RE: Time for a change27 Sep 2024 15:35
THE CAPS ARE MY ADDITIONS TO EXPLAIN THINKING "The Board and I are excited about this next stage in the development of our strategy TO ENRICH OURSELVES, which I AND THE PRIVATE EQUITY MAJORITY SHAREHOLDERS are confident will fully unlock the growth potential of each business FOR US and provide greater optionality to maximise future value for ME, ALAN & THE PE MAJORITY shareholders."
This has PRIVATE EQUITY exit written all over. Am increasingly suspicious of Ashmore, who has delivered nothing for shareholders whilst trousering huge personal wonga. The new holding company structure, with its two separately managed, ring-fenced businesses is perfect PE playbook stuff. Who benefits? Ashnmore for one as note EXECUTIVE CHAIR of Pro Service, whilst ensuring that the current chair nose is kept in joint/in trough as NED chair of the less attractive (PE multiple basis) Ops business. Note tyhat not one of the analysts asked about the glaring conflict of interest that immediately arises between Ashmore as EXECUTIVE Chair and Shorten as his CEO. The fact that this legal separation will lead to big costs so much so that guidance has been withdrawn matters not a fig to Ashmore because he really doesnt care about the shareholders. IMV it is absolutely in Ashmore & the PE ownrs interest that the share price remain nailed to the floor. Why, because that makes it easier to engineer a takeover of the Group at a very cheap price, warehosuing the attractive company- Pro Service - for a future IPO at a higher multiple whilst probably selling on Operations either to a consolidator or avia an MBO