no say in how the business is run.
For evidence, I suggest you take a look at how employee share schemes of unlisted companies are often priced; do you think HMRC would agree a discounted base cost if it wasn't normal, accepted practise? For holdings of less than 10%, it's not uncommon to be able to agree a c90% discount with HMRC.
I accept that if there is an open offer for all the shares you MAY get market value but again would draw your attention to the RNS; minority shareholders in IBPO, once it delists, are not guaranteed to be treated on the same terms as Aggarwal. It says so in black and white!
You may need 90% of the votes to force a complete all share buyout (an "unconditional" offer) but that would not prevent Aggarwal from selling his shares to another party and you'd have absolutely no way of stopping him. The purchaser could choose to offer the minority shareholders the same terms but is not obliged to (that's why you have the Takeover Code for listed companies).
The conundrum. What does "... best interest of the Company and its Shareholders as a whole ...." actually mean? It says "as a whole" and that should not be confused with "all". For the delisting to be approved, a majority of at least 75% of the total number of issued shares held by the shareholders present (or their proxy) and voting at the GM is all that's required. QED Aggarwal only needs to vote his shares for the delisting to be approved; the views and opinions of all the shareholders is irrelevant.
I've held delisted shares in an ISA before now and confirm that your broker will require the shares "to be removed" from your ISA once it delists. With ii this meant in practise that the shares were transferred, on request, to my trading account. I'd agree that you could sell and re-purchase before the shares delist.
I reiterate, if Aggarwal was intent on being honourable he would have made an open offer for the shares.
Imv the sp will trend steadily northwards from here
You have to be very naïve to think that Anil's family and associates are not in the market mopping up the forced sells. There is zip liquidity, zero shorting cos nothing can be loaned out; probably just a few million shares with retail and hnw.
I'm not worried about AXA and them getting their money back, because you can be sure they are not worried about my shareholding at all here, only their own, so on that principle I hold and go forward here, though I do want them to fight for all their own legal rights, and in doing so they will ensure that legal right to smaller investors here, ienergizer can simply not just buy out AXA,s shares without offering everyone the same deal in some form or another, through technically they probably can offer a top price for AXA,s shares, as I've said before Anil Aggarwal surely wants to go out on a high with his integrity fully intact here and pay everyone a fair and reasonable price for their shares. Failing that then he must have bigger more exciting plans for this company, and that might even mean a USA listing or even share swap and then made a part of another massive USA listed company, remember that many other big USA companies may not even have seriously considered or offered any offer or any talks or money whatsoever to him as he owned over 82% of ienergizer, so it could be millions $$$ wasted in banking advisors fees on their part. Anil Aggarawal will also know that one of the biggest thing's that holds any company share price back is a massive controlling stake by its CEO, or to that effect anyone, because then there's little or no bid premium in any share price, why bother if it's main shareholder won't create proper liquidity in its shares and not allowing most institutional investors a half decent percentage of the shares, AXA was lucky to accumulate its large holding here, I say that with tongue in cheek because of this share crash and situation. I'm confident they and also us newbies here will come out good in the end here, I'm actually not nervous even in the slightest about holding these share after delisting, though if you need the money and can't risk potentially waiting a year or two then simply sell up and be assured you know what's happening to your money and investment.
All this is only food for thought and not any kind of recommendation to buy or sell here.
GLA
TheTrotsky I can't believe you said that with a straight face LOL , that Anil aggarwal can offer the blocking minority shareholders here 90% less than the shares are actually worth, I'm not even going to asked you to back that up with any online evidence, because it's actually ridiculous to even put that out here, if you had said maybe 25% less I might have understood the cut throat logic of that business decision, also remember Anil Aggarwal picked up a massive special strange dividend the other year, so he should have the money somewhere to buy the remaining shares out if he wanted,
As I said in most jurisdictions you need 90% or more of the shares to force a complete all share buyout.of a company, Anil Aggarwal can't achieve that virtue of AXA,s 11% holding, I do not know if that is the case in india, maybe someone can enlighten me here ,
If Anil Aggarwal short changes AXA here after it stated that ienergizers shareholders are best served by going private then he must then demonstrate that statement and commitment in monetary terms, and if he fails I think he could have a legal battle with AXA on his hands, I don't believe it will come to that, I do think this man Anil Aggarwal is protecting his baby that he's created and nurtured for over 22 years, he knows it's worth a awful lot more money than what the venture capitalists are offering right now, plus he can probably see that what ienergizer is offering to businesses right now is one of the biggest growing services industries around, call centres and B2B help ,and with artificial intelligence changing the whole landscape in B2B companies, with the financial savings for businesses and Ienergizer here, the extra profits with all those savings could be enormous, also ienergizer many companies would be at the forefront of this massive change over, so really ienergizers profits could easily soar during this critical period, so do I want to be out of this company during this exponential increasing new type of work load, absolutely not, I'll be more than happy to just let the massive dividend compound year after year without any reasonable buyout of my shares,
As far as owning these shares in a ISA I would have thought that they might just also delist inside a ISA , though I don't know for sure here, or simply sell in the isa and rebuy outside a isa and then simply hold for the long term as I'm doing.
Anil Aggarawal is incredibly rich and a astute business man of over 22 years here, so you think he wants to go out with a truly appalling reputation that he swindled AXA and private investors out of their true share money, Sir Philip Green tried that stunt, and look where it got him, a extremely badly damaged worldwide reputation, so I'm sitting pretty with only 20.000 shares here at a average price of 40p, so the downside should be very limited if anything went wrong here, if dividends continue then surely 2 years gets my money back again.
You forget that ethical business practice is central to AA