Adrian Hargrave, CEO of SEEEN, explains how the new funds will accelerate customer growth 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.
Anybody had any feedback regarding excess shares? Am I correct in thinking each broker can apply their own allocation as they see fit? I'm with Barclays, so if only a few Barclays nominee holders applied for excess shares I might get all I applied for? And is it just a case of seeing how many are in my account tomorrow?
Fyoz
Excerpt from the OpennOffer RNS;
Shares available under the Open Offer. In accordance with the terms and conditions of the Open Offer all applications made pursuant to the Open Offer (other than Excess Shares applied for under the Excess Application Facility) have been met in full and a scaling back exercise has been undertaken in respect of applications for Excess Shares, with Excess Applications scaled back pro-rata to 44.766907% of the number of shares applied for.
So if you applied for £1000 worth of excess shares, won’t you be getting £440.77 worth with rest returned?!
Most retail investors are hidden behind a broker nominee, so the company only sees a single account from your broker that aggregates everyone together (i.e. thousands of accounts).
As far as I am aware, the broker has the ability to distribute that (aggregated) excess allotment amongst their retail nominee accounts according to their own procedures/algorithms. So what you get might not precisely match the methodology described in the circular because of your own broker's procedures.
That's how I see it don. If I applied for the same amount again, but another holder with the same broker applied for say 4 times his allocation, is it fair that we're scaled back the same percentage, so I get 144% yet he gets 276% (100% entitlement plus 4x44% excess). Not sure how they'll carve it up but surely greed doesn't win out?
Fyoz - I agree, I think the algorithm used by the open offer itself encourages people to apply for greater excess (by rewarding larger excess applications in the case of a scaleback). At least if I understand what they've written correctly.
Whereas when the 100% cap is hit, IMO, brokers should consider more factors, such as how large a holder's original shareholding is, fully fill modest applications first, etc.
I,m with Barclays as well and applied for my full allocation plus twice that amount excess. At the moment it is just showing as 2 separate lines in the hub account so I guess we shall see how many tomorrow.
Barclays still not showing scale back yet.
Ii still not showing volume or value of subscription allocation let alone scaled-back excess!
Dusty/Fyo
"Whereas when the 100% cap is hit, IMO, brokers should consider more factors, such as how large a holder's original shareholding is, fully fill modest applications first, etc."
It is impractical to expect brokers to take several different factors such as the holder's original shareholding into consideration. In addition you are in effect asking them to overturn the decision to apply a 44.77% haircut. Whatever alternative decision the broker makes there will be some winners and losers. The losers will complain that the broker had no mandate to apply their own alternative formula. It is obvious that a straight percentage cut applied to all shareholders is the simplest solution.
Fyoz says "is it fair that we're scaled back the same percentage, so I get 144% yet he gets 276% (100% entitlement plus 4x44% excess)". Since when did the concept of fairness come into the equation? Is it fair that I was not born absurdly rich? It is the accepted, frequently used and reasonable way to apply a reduction with both parties in your example each receiving 44.77% of the excess for which that they applied.
I applied for 4x on top of my entitlement. Halifax account still showing total number applied for but not yet able to trade them. I am expecting entitlement plus 44% of excess applied for. That's my understanding of the rns.
I have not been here for some years now but have recently been appreciative of some comment and opinions. Good luck all.
Anybody interested in the fact that we are half way through April and still no closer to things being signed off, rather than discussing how much extra digital confetti people have applied for.
Very true VINCE72. I've been here with QED for years in the hope of, well news of some sign offs. It's taking a long time. My main concern, apart from company going under, is that it's bought out at a much lower price than most of us will be hoping for.
Vince 72
I agree but other than bemoan the continuing delay and call out Jason for yet again failing to meet his own target dates what can we do or say that has not been said before?
See this for what it is, still a high play and stop with this time next year we'll all be millionaires , giddy up crap would help for a start.
Vince 72
What?
Not addressed to you personally Toby , but there are a number of posters on here, who see this as a given, its not until the contracts are signed and this is taking far too long considering the importance of the project that is being thrown about.
Tbh my main concern is for the unfolding of current global events and issues that are changing nearly on a daily basis. Sadly I think an alternative fuel trial at the moment is well down the pile of issues that MSC maybe currently dealing with or will be depending on how the Middle East issues run their course. As much as the money may now be in the bank, I would hope while they wait for lawyers, signatures etc they would use some of this down time and search for maybe a smaller target that may have potential to be a quicker route to a commercial contract. Utah IMO is out of the frame and there IMO will be no quick path to Morocco so unless we see a sudden jump with progress for MSC and we just going to have to go back to sleep and let tumbleweed blow by. Global events will change things, and give excuses for can kicking, can the management be proactive and seek alternatives while we wait. I really hope MSC signatures are this month, otherwise my concern levels will certainly be increasing. Fingers crossed all.
The fact that these projects go at glacial pace, always mean events catch up and take over.You would think if MSAR was already in play, then we'd been in a fantastic position if the straits of Hormuz were in conflict....but no.
“See this for what it is, still a high play and stop with this time next year we'll all be millionaires , giddy up crap would help for a start.”
Said the guy whose mantra has been “it’s a public board, people are free to voice their opinions”. Funny how it’s not so free when you don’t like it. Must be starting the next Vincestruation cycle.
Surely MSC would want to be expediting the trial with current worldwide events. They will need to be looking at more cost effective ways to do their business. Saving a small fortune on fuel is a very easy way for them to achieve this.
I disagree with the notion that the world is a scary place right now and that it provides a reason to put a break on the trial of a new fuel while our potential partners wrestle with daily problems.
Those of us born in the 50's and 60's remember how chaotic everthing was in the 1970's and early 80's. Today is not unique.
I subscribe to the Rahm Emanuel school of thought regards crises - and I hope MSC and Cargill do too.
"You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things that you think you could not do before".
Sadly though Pharaoh IMO a lot big business these days is a lot more risk averse. There are many more hoops to jump through, hurdles to leap over. If it ain’t broke then why try to fix it. We know the benefits both financial and environmental for MSAR, so if we have been doing this for years why are we not much further along. We do just need one break and IMO we certainly will be off to the races, let’s hope for all our sakes it this year.
"Anybody interested in the fact that we are half way through April and still no closer to things being signed off, rather than discussing how much extra digital confetti people have applied for."
Ah, so there's been too much positivity on display lately for you Vince? How about this instead, anybody heartened by the FACT that the chairman and the CEO both stumped up considerable amounts of their own money, to take subscription shares? I for one, was mightily encouraged by that gesture
So my Barclays account has only allocated me 22.72% excess shares, thats a bit harsh.!!
BC does that equate to 44% of your original entitlement?