Gordon Stein, CFO of CleanTech Lithium, explains why CTL acquired the 23 Laguna Verde licenses. Watch the video here.
Where is Elliot's formal declaration of a "multi-billion pound shareholding"? So far, Mr. Singer is being more bashful than a fan dancer at the Folies Bergère. Coy hints in the financial press to his pals at the FT is all we have.
GSK is capitalised at £68 billion. There's an obligation to disclose your precise holding once it exceeds 3%, which just happens to be £2.04 billion. Changes usually have to be disclosed within 3 business days. The story hit the comics last Thursday, so that's Day 1.
Now where are we? Friday, Monday, yes, it's Day 3. Where's the announcement, or is Mr. Singer having as much success as he enjoyed in Iraq as Dubya's disastrous sidekick? Surely not another smoke and mirrors attempt to move the market?
Paolo, Ciao! HL's claim that they won't sell your shares due to Covid has flabbered my ghast. If that were remotely true the LSE would have been shut for over a year. So if you have a paper share certificate (?), I'd suggest you call around a few brokers like Barclays, Halifax and Peel Hunt, and ask the question. Will you sell this for me, please? For a £15 fee, I imagine that one of them will. But, if no-one will help you, I suggest you ask the question at the LSE's own website. (londonstockexchange.com) Good luck.
Paulo,
I suggest you advise your registrars that they are dead wrong. WMH failed to obtain court approval on March 31st and Caesar's Bid requires Court approval before it can pay anything to anyone.
Meanwhile, there are millions of shares being traded daily and over 80,000 traded so far this morning - all around 275-276p. Perhaps suggest to them that they visit the London Stock Exchange website to see for themselves.
Question: why are you talking to the registrar? Surely you use a broker to buy & sell?
This very poorly performing trust is advertising through some people called Kepler on the 'net today.
A cursory glance reveals truly dreadful results since inception. Trustnet says their performance is 4th quartile in every time period from 1 month to 5 years. That means for every four trusts picking plc's in the far-east, three-quarters of them do much better, and some very much better, than SST.
Consistently underperforming trusts like this should be shut down, imho. If you want to invest in funds or trusts, go to Trustnet. Pick the sector you like and then search for the results that show 1st or 2nd quartile performance for 1, 3 and 5 years. That's where your money will work hard for you.
The FCA may say that past performance is no guide to future performance, but it's no surprise to me that that some fund managers consistently outperform and some, like this hyena, are 4th quartile all the way. 75% or more of their competitors outperformed them in 2016 and have continued to do so every year, right up to today.
I hate to be so blunt about incompetence, but it's time the people who won't do very much good for your hard-earned savings were held up to to a rigorous inspection in bright sunlight. Avoid at all costs and if you're an existing investor sell now and follow the simple rules in the 3rd paragraph above..
Ronnie, Judges always take their own sweet time, because they have a clerk who writes the judgement for them. The judge will tell his clerk, after the hearing, which way he leans and expect the clerk to come up with legal arguments, including precedent, in the form of previously adjudicated cases, to support the judge's opinion.
I'm no lawyer, but I'll bet there is precious little in the way of precedent here, because almost all court approvals go through 'on the nod'. There's no opposition at the hearing. However, the evidence presented last month was clear and pretty persuasive. The board of WMH told the PI's the absolute minimum, both at the time of signing the Caesar's deal and later on the offer. They arguably misled us all, in a very serious fashion. They told us the truth, but they were a long way from telling us the 'whole truth'. That's called 'lying by omission' and is highly disapproved of in Contract Law.
To bar the deal on the grounds of misrepresentation by both parties would, I believe, be a first. Consequently, if that's the judge's opinion, the clerk has the onerous job of getting all his ducks in a row, so that the judgement is as bullet-proof as possible, when it goes to the Court of Appeal, as this very likely would. No judge likes receiving ruderies from his AC colleagues, if the judgement is dead wrong.
Likewise if the judge is minded to approve the takeover, he also needs to get the judgement right, because the plaintiffs are the owners of more than $300 million of stock in WMH and will also likely appeal, if they lose. This is a fascinating case, from the legal perspective. Meantime, Caesar's who were very circumspect in their 1st quarter update, are supposed to be giving much more detail on the 21st, next week. I assume this may not happen, depending on when the judge delivers his verdict.
