Member Info for CloudyMountain

You must have a different system with your broker (odd). With mine, the default is not to accept the offer. Therefore if people do not vote (as you say), they do not accept the offer.

That’s eminently logical - I would imagine that they can’t have the default being to accept the offer as that means anyone not seeing the offer would be deemed to have accepted it, for example. I can’t imagine that that would be acceptable in law, which would explain why you have to take positive action to accept the offer.

Do you have a default of accepting the offer? I don’t see how yours can be different to mine.

P.S. I ignored the first offer. I still have my shares - the system didn’t take that as accepting the offer. I will ignore the second one too.

I hadn’t read it. Thank you.

I wish I could vote against the offer. I have a choice between accepting the offer to buy my £10 note for £9 or not accepting it. I haven’t got the option of telling them what I think of it, sadly.

I don’t want to sell even for £10. I want to leave them untouched for 2-5 years and then reassess. I could hold them for far longer.

I couldn’t agree more. It’s a fascinating article.

I laughed when they extended the offer because they haven’t had sufficient numbers take it up. “Roll up, roll up! We will buy your £10 notes for £9! Turnaround time for paying you is about 10 days compared with 2 in the open market. The open market will pay you £10 - wait 6 months and it might pay you £12 or more. We encourage you to act quickly”. I bet you do!

The reason they gave for the offer was ridiculous.

Thank you, Falcon01, for sharing the article with us.

Am I right in thinking that they now have approximately 60% of the shares i.e. 50% before the offer and 10% gained through the offer?

I gather that the 20% acceptance was 20% of the outstanding shares i.e. 10% of the company (not 20% of it).

I’ve never seen a takeover bid offer such a small premium above the share price. If we are going into a supercycle, as is being speculated, it’d be foolish to sell.

DTY did a similar thing two weeks ago. There was no apparent reason for a significant sudden rise of approximately 10%. Then they revealed good news and the SP shot up (by over 60% in one day). I’m not saying that’s going to happen with TED but I am saying that it might be because some people know something we don’t and are buying in.

The other side is that a 10% rise one day can be followed by a 10% fall the next. And I do wonder if market makers drop the price to encourage people to sell, then jack the price up to sell their newly acquired cheap shares for more - and people buy in because they think it’ll carry on rising but it falls back. There’s no such thing as easy money in shares.

It’s a massive rise for no apparent reason. I wonder if there’s good news yet to be released and those in the know are buying in.

I’m guessing. I have no idea why it’s risen.

“...comes across as wishful thinking”.

@downbutnotout, why do you think that the high 70s are possible today?

If you mean “It’ll bounce sometime” then I agree with you but anyone can say that - no one knows when it’ll bounce, or to what level. Saying that the answer to both is “today” and “high 70s” comes across wishful thinking.

The next question is whether the bounce will be part of the general trend down or the start of a reversal.

I thought I’d write this for anyone who is confused, especially as the deadline for the rights issue decision is tonight.

The current share price for the shares via the rights issue (“WTB NP” meaning Nil Paid) is just over £10. WTB shares are just over £25. If you’re thinking that means you’re being asked to pay £15 via the rights issue for shares currently trading at £10, you’re mistaken.

Your right to buy the new shares has a value because it is the right to buy something currently worth £25 for £15. You can sell that right for £10/share. Or you can exercise it for £15/share.

That explains why the difference between the two share prices is £15.

(This is my understanding - do your own research).

Thanks to the newbies for posting their first ever comment to help, and to everyone else who has commented.

I’m writing this just to bump it up the listings, in the hope that Crashbc will see the replies in support and that more people will offer support and also report the original post in the hope that LSE can contact Crashbc to offer help. There’s going to be others who feel equally despondent.

I’m lost for words. Someone else has written a disturbing comment under the thread “Death” and it’s just terrible. I’m so sorry for you all.

0011, you may do better next time. You don’t have to get it back the way you lost it. You may find better shares.

Thanks. I’ve reported it too in the hope that he can be helped urgently.

If you are reading this and don’t understand it (like me when I first read it) see the separate “Death” thread. Someone needs help. It’s awful.

Sock warrior, what you say in your initial comment is right but there are ways of saying things. There’s a chasm between pointing out people’s mistakes and rubbing their noses in it.

PIs are naturally attracted to get rich quick schemes. Some friends of friends advised me to invest in an oil company years ago. Their research was “It’s gone down a lot”. That’s it! I avoided it like the plague. It was a hot stock at the time. The next time I looked, as a matter of interest, the share price had indeed plummeted. Which explained why, when we’d met since, they didn’t mention the company.

Good God, I am so sorry. That’s awful.

I was commenting on the offer, not on anything that did or did not happen before then. I’m not aware of any dodgy dealings by Anglo.

I am so sorry.

And the offer caused the SP to increase by more than 50%, from approximately 3.5 p to 5.5 p. The offer has been beneficial for shareholders.

The recent bloodbath in stock markets worldwide made SXX an island of green in a sea of red. I thought it obvious then that the offer was a double blessing and, had it not been made, the share price would’ve fallen from 3.5 p like everything else.

Have you never held a share that’s gone into administration, or where there’s been a D4E swap? I’m sorry for those who have seen this crystallise a loss but they are still 5.5 p/share better off than had it gone into administration. In the long term it’s been painful for them but in the short term I think they’ve dodged a bullet on this vote.

The stock market is unpredictable at the best of times. And three months is a very long time frame.

I’ve got plenty of ideas. Just don’t expect any of them to be right.

“Rottweiler has bite of Ted Baker” 14/12/19.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/3700a5ea-1dc5-11ea-8556-8cb7c08c0f76

An activist investor has more than doubled its stake in Ted Baker days after a profit warning resulted in the chairman and chief executive resigning.

Toscafund, a £4 billion hedge fund founded in 2000 by Martin “the Rottweiler” Hughes, 58, took a 5.9 per cent stake on Tuesday but took advantage of the fashion retailer’s sinking share price to build it to 11.9 per cent.

Ted Baker was started by Ray Kelvin in 1998 with one shop in Glasgow and has grown to 550 stores and concessions. He stepped down in April after allegations of misconduct, which he denies. This week in a third profit warning it said full-year profits would be £5 million, a 90 per cent nosedive on the year. A week ago the retailer had admitted a £25 million accounting error.

The shares have lost three quarters of their value this year but rose by 19½p, or 5.6 per cent, to 372¾p after the Toscafund stake was revealed.

One commentator said there was little for the activist to agitate for as the board had already been cleared out. “The numbers have been kitchen-sinked, there is fresh leadership in key positions and there is an upside from asset disposals and cost reductions,” he said. “Acting chairman Sharon Baylay is not wasting any time.”

To encourage panic selling & FOMO buying? And to trigger stop-loss selling?