The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from WS Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
ETC have had months to look at the books and discuss and plan this takeover with the SHG directors, who have unconditionally promised to support the bid.
Any company wanting to counter bid, would not have the support of the directors, and may not even be allowed to look at the books.
SCAM WARNING
This seemed rather improbable to me, so I looked up details of the company you would be sending your details to - Capital Asset Services.
Struck off according to Companies House:
22 Sep 2009 First Gazette notice for compulsory strike-off
05 Jan 2010 Final Gazette dissolved via compulsory strike-off
https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/04448210/filing-history
Trustpilot reviews indicate company is still trading, but with awful reviews.
https://uk.trustpilot.com/review/www.capitaassetservices.com
BlueDefender,
The issue is whether you have paid 10% tax or 20% tax. A tax sharing arrangement between SA and the UK means that UK citizens should pay 10% and not 20%.
Lloyds/HBOS used to pay 10% while others such as AJ Bell always take 20%.
However, this year Lloyds had deducted 20%, but states no tax has been paid. As you say the figures don't add up.
To check how much has been deducted:
For a 10% deduction, multiply the number of shares by 0.68615.
For a 20% deduction, multiply the number of shares by 0.60991.
Full control is exactly what I believe CIG want, and they will have got it for 11.26p per share, if this goes through. They don't need to buy all the shares yet, a 40% holding means they would be unlikely to lose any future votes. Run the price down over the next 18 months, and then make a low ball offer to buy out shareholders and take the company private.
"No, the 43% is before any other shareholders take up the offer. Of any shareholders do take up the offer, CIGs end ownership will be slightly below 43%. Quick maths."
Jamime, glad we agree that the 43% is before other shareholders take part in the Open Offer. But CIG are also shareholders and I have seen nothing saying that they will not be offered shares in the Open Offer as well. If they are included then, as I said, their holding will rise above the 43% stated. They may also be underwriting the Open Offer, which would mean that they take up any shares not wanted by other investors.
The company are seeking a waiver of this rule, which needs voting through at a General Meeting, as stated below. Note that CIG cannot vote on this motion.
"CIG is conditionally subscribing for up to 142,522,475 of the Second Tranche Shares subject to, inter alia, the granting of a Rule 9 waiver by The Panel on Takeovers and Mergers (the "Panel"), to be approved by shareholders independent of CIG,"
"CIG will be issued 35,057,991 First Tranche Shares and up to a further 142,522,475 Second Tranche Shares, subject to, inter alia, shareholder approval. In total, it is expected that CIG will be issued up to 177,580,466 Subscription Shares and will have a holding of up to approximately 43% per cent in the Company's share capital as enlarged by the issuance of the Subscription Shares, and prior to the effect of the Open Offer."
Note the last few words "prior to the effect of the Open Offer".
CIG will of course take up all of their allocation of Open Offer shares, but who else will pay 11.26p to increase their holding. Hence, their holding could easily rise above 43%.
Hi RetiredBanker, and thank you for your "welcome to this ****show".
Like you I am concerned about CIG's intentions. As I see it, they are underwriting the placements and will therefore be liable to buy any new shares not taken up by other parties or shareholders. And how many shareholders or Institutional Investors are likely to buy in at 11.26p when you can buy the shares on the open market for 1p less?
Hence I suspect that the projected up to 43% may turn out to be a low ball estimate. If this goes through they will have effectively gained control of the company for a pittance.
"The RNS is as clear as anything to me"
If the RNS is so clear Angelis, why did they neglect to tell us the figure that they have set the Gold price collar at? How much they will sell 60,000 oz of Gold at is hardly irrelevant. Or perhaps Dan thinks that we small shareholders should not be bothered with such minutiae.
These statements are VERY OBVIOUS LIES.
"In November 2023, Petrofac issued a statement saying that it was "engaged in constructive discussions with its lenders and key stakeholders" about its financial position."
"In October 2023, Petrofac announced that it would be taking a $1.5 billion impairment charge on its oil and gas projects."
Companies are not allowed to make announcements that could affect the share price without announcing that information to the market via an RNS, and there are no RNS's concerning this.
Anyone who relies on Artificial Intelligence for financial news is clearly lacking any of their own.
"Shorters having a field day. Taking the company and us shareholders to the cleaners. They have to buy back. "
Not if they if the company falls into administration, they don't.
People were posting the same with Carillion, but the shorters were proved right.
As a shareholder, I hope that this is not the case here, but the absence of any comment by the Board worries me.
TheJanbo,
Shorters borrow shares at an agreed rate, and have to return them within a specified time.
A dealing house will not lend out all of the shares they hold for a company, so you selling yours is unlikely to make any difference.
And lastly the broker or dealing house is the registered owner of your shares, your are merely the beneficial owner.
I doubt if " Ayman Asfari, Petrofacs biggest shareholder" has lent shares to the shorters.
He would be losing serious money as the sp plummets. It is far more likely to be the trading houses that we buy and sell our shares through, that have lent them our shares. They do not own these shares, and will lose nothing when the price collapses. The shorters will pay them a percentage for lending the shares, so they will make a profit out of this whatever happens.
" During the close period, insiders are prohibited from trading company shares or making any relevant information public before it is officially announced.
Looks like any release of an RNS would be a very grey area!"
Neil777,
That last sentence is wrong. There is nothing stopping the board releasing a statement about the falling share price. The point of the legislation is to stop insiders leaking information before it is made available to the general public. Issuing an RNS makes the information available to all. The only requirement is that the company must not knowing lie
I think that blaming Covid or the war in Ukraine for AVO's financial troubles, is a complete cop out.
AVO were promising a working machine many years before Covid, let alone the war in Ukraine It is the failure to deliver a working machine that is the cause of their problems.
Final Result 3rd June 2015
"A number of key milestones in the development of the LIGHT system have also been completed following the close of the financial year in line with expectations. The Company remains on track to install its first unit in Harley Street by the end of 2016 with first patient treatment expected in 2017."
03-Nov-23 16:40:39 2,805.02 713,403 Unknown* 2,649.00 2,650.00 £20m O
03-Nov-23 16:40:39 2,805.02 713,403 Unknown* 2,649.00 2,650.00 £20m O
Not defined as a buy or sell, but £1.50 per share above the quoted price !??!