Meantime, the SP sits at 5p over the agreed TO price, which tells you that a lot of Hedgies still coming in the for the ride, reckoning there's a good chance of Caesar's having the submit a higher offer, north of £3. Their risk is 5p lost if the judge approves and the reward is 25p+ if the judge sides with the large shareholders. Pretty good odds if you've a few million to spare.
Nic92, please pay zero attention to so-called "Buys & Sells". LSE has an algo which labels a trade a 'buy' if the price is closer to the Ask than the Bid, likewise a 'sell' if it's closer to the Bid.
Many times I've seen my trades categorised as the opposite of the reality and oftentimes, at days-end, you'll find the situation you described, where "buys" vastly outnumber the "sells", but the price has fallen 4% during the day, or vice versa. It's unhelpful BS, so pay it no mind. Quite by accident, I trade through a platform that seems to get me very sharp prices. :)
Thanks very much, Longview. I don't suppose you have a sub with the Torygraph, do you? They had an article on Saturday, with a lively headline suggesting that Foxbet was attempting to make life difficult for FanDuel by banning advertising somewhere. But I couldn't get past the paywall.
Montechristo; the cash to pay the fees to the fund manager is "built up" in the usual way. The trust sells some of its' investments to cover them, unless it happens to have sufficient invested cash sitting in the bank.
Because EWI invests in a lot of plc's that don't pay dividends, it says in its' annual accounts that it will likely have to continue to sell small amounts of assets to pay the manager, because it's most unlikely to have the cash on hand from any income.
I love this stock, having first bought in April '18 at £3-odd. Now heading towards last November's ATH of £21.85.
Does anyone have a good idea why it's on the upward move? There's no interim results due until May.
BTW, jj, I don't much care how many millions the ladies pay themselves. This stock was a useless basket-case until Zillah became CEO, with the stock at 13p in late '17. They none of them have large shareholdings (a year ago each was under 100,000) and have created a company worth £2.5 billion, so they've done us PI's proud.
If they get hold of a few tens of millions worth of shares through some options, that'll still be only 1% of the company. Paying Zillah a fee of 1%, to take the SP from £3.55 three years ago to £21.50 today, is, imho, a very lop-sided deal in my favour.
This mocking parody on the classic 'starter's orders' for the Indianapolis 500 has always summed up business in the USA. Given that the members of the Murdoch family are practically down to their last $10 billion, it was to be expected that they'd jump on any loose wording in the FanDuel/Stars purchase and sale contracts, in order to score themselves a bargain.
The good news is that the paperwork calls for arbitration which is great for two reasons; 1. Speed. No waiting for clogged courts to hold hearings, and 2. A well-written arbitration judgement is virtually unappealable on the facts of the case. The arbitrators have to make errors in law.
khunter. Thank you for the GS post. Where do you find that 'info, please? An update on the overnight result, in due course, would be much appreciated.
This reserved judgement suggests that the judge is giving very serious consideration to HBK's arguments against ratifying the deal. Normally these High Court approvals go through on the nod in ten minutes.
Brown trousers time in the boardroom. Twitchy bum time, at least. This is as exciting as betting on photo-finishes at the races. If had five grand to spare, I'd go long on WMH today. There's nothing to lose with the SP at 272.7p and possibly much to gain.
Good question Morbox. Imho, CZR would be mugs to terminate. Why? Because they have no experience of bookmaking. Bookmaking requires real skill, whereby you pitch the odds on a contest so that your book is "round". ideally at 108%, so whoever wins, you'll only pay out 100% and trouser the 8% margin. This balancing act has to be done in real-time as different amounts are wagered by your punters and you keep changing the odds to maintain the proportion, so for each £108 of total bets, the payout will only be £100 max.
The Americans have only ever offered even-money bets, via the Over-Under and Spread, which are singles and unsophisticated. UK Bookies offer all manner of singles, doubles, trebles, Yankees, Heinz and accumulators. Plus "In-running".
The NFL (& Baseball) is tailor made, with it's regular two-minute advertising breaks, for the sports books to offer odds on whether the next play will be a run or pass? How many yards will be gained? Will it result in a TD? If CZR fires WMH, then it'll have to find a new partner, which would it back at least 12 months, because all the software, connecting the mobiles to the website is Hills.
Right now CZR + WMH have 19% of the market and risk losing the lot. The baseball regular season starts tomorrow! I'll be very interested in what the judge has to say today. It wouldn't surprise me if he, or she, upended the deal.
Three hours into the first day and the price is almost a quid below the subscription price of £3.90. The PI's are taking a cold bath.
