The best route...for the board of directors.03 Mar 2020 12:54
Remember the Barclays fundraising saga...the BoD rejected govt funding because that would have restricted their bonuses. Instead went with Qataris which cost the company higher interest rates....but directors could fill their boots! Why would SXX BoD actively pursue other options in interest of shareholders...when they have one route that feathers their own nests?
According to Companies House, a company director has 7 principal duties (Gov.uk/ companies house). These include: a)Acting in a way that they consider in good faith would be most likely to promote the success of the company for the benefit of its shareholders, and b) Managing conflicts of interest such as situations where the Director may be considering taking advantage, on a personal basis, of property, information or opportunity which belongs to the company. I wonder to what extent we shareholders believe these duties have been adequately discharged?
I know markets are all in the red today, but Anglo's shares are down 9%. I wonder if part of the fall reflects either the possibility of having to raise their offer for SXX...or the possibility that they might fail to pull off the steal of the century? Either way, I have just bought a few as some kind of hedge!
That's a fair point. I have just tweeted big Dom as well. Honestly, with a new administration, new chancellor etc, I really think it is worth canvassing govt intervention again. Certainly nothing to lose from it.
I have encouraged shareholders to send tweets to Rishi Sunak...he's easy to find on Twitter. I have highlighted: a) the politics - a conservative party backing a mine in the north with local PI's, jobs, exports, world-leading etc plus b) the financial case based on unique product, pre-sales and a clear line of sight to operating cash flow. Obviously not easy to make full presentation within the constraints of a tweet!
My understanding is that all of the directors, including the CEO are agents of the shareholders. Their function, their duty is to advance our interests. Who amongst us feels they have had their interests advanced as much as, say the CEO's interests have been advanced? When was the last time that this number of private shareholders were so badly abused by the market, the regulators, their board and countless "interested" intermediaries?
Not being a Yorkshireman, I'm afraid I don't know who the relevant MP is, but for those who do...are you satisfied that the case is being made in the strongest terms to the new Chancellor? I know Hammond and Javed declined to put up the gtee required by JPM, but new broom?
Yes that was the number. I wasn't happy discussing the matter on the phone. Chap was very polite, and not pushy, but started off checking that I had been informed about the bid etc...but ultimately it was seeking a steer as to whether I would support or not. For the record I'm in for 158,000 shares! Ouch.
Short sellers - better protected than grouse!14 Aug 2019 09:56
It seems that the short sellers have a very cosy relationship with market makers. I have seen the same phenomenon recently with Premier Oil; just when you think shorters will crash and burn, the market makers let them float down gently.
Apologies if this has been posted before...but I thought the Bond Issue was underwritten? If so the risk of so-called adverse market conditions was bad luck for the underwriter, but SXX should have received the underwritten amount....that's what an underwriting fee is all about. As for adverse market conditions, the market for bonds of late has been very strong. If you cant' sell fixed rate debt when long gilts are flying, when can you? My fear is that the underwriters were about to take a bath and sweet-talked their way out of putting their hands in their pockets.