The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring financial educator and author Jared Dillian has 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.
*missed
Fat fingers…
Have I kissed something? What makes you think PH might be against it?
Well, if Peel Hunt are against the proposal, they do not stand a chance.
That's quite a weird statement to make given I just explained how their Circular impacts shareholders. Just pointing out the obvious maybe, but how it would relate to me working for Verditek really is something out of the ordinary?
Its under the 'view shareholder meetings' tab on the my-accounts page when you first log in. Just put my 200,000 shares in as against all three motions. I'm down 95% and at this point I'm not going to let them walk off with the only bit of value left.
Yep it's rotten to the core.
As usual there is no news on current sales. I am a definite NO. 2023 H2 figures should be released, the smell is almost unbearable.
DJ79
You sound like you might either work for VDTK or be one of the few who stand to benefit from voting for this. There’s is no way on earth anyone should let this through. It’s daylight robbery.
Riddle me this:
Why on earth would shareholders vote in favor of the disposal of assets? As they mention in their Circular those assets are the most important aspect of the Verditek company. Selling those would mean that the shares that shareholders have in the trading entity on Aim become abolutely worthless. The bondholders will gain those assets and intellectual property. Of course, they mention that they will explore a reverse takeover, but why would they?
From the bondholder perspective, they would have to share ownership with the remaining shareholders, diluting their potential profits and rights. They will simply want to have ownership of the existing assets in the newco, which will continue operating the Verditek brand as they are already doing, IN PROSPECT OF INCREASING SALES AS WE HAVE ALREADY SEEN HAPPEN IN THE PAST MONTHS.
This is a simple shareholder shakeout. They will get rid of us and continue under bondholder ownership, specifically, Gavin Mayhew, owning >30%.
The options are simple:
1) the bondholders AND FORMER DIRECTORS walk away with the value of the company assets and shareholders are left with nothing
2) or we vote no and we remain owners of the assets, the company has to attract financing and could go bust, again leaving us with nothing but also the directors of the company with nothing
With the way they have been treating our best interest, it is time to say no.
https://verditek.com/uploads/document/Verditek_Circular_09.02_FINAL.pdf
@Roger65 The purpose of this Circular is to provide you with the background to, reasons for, and details of, the
Disposal and to explain why the Directors consider the Disposal to be in the best interests of the
Shareholders as a whole.
There is your "best interest of the Shareholders"
The Circular can be found here
https://verditek.com/uploads/document/Verditek_Circular_09.02_FINAL.pdf
Agreed. It seems pretty obvious their intention is to wipe out current share holders If they don’t provide an amazing reason to vote in favour then I hope everyone voted against to prevent the Directors on with their money grabbing games. I’ll check HL and now. Tks for the heads up. Careful not to vote too soon. If they realise it’s going to be voted down they’ll try to skin the cat another way.
Rob Richards must be stopped from stealing this IP and fleecing hundreds of share holders for the last few years .
Roger, I’ve just checked the shareholder meetings section on HL again and they’ve now finally put the vote up there. Haven’t got a circular. But I’ve preemptively voted against all proposals until they give me an absurdly strong reason to change my mind. They’ve treated us like we’re scum. Bet you’re voting the same so let yourself loose on that now. I feel your pain — I lost a ton on cineworld last year and I know it’s wretched. Keep soldiering on and staying positive. All best
I'm not holding this but have dealt with a few cash shells. If the cash shell was abandoned and ceased trading (or if there's no reverse takeover within 6 months) the shares would be cancelled and no value would be realised for shareholders.
Any capital raised for the new company happens within that shell, so Verditek plc (or whatever it's renamed to after they've sold the opco) effectively becomes a holding company for the new enterprise. Management's incentive is they can continue to draw a wage via capital raises.
Long time lurker here, looking for some thoughts from others.
I have a few shares in this company and am considering how to vote. I am minded to begrudgingly support the motion - anything to give the company a fighting chance and recover some of the value from my holding. Lots of other companies are struggling for finance at the moment so I don't entirely blame the board for it having reached this point.
