Member Info for Frogjumper

@Ports I agree that a sale is unlikely. No one would be interested in the express or document exchange businesses. The only sensible rationale would be that someone wanted to get their hands on the freight business but that, as proven elsewhere, does not integrate well with other businesses and would not bring operational synergies. Some sales and marketing synergies perhaps.

It's not just the share options. Someone commented here a month or so back "I was alerted to DX shares as a buy in the middle of November 2020 when they were trading around 15p by an employee who along with other employees were all encouraged to buy shares as they would be worth over £1 within 12 months. I even had a screenshot of the email at the time. Employees were told to be discreet who they told and only to be family."

I'd be livid and possibly afraid about my wealth if I were a DX employee and had followed this advice.

The broker's name is Liberum and the article is here: https://liberum.com/insights/thought-of-the-week-3-december-2021/

Silence is golden
But my eyes still see
Silence is golden, golden
But my eyes still see
But my eyes still see
But my eyes still see

.... or not! :-)

@Pianista "However, management and institutional investors have far too much skin in the game to be throwing in the towel that easily, so maybe the news, when it arrives, won’t be as bad as feared."

You're ever the optimist! My glass is always half empty ;-)

@Pianista
"why give out run-of-the-mill news of a depot opening while studiously ignoring something else far more significant and important to nervous shareholders?"

I think it's another example of the Johnson strategy in action: keep talking about the good stuff and hope that people will forget about the bad. It's also possible that DX genuinely thinks it's in the right and GT is wrong; but that's what Johnson thinks about Partygate. If only constantly saying I'm right made me right, my life would be so much easier! :-)

@ Pianista "However, if it’s that bad, you’d expect the Chairman, who is in charge of corporate governance, to resign. The fact he hasn’t is a good sign therefore (though not foolproof!)."

You're much kinder than I am. I regard his failure to resign as a failure to recognise his failings, rather as Johnson failed to recognise what was and wasn't a party in Downing Street.

@Pianista

"Ports: “I don't think anyone would voluntarily take it private just after turnaround and just a they start making a reasonable profit.” I agree, which is why I don’t think there’ll be an MBO."

The key word in the above is "voluntarily". They've been pushed or have worked themselves into a corner and now have to do something involuntarily.

I can now understand why a couple of people on this board have expressed their frustration about other posters claiming inside knowledge. I'm thinking of ATPM at present. Unless this person's real name is Lloyd Dunn (there are two working at DX) I don't trust a word he/she says. I'm actually certain that the CEO is not so stupid as to allow an auditor to be appointed with which he has "form". He would have had ample opportunity to voice any concerns to his FD, BOD and Audit Committee. Likewise, the speculation about why "the company was not set up as unlisted when LD joined" as if it's always been the plan to take it private. I think LD just saw an opportunity to buy into the company at a bargain basement price and increase his capital by turning it around. He might have viewed an MBO as one way of realising some of his capital but he would have been foolish to discount others. In my experience people go for the best deal that is available at the time they want to realise their holdings. But this is just my opinion and I don't claim any inside knowledge.

"Lloyd has form with GT and was looking to dispense with their services before this issue arose, once the audit was complete. "

If that's true then he must be more stupid than I thought. GT were only appointed auditors in 2020 . Lloyd became DX's CEO in 2017. If he has "form" with them why on earth did he allow them to be appointed in 2020?

Portswigger, I'm with you on an MBO being the most likely outcome. I think it would also be the best outcome for me.

It wouldn't surprise me if DX delists and Everton get relegated this year!

Do these deadlines for submission of accounts allow for the extensions granted to all companies as following the covid disruption?

Pat2014, I don't see that delisting affects Lloyd Dunn's decisions very much. It doesn't matter to someone like him if the company is publically traded or not: he just wants as large a stake as possible. In fact, taking DX off the market probably benefits him and others because they don't have the issues around compliance with exchange rules.

No new RNS this morning. Not a surprise at all. The leadership at DX is appalling.

Hello Portswigger, my experience of company lawyers is that, as with any lawyer, there are times when they can assess the situation incorrectly or when their advice is ignored by clients or employers who think they know better. I don't claim this is the case at DX because I have no inside knowledge.

Sisteract, I think your reaction is excessive. There's been a bit of hearsay about the management structure and speculation about the disciplinary action but nothing that would normally be classed as insider information. Or have I missed something?

"I understand the "corporate governance " issue actually relates to a board member trying to extract commercial information from a competitors employee and that this may have lead to legal action." Unlikely to have been the HR Director doing that so I think we can discount the idea that she was the object of the disciplinary action.

As we've established in respect to the "HR Director", DX calls some people "Director" even when they're not on the main board. Is ATPM sure that the issue relates to a "board member" and not just someone with "Director" in their job title?

Tep, it could be any of a number of things:

1. She could have been disciplined because she did something wrong;
2. She could have been managing a disciplinary process but wasn't allowed to take the action she felt was necessary and resigned on a point of principle;
3. She could have been victim of some form of discrimination or other disciplinary matter;
4. She might have fancied a change of scenery;
5. She might have been offered redundancy;
6. None of the above and any of a myriad of other reasons.

Speculation isn't helping us other than being fun!