Charles Jillings, CEO of Utilico, energized by strong economic momentum across Latin America. 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.
Thanks for this link. It also "helpfully" points out that shareholders through ii have been able to vote on all companies' actions..highly useful for letting off steam, even for tiny shareholdings. HL , where I hold JRS, has been a pain in the neck.
Extra pressure on CLIG may help...it's odd how ESG/CSR is always introduced to conversation when companies are asked to justify their actions. If CLIG were suffering from ESG/CSR qualms about holding JRS, they would have cashed in months ago.
Hi Kate would be great to hear from you on the email address - trying to coordinate retail intentions and keep a tally. Same goes to anyone else.
Also, I totally agree with Katenip's sentitments. JRS has endured months of hell, but remains standing. Not a lot more for the trust to lose, lots and lots to possibly gain. Would be a monumentally terrible time to throw in the towel.
This situtation really does make me question the actions and intentions of the directors. Note that I only say 'question'. Perhaps the directors can demonstrate that they really are acting in the best interests of the members as a whole? But on the face of it, my suspicsion is that they are they being poked and proded by JP Morgan Assest Management who (perhaps understandly) don't love having 'Russian Securities' within its stable of funds. Incidentally, I wouldn't mind changing the name, as long as this is a fairly cosmetic thing and doesn't go hand in hand with a fundamental change in investment strategy
will be voting no ...the whole point of the investment in the first place was exposure to Russia and have held this during all the Ukraine/NATO/USA/Russia chaos , so don't see any point in throwing in the towel now. Also suspect JRS board could just be looking to start collecting fees again.
Anyone voting no I'd love to hear from you directly at investors.jrs@gmail.com
Do vote no!
Log into your account and there’ll be a “contact us” option. Or just send a message through the app
How do I vote if holding with Hargreaves Lansdown?
In other words, vote no! hell no!
extremely opposed to any change of invesment objective. best thing for JRS and its shareholders is just to ride out the storm. (perhaps this is not also the best thing for JP Morgan Group, as it's all too much of a smelly headache for them)
If prohibitions on trading of Russian assets were to be lifted, I shudder to think of the trust rushing for the exit to sell off Russian assets at fire sale prices, only to buy shares elsewhere in Africa etc. possibly needing a dilutive fund raise too in order to make the fund large enough (dilutive unless existing shareholders want to plough more in, and who would in these circumstances).
By the way JRS's custodian in Russia is in receipt of all the dividends this year from investee companies. All that has to happen for JRS to be able to access these many millions of GBP is for the prohibitons to be lifted. (No other third parties to naviagate around, just our friendly custodian to unlock the safe). For me it's more probable than not that the probitions will not be in place literally forever.
Just imagine the reported NAV change from one day to the next, the day that prohibitions are lifted and suddenly mega moex value and a big pile of dividends are inclduded in the calcualation.
More or less. Tons of residual value - can't just dissolve our shareholdings in Russia away. Wind up can only happen if we vote for it.
so, is JPM pursuing this proposal just to start collecting fees again and look to wind up the IT somehow ?
What do the lse board posters think of the value of whatever is left and is there income at all anywhere?
Please all vote no, their EM EMEA/Africa fund has terrible performance - we want no exposure to these assets. If you are interested in discussing further join the JRS Telegram group which is very active *************jpmorganrus
Please vote against the mandate change.
There is no advantage to investing the cash really. Better to wind this up in my view rather than continue as going concern.
The risk if the mandate change goes through they could then put a vote in to issue more shares at 'NAV' - issue being 'NAV' is understated vs MOEX based NAV and we get diluted.
PI's really dominate shareholder register for this stock so if you contact your broker and tell them to vote your shares against resolutions we may be able to get this stopped.
My thoughts are here - but please dont forget to vote against - one of the few stocks where you really can make a difference....
hTTps://deepvalueinvestments.wordpress.com/2022/10/28/jrs-cheap-but-vote-against-name-mandate-change-oil-and-gas-also-shorts/
Eric meaning ‘sole ruler’ or ‘ever powerful’
Mr. Sanderson:
theaic.co.uk. ‘ could continue as a going concern for
several years’ (3/8/2022)
this is money.co.uk: £20000 trips for ex-MyTravel boss (29/4/2004)
Companies House Appointments 17of 31 dissolved/liquidation.(MWB Group,MyTravel etc.)
‘Proclaimed’Company doctor but no evidence of resuscitations.
Extra shareholder vote required at upcoming general
meeting to remove Eric Sanderson’s short tenure
forthwith.
CLIG (quoted) looks healthy? If it was selling JRS on way down, wonder how much of potential RI + benefits (frozen divis) it’s looking to buy with cash pile? Sweet for our bod & other major holders?
In turn we’d have to subsidise this kind of behaviour
of course?
Maybe a smell here?, as newco sounds an idea amalgamation of Sanderson’s blackrock greater europe & oleg’s jpm ME/jpm Africa /jpm Emerging etc.
‘Transaction in own shares’ (RNS 2017-2022).
Back of fag packet calculation best part of £71m spent? More latent value accrued & owed to present ‘ordinary’ share class holders? To my mind yes.
Divis like that begs the question why any mandate to change company name/remit is required?
Other than to justify & pay JP Morgan ongoing fees?
More plausible believe POLY/EVR might have inside
track & hence sitting on their hands?
What inside track do JPR Bod have?, I fear none.
Patience is a virtue
https://www.lukoil.com/PressCenter/Pressreleases/Pressrelease?rid=600027
537 rubles per share: equates to over 10p per JRS share.
It was reported that JRS were looking to expand/alter the mandate ...any news?
ok, daft question time... what workarounds could be considered?
Could JRS (a company) simply relocate to another "friendly" jurisdiction whilst retaining the LSE listing?
Yep. JP Morgan have written down the value of the holdings by about 99%, hence the low reported NAV - it's pretty much just the money market fund value. Investors are essentially betting on the capital controls lifting and MOEX access being restored to "unfriendly" nations at some point in the future (or a workaround being found). The cost of the bet is the difference between the NAV and the SP. Worst case scenario is we only get 40 odd pence per share back IMO.
he has ,,,,,,,,
Yep. JP Morgan have written down the value of the holdings by about 99%, hence the low reported NAV - it's pretty much just the money market fund value. Investors are essentially betting on the capital controls lifting and MOEX access being restored to "unfriendly" nations at some point in the future (or a workaround being found). The cost of the bet is the difference between the NAV and the SP. Worst case scenario is we only get 40 odd pence per share back IMO.