Member Info for CJohnSpain

Good to hear from you again, Tully Crow.

So really, the market cap of DLC is around £7m.

Of course, both DLC and CRV are trading at a dscount to tangible asset value. (That's why I invested here.)

But by a country mile, this is the most peculiar and exotic share I hold. (And that puts off many investors.)

Surely, the directors already hold a significant percentage of the company. They can't really be criticised on those grounds.I, for one, would be happier if they held rather less.

But would it honesly be kosher to try ropjing in your mates to buy a few cut-price CRV or DLC shares. Ummmm. Dunno about that…..

All the best CJohn

Hi Tully,

the four trades on Friday, 2 at 4.25 cents, and 2 at 4 cents were for a grand total of $325 Canadian, which is worth just over £186.

My feeling is that this shouldn't be taken too seriously as an indicator of DLC's market cap.

Thanks Karina for your own impressive research and the links! Whole heartedly agree with Spot and Tully, The issue is that they need to give more information to shareholders. The IIU deal is only one example. Whether it's a related party transaction or not, the deal may well be entirely above board and in shareholders' .nterests. But the lack of info given creates suspicion, Likewise, why fail to tell shareholders about the Sretaw case? To my mind, the have a sm

i've done some more research at SEC: IIU stands for international Investment and Underwriting. In the mid noughties, it registered stakes at SEC in two companies: Remote MDX, a Utah medical company and Datalex PLC, an Irish company. Simultaneously, Dermot F Desmon had notifiable interests in these companies. So IIU is a Desmond "brand". It's possible, but not certain, that CRV's purchase of IIU inc was a related transaction. It may be that they have just used the wonderful IIU name for the purchased company. Again, not enough info to be sure. PS I do have more info re IIU. But I don't think it's especially relevant.

Purely on the financials: CRV have purchased IIU inc at a pe-tax multiple of 5. On the face of it a good deal. But, of course, that profit figure is just one year's performance - perhaps a particuarly good year or indeed a particualry bad one. Was that $500,105 pre-tax profit on $2m turnover or $20m or $200m? In reality, we don't have enough info to judge whether- on financial grounds - this was a good purchase.

I mean arrange for the Greek company to pay back the loan early wihtout paying early pay back fees.

Regarding the Greek loan: the hotel company paid this back early. They'd surely have had to have paid a fee to CRV do that. So total sum repaid would have been more than $2.5m. A speculation: CRV strapped for cash; see the IIU opportunity; contact the Greek company as they know it's not (any longer) in financial difficulties and see whether an arrangement can be made to waive the extra fees???

So the IIU Nominees Ltd with a Desmond as a beneficial holder that I saw on the Edgar database wasn't a coincidence. as far as I could see there was no actual activity. it seemed to be a dormant shell company.

Insurance brokers that are also public companies will always be SEC listed. But this is not the case with either the holding company, IIU inc, or its subsidiaries.

Hi Jarnold, Much financial regulation in teh US comes from state level including regulation of insurance brokers. Private companies in general - including private insurance brokers - aren't SEC listed, So I doubt whether the insurance subsidiaries will be SEC listed. I agree with your description of IIU inc as a holding company (it's clearly not SEC listed.)

Hi Tully, The purchase of the insurance br�ker was at a low multiple to earnings. If companies can be picked up at such a bargain price, this is the justification. The company is private; and hence is not regulated by SEC (the federal Securiites Commission) but by the state securities commission where it's based - Virginia in this case, i believe. There are less disclosure requirements on US private companies than on UK equivalents. Nonetheless, we should be able to find out more about the company, as time elapses and further filings are made. CRV have said they intend to invest in US private companies, because such companies are trading very cheaply. IIU would seem to be a case in point.

Hi Tully, My experience is that the vast majority of investors aren't interested in asset values. (They judge a company on its profits/cash flow.) Indeed, if this wasn't the case, asset-style value investing such as practised by myself and others wouldn't work. There are several companies in my portfolio trading at eye-watering discounts to tangible asset value; in some cases for years. To take just one example, : Caffyn's, a motor dealer in the south of England, trading at less than a third of tangible asset value - mostly freehold property. My experience has always been that at some point the discount to assets closes. patience is necessary however. So CRV isn't unique in this. However, there are obvious particularly off-putting aspects to CRV. Firstly, the assets are far-flung across the world and often in troubled countries. ((And therefore cheap.)) Secondly, agricultural assets tend to put off most investors. So very unfashionable. Thirdly, the issues of governance we've been discussing on this board.

If it isn't a coincidence, most likely explanation is that CRV have simply used a "familiar" name.

I've checked the EDGAR database at the US Securities Commission. There was an IIU Nominees Ltd with a few entries from 2001-2007. But no concrete activity, as far as I could understand it. One of the individuals registering a beneficial interest was surnamed Desmond. This is probably mere coincidence and a red herring?

If the settlement has no material impact, what on earth is there of importance to keep confidential about?

Hi Karina, Perhaps, they should employ new counsel�.. If s/he can't grasp the distinction between respecting a confidentiality agreement and merely announcing that there has been an agreement........ .

Soory about the poor editing at the end of my previous message!

Hi Karina, So in August 2017, CRV transferrred two holdings to DLC: 1. its 49% shareholding in Ceniako. Ceniako owns a 1973 hectare parcel in Caravelas, Brazil. 2. Its 95% shareholding in Craven House Industries. Craven House industries holds 500 hectares of land in Canavierias, Brazil. These two holdings were held on the balance sheet of CRV at combined value of $5.058m. They were transferred to DLC at an implied value of $9.034m; for a a 68% holding in DLC. Currently, CRV's DLC shares are worth roughly $8m. So all that has happened is that overall DLC's share price has gone down about 10% since August 2017. (DLC has, traded at higher and lower prices, as you will rermember.) But, of course, CRV itself trades at a marked discount to balance sheet tangible asset value. Today, my rough calculation makes PTBV for CRV around 0.4. That's a not untypical value. So when the two holdings transferred to DLC were held DIRECTLY, the market was giving them a value of 0.4 x $5.058m,which was the balance sheet value, making a grand totat of around $2m. So the DLC move is really quite a positive. all best So, in my view, this has been indeed a positive move. So when Ceniako and CHI were held dreictly by CRV, they

Hello Munster, I understand that you are based in the US and have only been able to pick up a small quantity of shares in CRV.. CRV is quoted in US dollars, but trades on an English market and settlements are in pounds. This creates complications. Limit orders can not be set at all. And if you are using a US broker, an extra level of complexity is added. this may acount for your inability to pick up many sahres in spite of having open orders in the market. You make general remarks about AIM stocks being difficult to deal in. I can only asume- as with the above - that the difficulty arises from your US location. (Likewise, I have found difficulties dealing in "pink sheet" stocks in the US.) One obvious solution is to open an account with an English broker. I know from personal experience that the red tape associated with this is horrendous. Living merely in nearby Spain, I am subject to ridiculous levels of scrutiny on my various Englsih accounts. (Better however than trading Englsih stocks through a Spanish broker.) I'm sorry if none of the above is helpful. Good luck.

Hi Rusty, I think you've read my posting wrong; I'm not in favour of unjustifiable company secrecy On this issue, it's quite clear the market should be informed there has been a settlement, even if, as I suspect, the outcome has been a damp squib. And as a result the BOD can't be bothered. By the way, I wasn't sure what you meant when you say that the Brazilian land is now worth $2m. I've looked in vain for any relevant update or info. The last sell price for DLC was 18 cents. This gives a rough value for CRV's share of 6 million sterling. (Around $8m.) .