However, I don't understand this part of the disposal process: "Upon completion of the Disposal, the Company will be regarded as an AIM Rule 15 cash shell, having ceased to own, control or conduct all or substantially all, of its existing trading business, activities or assets. The Company will therefore need to, within six months, make an acquisition or acquisitions which constitute a reverse takeover under AIM Rule 14, failing which trading of the Company's shares on AIM will be cancelled."
What incentive would the board have to use the shell company to make an acquisition which constituted a reverse takeover, within six months? If they have created a new company and have permission to allocate 100% of the shares, surely they would just use this new company to raise capital, and leave the shell to cease trading? If someone could explain to me why the board would do the reverse takeover (i.e., why it would be in their interest to do it), that would be appreciated. As otherwise it just looks like they're gifting them all the assets and dumping the shareholders (turkeys voting for Christmas being the analogy which comes to mind). And if that's what they are doing I will certainly vote against.
Second question - I presume there's no way we can engineer an ousting of Rob Richards as CEO? I'd be much more willing to vote for the proposal if his departure was the quid pro quo.
Has anyone received the Circular yet?
I'm with HL and there's nothing there yet to allow me to vote. Are the BODs going to sink so low as to only send it with a few hours to go before the GM? Nothing would surprise me with this gem Rob Richards.
Yep once it’s up. We’re waiting for the next RNS which tells us it’s all over and that the BOD ‘did all they could’ to try and preserve the interests of all shares holders. lol
Happy to see it. Will you post the link?
Was right about Rob Richards all along. Wish I'd listened to him.
Given what's happened here over the course of the last two or three years, right back to the supposed 'burglary' and repeatedly delayed Certifications and constant tiny changes to the products so that they were always having to go back for reappraisal time and again, surely you don't give RR any credit for being a decent human being? Jeez.
There will be a short video released on Youtube very soon which gives a run down of the actions of Verditek's BoDs over time and its recent 'suggestions' to help 'secure' the company. It highlights the involvement of the Rt Hon Lord Willetts, the Chairman and all the Directors, especially dear Rob. Lovely man. It's hilarious and will make people think before they throw their hard earned cash into scams, sorry companies, such as Verditek. It also ends with a very funny send up of Rob Richards' other company which of course, as if by magic, will benefit hugely from what's happened in the wiping out of VDTK ordinary share holders. Just imagine what could happen if some kindly folks in the Press got wind of it..nudge nudge wink wink.. And before anyone worries about it, one of the members of our Investment Club is a retired lawyer who worked for Linklaters and also Morgan Stanley for 12 years. He says there's nothing illegal or that can be challenged in the video....because it's ALL ABSOLUTELY TRUE and irrefutable, even though when it's all laid out it seems utterly unbelievable and farcical.
Do you have more details because this is of course a pretty hollow claim
I feel very sorry for shareholders here. I worked with Verditek a few years ago and can testify RR is the most obnoxious man going
Couple of million to Lindab is chicken feed.
I would have no qualms now voting for a buyout even at that lowly figure. Far better that than seeing RR and pals pick this up for nothing having let pis pay him to run the company into he ground.
Please vote against everyone. Our best chance of getting anything is to vote this down and the BOD try to sell the company on the open market. Someone will buy it and for rather more than £500k. If we are to lose everything then so should the Directors.
I think they need 75% to approve. If the AGM deal was scrapped because the major shareholders did not want the board to gain control by the 100% placing it is difficult to see why they would agree to such a blatant giveaway. If you approve, you are certain to lose almost everything. If you vote against then an alternative will have to be considered. It seems to me that it is a no brainer and I will be voting against. This is another attempt by the board to use the threat of collapse to ensure that they get their way. There has been a reasonable amount of buying today, so at least I am not alone in saying to the board " bring it on, if I go down so do you"
Not sure what else they can do. Bondholders have loaned the company £100k effective 6 Feb. They already have control and voting down the proposal would collapse the company.
Not sure why the mcap is still £600k. The deal would leave a cash shell with £50k (which will doubtless dribble away in 'admin costs') so either an AIM listing is worth over £500k or a counter offer is expected by some. I hope that white knight shows up but I'm not tempted to take a punt on it.