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.
... I'm surprised that no comment has been made ,on this site, regarding the RIG group bid.
I'm sure they would like to acquire it for as little as possible.
And then nothing for shareholders and they own the asset..
You've given them your vote...
Feels fishy to me
Lauren the group RIG bid was a worst case scenario. If no sensible bids were made (no return for shareholders) then the purpose was to stop the mine basically being stolen!
Ideally, the best result for us all, is for the mine to be sold for 100 million plus…..
>Ideally, the best result for us all, is for the mine to be sold for 100 million plus…..
And that's GBP, please. :-) Not CAD, USD, or Dogecoin
Santhi......to use your words...if no sensible bid is made then RIG group steals the mine...
Lauren, if the mine was taken on the cheap, I would rather be part of a counter bid than sit on my hands and do nothing. You tell me what you would rather be part of???
Those outside RIG, that may still also have vested thier share holding weight to the cause of avoiding a cursory, and defensive (BOD wise) wind up of the company.....
Would not take kindly to the RIG bidding to then exclude them from any benefit. Despite our support!
I am sure that's not the RIG aim, being an ordinary SH group they have canvased support from all quarters. Have they not?
But, and in light of this accusations. Would be very interested to have them make that fact known.....
Thanks.
Strummer, voting no to the resolutions has got nothing to do with RIG putting a bid in.
They are not related in any way.
The voting No was to ensure the directors wouldn’t control the liquidation process.
You can’t please everyone at the end of the day. Some have been working tirelessly trying to find a solution and others are just waiting to see what happens.
All shareholders were invited to join RIG. Nothing has been kept a secret and there is even a FB group where lots of useful information and thoughts have been shared.
End of the day as I have said already, the hope is the mine is bought for a fair price so we all get some of our investment back.
The RIG bid for Rambler Canada has nothing to do with the CVL vote for Rambler Metals and Mining PLC. Do some research before throwing accusations around. Any shareholder has been welcome to join the RIG group for a long time now, and the back up plan of a low-ball bid for RMMC was not and has never been a secret.
@Santhi.
Fair enough. Be interesting to see the UK vote outcome. When I spoke to the prospective UK liquidator. He was at pains to point out that the convoluted process to even get a vote registered was not his doing. Simply the archaic Nominee hoops that had to be jumped through... Etc etc.
So be Interesting to see how many Nays actually made it to the ballot box I guess ...
As to the Canadian sale. All logic would suggest to me that the only small chance of a return is if more than one party is interested, and a bidding rivalry occured. Leaving aside any fall back RIG offer. I have great doubts though that there has been time for significant potential players to do the due diligence needed to make anything more than a perfunctory low bid, and to just chance their arm.
As such I am not expecting much hope sadly. But it would be nice to be pleasantly surprised.
Cheers.
For those that refused to commit an ounce of effort with RIG when urged to do so (on countless occasions), check out the story, ”THE LITTLE RED HEN”.
I posted here long ago you’ll end up wanting to eat the bread.
Do you think given the timescales and the nature of the sale circumstances there will be bidding competition Bertie. Are you hopeful of funds returning therefore. Or is that highly improbable given the timescale and circumstances. The Liquidators off the record view was that one of the larger creditors would buy it when I chatted with him .....
There is very littel chance of any return, but the members of RIG are at least fighting the corner for ALL shareholders with any bid.
Do you think BM might be one of those 'larger' creditors?
The RIG bid was to provide more than one bidder....
Who here has bothered to register to attend the GM - outside of the RIG group?
Strummer.
My thoughts would be pure speculation, so irrelevant really.
My hope is that EVERY PI gets their money back somehow.
And whoever didn’t do the right thing for RMM gets their comeuppance via the courts.
Sadly there are many here whose lives and minds have been adversely affected by the greedy few. The stories are heartbreaking.
Good luck to you and every Pi.
The correct result is that that SISP is valued properly to benefit the shareholders - preferably on a restructured basis so that the original shareholders of the UK entity benefit from future returns following the dreadful mismanagement. This is similar to what the 7% shareholder group in Cineworld is arguing in the US bankruptcy protection court proceedings to avoid an under-valuation in teh restructuring to suit creditors but where shareholders nothing. (Last week's news.) This is our best option in Canada but no-one has realised this. If the UK Parent is liquidated we need a court appointed liquidator who must legally immediately remove and investigate the directors under a compulsory liquidation.