RE: Sell26 Oct 2023 16:31
@Glowacki I reached out and got exactly the same. I then followed up with:
"Hello Luke,
Thank you for taking the time to get back to me and so promptly as ever.
Whilst I understand the long-term outlook with regards to raising the finance, this was something that very much came out of the blue for all current investors and there was very little that was forthcoming from yourselves as far as explanation and reassurance as to the sudden and urgent need for capital closely following the announcement of the delay in permissions to self regulate and the heavy increase in shorters. What I think the reality is is that it is not necessarily good for existing share holders, as the vast majority will be at least 50% down, more that it was good for the business. You may argue that these two elements go hand in glove, but I wouldn't say that is this case as the share holders have already made sizeable losses (on paper at the very least) which there is no guarantee of recovery, where as the business and those paid by it continue as "normal" and someone else benefited from Metros vulnerable state.
Given that the deal and issue of shares hasn't been approved yet, and having given 102 million to one person and the remaining 48 million to other institutions, there clearly would have been the ability to have had a few million earmarked for retail investors in principle which, if not filled, the aforementioned could have swallowed up too. The likelihood of retail investor not taking those would be close to zero given it being an opportunity to average down after the landslide in share price (even before the dilution) off the back of poor management of the release of information being released and subsequent lack of communication. As inferred above, I am not sure I agree with your sentiment that the deal was in the best interest of all stakeholders. Being one of them I have seen no benefit at all and, had it been better managed, we likely wouldn't have seen the need for such an extreme fire sale. I think what you are saying is that it was in the best interest of the bank and the major shareholders.
Its an awfully good job that the share price had fallen so drastically for metro bank in such a small space of time, otherwise you wouldn't have been able to get the equity if 30p was where it needed to be given where the price was a month or two back. I appreciate it was mentioned in previous RNS's that looking for finance is on going, but never was it conveyed or insinuated that the bank was suddenly going to become desperate and in difficulty. There is no way you can tell me the bank wasn't both desperate and in difficulty if they gave the shares away for 30p???? And the control of the business....... All in the interest of all stake holders?
I appreciate it is a difficult position for you, but for those who are at the mercy of things like this, it is cathartic to call things for what they are rather than a corporation basically gaslighting the likes
Sign In
Follow the stocks
