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.
Well said Fate they certainly need to refocus their efforts and in getting a deal through rather than just repeat this is the only deal avaible again and again like a nursery rhyme.
Those who have said a pre-pack will not do much damage here are totally wrong and need to do their reasearch, as even the lenders and BOD have stated this. It will damage the companies reputation, leaves joint venture partners with the option to acquire IRV’s stake at a bargain price, as well as some of the lenders having to pay certain clients who have bonding arrangements on their contracts should IRV fail? Now tell me there is no impact to the lenders here??
That said I don’t think the above will stop a pre-pack entirely, but certainly will be causing them grief? If they had nothing to be woirrried, the BOD would not continually pleading with shareholders to approve the deal. It would just be take it or leave in which we’ll go down the prepack route. No one wants a prepack but looking very likely, and the penny will drop by 6 months times but it will be too late.
The pre-pack admin had no impact on Mouchel. There is no equity value in this company. The lenders are offering something to save the costs of the admin. It won’t get any better. Coltrane are deluding themselves and other less informed shareholders.
It may be the only deal, but it won't get through if Coltrane & Farringdon oppose it.
Rather than the BoD going around telling everyone its the only deal, they need to get on with talking to Coltrane & Farringdon & the Lenders (all inside the same room) and come up with a deal that will get through.
It's a bit like Teresa May " its the only deal available", oh until it's voted down.
A pre-pack Admin is Interserve's equivalent to a no deal Brexit. No one wants it, but its looking likely and will destroy Interserve.
Irresponsible if the BoD just sit back with their fingers crossed. Time to negotiate again, but this time not just with the Lenders!
.
The Chairman has summed it up in the Telegraph article this morning. This is the only deal.
This is a re run of Mouchel and will have the same outcome. Shareholders rejecting an offer left them with nothing.
My2penneth- they may well do sweet f*** all, but that’s the sort of capitalist society we live in. I do agree with your comment regards the equity raise but personally think it should have been done after the first EFW annnouncement. The fact that current management did call one at 1.20 as you suggested, I suspect some foul play here. It appears to me they were in cahoots with the lenders and this deal was already done back in spring last year, and then the BOD have spent the last year deliberately surpresssing the share price to the current levels.
There was an article yesterday where Glyn barker claims he’s lost a lot of money in IRV so shares the pain of shareholders, however it was biased as he didn’t mention how much him and others would get for getting the proposed the deal through which likely to be hundreds of thousands. They also claim it’s the only viable option.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2019/03/03/rescue-deal-interserves-viable-option/amp/
Bill, the FCA will do diddly squat...Ringrose lied big time before getting out to Syrinix. It's been a tale of really poor programme management ( EfW). I wrote to Investor Relations several times urging them to do a rights issue ( when the SP was 120p). I told them not to leave it too long.
Frankly, Coltrane wanting rid of the BOD..I can see why!
This is beyond predictable, best to sit it out abd wait.
I wonder if Coltrane would accept it and walk away now, if the existing shareholders were left with 7.5%?
Has to be better solution for everyone (apart from the lawyers).
It would be logical thing to do. We’ve all seen how much advisors have milked out of this company, one can only imagine how much alitigation would cost. The cheapest and logical option of course is to give away more equity, it hey what do I know.
Bill
Whoever is currently buying shares ( I think the lenders) are doing it to influence the vote.
I am guessing that the lenders hold significantly more than 12% between them, but are worried about losing the vote.
This vote will be very close Imo
Maybe buying a few million shares at 17p will be worth it.
But surely for everyone, it's better to negotiate a consensual deal!
The BoD need to facilitate a negotiation between the lenders & Coltrane
If they sit back and wait for the vote, doing nothing....... then shame on them!
Debbie White, you need to give this one last try....however hard it currently appears.
The lenders do not want to lose the shareholders vote.
I am guessing it could currently go either way.
Coltrane, if the vote gets through or not could end up being the big losers
Surely there is still time to negotiate a deal which the lenders could accept and Coltrane do better than litigation - where only the lawyer's will win.
Consultants have already taken too much money off the company. Hopefully that is one thing everyone can agree on.
Well they were given around 4.5m shares as warrants for 10p but no idea how many they bought outside this. Also if you look at the TNs from jan they were issuing more than 14m shares as warrants so not sure if these have been issue yet. This will give them around 12%.
I would agree that lenders maybe increasing their holdings to ensure their deal gets through
Any one know what percentage of shares they currently hold?
Looking at the volumes today they are nearly double the sells, with the some really big buys. Yet the sp stays where it is?
