Listen to our latest Investing Matters Podcast episode 'Uncovering opportunities with investment trusts' with The AIC's Richard Stone 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.
TheMoneyShark member has been barred.
Great Stuff. They were bothering everyone here on the ids forum.
Casshy well done if you made a profit. What would make the business attractive to you to buy back in at £2.80 I assume you can only see it going up from there? No one went poor taking some money of the table at times of higher risk.
If the delay in the results is not about the number's, then what else could be the cause? IDS are certainly withholding information from shareholders. Could a valid reason for this be that the effective announcement of a new labour government has caused Kretensky to change his bid price? The odds of kretensky pulling out of the deal at this stage are vanishingly small.
Mind you it doesnt stop Chinese Pharaceutical companies buying up a Pfizer site in Kent this week...Asymchem Laboratories...after Covid, unbeliveable!..useless govt
Casshy, I think you might have a point wrt Government intervention however those who think along these lines usually get shouted down on this forum. Time will tell?
Thats very tempting Casshy
Sold at 322 and will buy back at C. 280....too good to be true....deal won't progress due to govt intervention
.
Oli
Time will tell, but there is one more scenario that you haven't mentioned. At the end of the day iwhen there is a benefit from an action then I always look at who is the benefactor. Unbelievable that at a time like this and under these circumstances the accounts are late.
So presumably the immediate course of events is for most to comprehend that something underhand is afoot. Worryingly it's the board and accountants that "appear" to be driving events.
No doubt in my mind now that my long association with this shareholding will be curtailed in due course.
Oh for the good old days Oli. The occasional falling out but sensible debate.
Redceo, agreed wrt yesterday's comments. I started to read the afternoon's comments at 8pm but soon stopped.
Riflemans, good point. Do you think the delay was a deliberate attempt to force DK to make a binding bid or even force him to walk away? Surely the end of year statement and financials should have been written up and approved by the BoD last week ready for publication?
How can you do due diligence if you haven't published your accounts and at such a key time. Not even an advance warning of delay either. The Bidder will revise his offer down or walk away. Forget improved offers this will be lucky to end up with the first. Total shambles.
Yesterday's comments were in the main not worthy of comment, so I didn't.
Clean slate today let's see an improvement.
Fantasy Shark,
it was a thing of beauty watching you get your ar*e handed to you on a plate by the long term posters on that board. They still reminisce about it from time to time, but you wouldn't know would you as you ran away ha ha ha ha!!!
The clever punters on here are the ones who made money while using as little as possible of that most precious commodity, time. He ain't one of them.
"If I was as clever as the megashark I’d have had an average of 65p and could sell out for a mega profit. Unfortunately I am a mere human, while the megashark has the knowledge of a Nobel prize winnner to back him up"
Nobody is as clever as megamouth!
I did find it interesting that this Nobel prize winner has decided to plagiarise my views. Apparently Nobel prize winners aren’t that high above me afterall
https://www.businessinsider.com/nobel-prize-economist-angus-deaton-rethinks-unions-free-trade-immigration-2024-4?amp
If I was as clever as the megashark I’d have had an average of 65p and could sell out for a mega profit. Unfortunately I am a mere human, while the megashark has the knowledge of a Nobel prize winnner to back him up
KPMG also known they have to show they weren’t failing to carry out their checks appropriately because vesa will be carrying out their own due diligence before purchase. Last thing KPMG want is to be complicit in cooking the books
There must be a fairly large discrepancy that needs checking if the auditors haven’t been able to complete their standard checks on time. Somebody has been cooking the books.
Called it ;)
Well, the first part, hopefully the second is just around the corner.
Agreed - only reason for a delay would be to hide the results which are likely better than expected, if they were worse it would be more likely to push through the buy out, a better set of results may see some institutions investors vote no.
There is no smoke without fire im sure it is not a coincidence....
It is obvious that the board want the auditors to fiddle the books so to make the performance worse than it is so the takeover looks more appealing.................Retail investor getting shafted usual.