Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
I'm confused now ( doesn't take much ) I agree with you K3vmc on those points but I thought if the vote was successful as far as the yes votes goes who are for the deal then it had to be signed off by the courts before the deal can take place?
I was also asking if the deal it's self was a scheme of arrangement as seem to remember posters talking about this when the deal was 1st outlined, have I remembered this wrong ??
I thought the deal had to be signed off by the courts ?? Please correct me if I'm wrong as I'm not that knowledgeable on this stuff and happy to be corrected ?
Guys I am looking into the courts stuff and I may have to ask a few questions on here along the way as my memory not the best at remembering technical jargon so please help me out as I'm trying to help all us no voters.
Is the deal structured around a scheme of arrangement ??
Thanks for reply K3vmc, can I just check you have asked Hur the question of which court will the deal be put in front of ?
I'm going to presume its the High Court of Justice ( looking most likely) that the deal will go Infront of and just in case our voting for NO is not successful I'm going to research a plan B to see if we have any sway with the courts.... Thanks
Thanks you British, am busy for rest of the morning but will email them this afternoon and fingers crossed I get an answer.
Does anyone know which court this deal will be put Infront of if the deal gets voted the go ahead?? I've found 3 possibilities High Court of Justice,
UK Takeover Panel,
Chancery Division of the High Court. If anyone knows please shout up please. Thanks
Hahahahahaha
Good post Flyingpie,
3) Conservatively, I would say around 75% of PIs are "against" judging off what I've seen in the forum... I believe PIs make up about 20% of the vote, so this gives 15% against and another 5% for.
Just to add Flyingpie on this forum I would say about 90-95% are against this particular deal from what I've seen, think I've be only encountered around 3-4 posters for the deal on here. On gazelle's page where we put how many shares we had to vote against think there were 80 ish and a few more that hadn't put names on there have definitely popped up since and said no to it.
I know it won't change the over all voting numbers that much but just wanted to highlight what looks like a massive majority on here and hope other PI's elsewhere and the smaller institutional investors feel the same. Thanks
Could someone please tell me if known a bit about the procedure of when this deal gets rubber stampsed by the courts, like which court does this
work and do they ever halt a deal for any reason or is it just procedure and will be granted regardless ?
I know it's a very long shot but if the courts do look at deals carefully they just might be a loop hole or angle we can use. If I know which court is used I will do some research and see if I can see anything of use. Thanks
I have shares in a Lloyds Bank ISA sharedealing account and they have told me they are expecting clarification on the DCU's when the corporate action details appear. That's all I could get out of them info wise
So do the NO voters think we have a better chance with the way the voting system will work for this vote ?
Thank you Asi
Littlened
Why on earth would Prax do that ?
Exactly they have us by the balls with their deal so why do a deal where shareholders keep a little more control by staying on lse.
Sorry few mistakes in post as writing on the phone but you get the gist
Would the knowledgble chaps on here answer me a question please, if God forbid prax does get its hands on Hur with it's crystal maze of conditions to be met to get our DCU's payments would it leave the jurisdiction of the FCA and then come under just the financial ombudsman or would it be a grey area and maybe both ???
I will tell why I ask, I've found financial ombudsman has bigger teeth and back bone as I've used them to pursue a sharedealing platform for ****ups and won and had a payout. So if we do end up with this deal and they try to screw us then we have an avenue of recourse with the financial ombudsman if hur would falls under their jurisdiction...
Or even better prax may read this and other hur forums and think hell we are a be a force to reconded with and shape up or ship the feck out as we are more trouble than they imagined. Might be a pipe dream but worth a thought. Thanks
I like your lateral thinking Mariog, hope prax/hur/CRS are reading this and take note if deal fails. My biggest ick about the deal is Hur being taken private.
You are entitled to do that but it would be 8p MAX and NOT 12.5p
That would mean the 8p you talk of would be safely in my Isa account totally tax free, but with deferred payments there is still a tax risk as brokers are not that consise to whether would be able to stay at in our Isa accounts.... As I've said in earlier posts everyone's reasoning is slightly different so respect to all....
However I have now changed my mind after speaking to RB.
Take the 12.5p guys.
Thanks for the info but think I will stick with I will milk the cow till it dies approach and if no better deals come along then so be it....
Good luck
Littlened
Everyone's situation and reasoning is slightly different but as you say most pi are aligned with the no vote as we would prefer a better deal or to stay as we are and milk the cow till it dies, it's quite simple. I respect your view but I don't agree it's a good deal for me is my reasoning for my situation. Thanks
Thanks for the reply Sefton.