Small wonder the big institutions held their noses and passed. Maybe time to change the ticker to POO?
The biggest float since Glencore, which ten years later still hasn't managed to stagger above it's flotation price. What price this turkey in 2030?
Yo Ian, This is all very interesting. Personally, I was disgusted at the initial (and continuing) lack of disclosure by WMH of some now very pertinent facts relating to the Joint Venture agreement, especially with respect to CZR's ability to terminate the JV in the event of a change of control of WMH. Now, thanks to HBK Europe, we know that ability was restricted to six "banned buyers" and severely time restricted too.
It wouldn't surprise me if the court ordered a new vote, but the problem with that is the shareholder register will now look wildly different from last Autumn. There will be far more hedges than PI's. The hedgies will, of course, vote against the takeover. They have nothing to lose and everything to gain, as indeed does does HBK with almost 10% of the equity.
I sold out long ago and bought CZR at $69, which was looking very good at $104 earlier this month and still OK at $87. So I'm in a lose-lose situation, where I won't get any more if CZR has to pay more and CZR is likely to fall if does have to open it's wallet.
However, in the interests of being public spirited, if the High Court does give the WMH board a stiff rap on the knuckles for being way too secretive, this would set a good precedent for far better disclosure in the future, which I'm all in favour of.
The speedy way the current, pretty new management, sold WMH to the very first bid, in return for plummy jobs with long term contracts and CZR share options, was, imho, a gross and stinking conflict-of-interest between their financial interests and the September shareholders on the register. I hope HBK's QC makes a real meal of this next week.
End of rant. I'm looking forward to the April 25th press conference by CZR to update the market and still remain confident that news will see the SP back over $100 during the summer. Fingers crossed!
I played with some numbers yesterday and take almost no responsibility for the fact that my steam-driven slide-rule may be wildly inaccurate. But try this on for size:
FanDuel had a turnover of $1.1 billion in 2020. It's smaller competitor, DraftKings, trades in on the NASDAQ in New York at 35 times turnover. Applying that multiple to FanDuel suggests a capitalisation of $37 billion, were FLTR to float, say, 10% to raise cash to pay down debt.
Last Friday FLTR closed at a capitalisation of £27 billion in London, which at $1.40 exchange rate = $37 billion. In other words, the rest of FLTR's assets are in the SP for nothing, if FanDuel (with 40% of the US market) is worth anything close to $37b.
Given that FLTR's non-US assets are worth a minimum of £10 billion, this suggests the SP is on its' way to north of £200. I stand to be corrected by anyone with a better slide-rule.
** 2020 should read 2021. Sorry for the typo.
The good news is that HMSO took steps in 2020 to replace Captain Bligh and his crew, who took the liner onto the rocks, with Rita Rose Gagné and Robert Noel. Both highly respected.
The bad news is the "Going Concern" warning for 2020. An LTV now up in the red zone at 46%. A 25% fall in property values in 12 months. 23% of tenants refusing or unable to pay rent, with no ability to sue for the arrears. Malls closed, but hopefully reopening before May.
If the shopping public, who are now over 30% online, don't come back in droves at the first opportunity, there's a real danger that covenants in the fine print of the loan paperwork could be triggered. I do hope this isn't another INTU, but PI's need to be aware of the risks they're running. You might treble your money, if the board pull it off. You might also lose the lot.
The SP is at a 58% discount to the revalued 31/12/20 net asset value, which suggests what Mr. Market is thinking to be more likely.
The yield shown here on the "MNG Share Price Page" is grossly understated.
They paid 6p last autumn and another 12.63p is due in April = 18.63p of dividends in 12 months .
Per my calculator, and based on today's sharply increased SP, that means a running annual return of 8.4%. I loaded up on MNG 18 months ago, because it seemed a no brainer that every Equity Income Fund for miles around would eventually hammer the asking price until the yield fell to under 6%. Covid & Tech has, in the meantime, distracted the market, but, given relatively calm waters, I can see MNG sitting around 300p within a year or two. The divvy is rock solid. Fingers crossed!
The very short RNS here advising of an update on 21st April, is a truncated version of the US RNS. You can read that here:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/mgm-resorts-international-entain-plc-140000847.html
This week's results will (he hopes) be mouthwatering.
I believe that Court Approval on 30th March is the final hurdle. Assuming the court approves, and there's no reason to expect a refusal, WMH should issue an RNS very soon afterwards, setting out a timetable for CRZ to pay the PI's, typically within two weeks. Check back here on 30/03.