The 200k trade alone bought nearly 1% of the equity so I wonder if the lenders are playing crafty and gobbling up the shares?
Waiting for under 15p to buy in here, around 10p would be ideal.
very sensitive observation. totally agree. it is a bit risky investment. After open offer, if sp is over 17p, both lender and individual holder can be out with good profit. i expect sp is aournd 15-17p on and after the date of subscribtion and may fall to 10p again if some bad news emerge and then ii buy more shares. after solidation of bottom, we may see 30p in the long term.
With a £200k buy someone knows something
Coltrane offer has too many conditions so cant be taken seriously. New offer from lenders is more reasonable for shareholders and we can participate fully if we want. If we vote it down then we have been warned that the lenders could pull the plug and end we up with nothing. The lenders will get their money back in any prepack or liquidation as I am sure it will be secured on the business and assets of the group or end up owning the business. How hollow the threat is difficult to say but you cant announce those things without actually doing something like talk with insolvency people. For me the decision is simple, is it worth subscribing to the new shares or can I buy them cheaper later. I am confident this business has a good future, I am worried that management have declined to participate but perhaps they have done a deal with the lenders to receive share options, I am worried that lenders will be queueing up to sell their shares and drive the price below 15p. For me I think it is worth waiting a few months.
tbh your concerning yourself with subdivision within the firm.
thinking of profitability ,revenue and divys.
I would concern myself with the fact the shareholder comes last at the moment.
this is firm survival.
it honestly doesn't matter if all the value is wiped out IF the company carries on.
maybe some board members might loose a bit but the company survival comes first.
IF you take the "firm comes first approach" which I believe does apply.
If the BoD had done their calculations and estimated the number who will take up of the OO would be less than the requirement of 25% free float in the Business post offer.
and they knew from their conversations with the Lenders, it was definitely their intention to de-list the company.....
Would they have a duty of care to shareholders to be more direct (in communication) than the RNS that merely describes it as a possibility.
Would they be accused of acting on inside information - not taking part in their own OO on the basis, and knowing that those who do, could have the liquidity of their shares massively reduced.
Thank you for the kind words Pbody and yes I will have a look at the company you mentioned below. I got caught out at £2 actually not 70p but you live and you learn and can only go by what you are being told.
Unfortunately I invested in 2016 after being told EFW being exited with a £70m exceptional loss, but as we know today that is not the case as still this is sucking money out. If you remember last year they said the costs related to EFW now would neutral but they just took another 15m hit on it, and of course many million yet still to come. I wonder how they are getting away with all these lies and look forward to FCA holding them to account.
I didn't like to say it bill.
be careful.
there maybe money to be made with interserve,
there are large spread of companies that also exist.
perditions of 30p a month ago could well happen.
personally I would avoid.
my own belief is that interserve is going to be run for the survival of the firm at heart.
employees and shareholders and any anything else are other lower priorities.
there is good volatility there, there may even be good profit.
as you can see when there is a profit its take your money and run at the moment.
personally take you money and stick it in TSTR.
wait for the plant to come online.
sorry you were caught out at 70p when it dropped.
it may get back there someday.
just remember shareholders are the lowest priority I would think at this point.
"The Lenders pushing this into administration or liquidation......
Would be the equivalent of turkeys voting for Christmas.
Where is the value to be had ?"
That did not seem to deter Mouchel's lenders - the company was placed into administration and sold to a new company owned by the banks and directors within 24 hours of shareholders rejecting the deal offered.
As I see it the board have dug their heels in. They are not negotiating with Coltrane, and imo, there is not a cat in hell's chance of a better deal being offered. Coltrane may have consulted their solicitors, but I cannot see that they have a case. What law or stock market rule have the directors broken?
When a company has debts many times the size of its market cap value, the banks can call the shots. I appreciate that a board is there to represent it's shareholders, but a higher goal is to keep the company solvent. If they fail to do this then shareholders are wiped out anyway. I don't know how much leverage the banks used to force through these terms, but the BoD have put their own interests and that of the lenders first.
They are offering shareholders a deal that they themselves will take no part in. That should tell anyone whether this is a bad or good offer. They are also threatening to take the company private if enough shareholders do not subscribe to the deal that the directors have spurned. Really classy that, a board that clearly has the best interests of the shareholders in mind.
Meta- wasn’t having a go at you mate you make a decent contribution at timesn, but you do come out with total rubbish st times.
And no I’m not putting my faith and banks and govt, if I was I wouldn’t have cashed out at a such a big loss.