Member Info for Longtermview24

Pont taken fran, but the difference I see with Interserve and Thomas Cook and others is that those were failing businesses. Here we have a business that has a 100 + year resource that has proven value backed up by crop trials and TORPS to the tune of 13mta. There is a sound business that'll be throwing off a wall of cash. The problem is simply funding to access the resource. If there wasnt a sound business here then AAL wouldn't be buying it for several hundred million quid (when you add the debt to the 5.5p)

That's a very different proposition and why I think another party might well emerge and why a no vote (and maybe the party will emerge pre-vote0 is worth the gamble. Otherwise, as I say, better take the 5.5p om Monday morning.

Secrets, yes it sticks in the throat that some execs have been very generous to themselves 9Fraser and the Cat) but regardless of how they got 'em, they have 'em and it'll sting Fraser if his 7 million quid payout is wiped out. That would be a small bit of karma. Better still if the company is liquidated or falls into the hands of another party other than AAL in admin.

Better still of course if the BOD find the funding. It's still disingenuous to cite previous PI participation in underwritten placings versus PI appetite to raise funds when their alternative is getting wiped out. JPM advised on the funding and looked how that turned out, so their advice/opinion on PI funding isnt worth ****. They didn't even try. Lets vote NO, and see how hard they try when their 7M and 2M quid is heading down the pan.

Fran, if that's the case, why wouldn't Scrimshaw be more categorical with his view on what happens in the event of a NO vote. Maybe the administrators would be called in before March 31, but I don't think they'll be waiting in the car park in Scarborough on the 3rd. There is time for someone to step out of the shadows.

If I was holding millions, then maybe I'd think differently, but most PI holdings are now worth very little. Cashing in at 5.5p is not going to make a big difference. It's certainly not going to give me enough back to reinvest and recoup my losses. If this company survives, even with massive dilution, I have a chance of recovering my losses. So the gamble is worth a NO vote.

Anyone who doesn't want to vote NO should sell their shares on Monday for 5.5p. If you're concerned about a no vote or want to vote yes to the deal, why bother continuing to hold. You wont get the 5.5p if the vote is yes until mid April. You can get your 5.5p by selling on Monday morning.

Fran, they have gone on record as saying they have sufficient funds to see them through end of March, so I don't see why they would have to call in administrators on 3rd march.

They also said the SR would run thru end of March. Why have the SR thru end of March if they would have to call in the admin at the beginning of March.

And why, after the offer, take a few weeks to put the paperwork together for a vote if the vote can only be yes or admin? and why then wouldn't Scrimshaw say that if it's a no vote the administrators will be called in the very next minute/day?

For these reasons I conclude that there is time to save the company with a plan B after the vote. And maybe there is someone (Polygon?) hoping for a no vote as that will give them leverage to cut a great deal for themselves. Any deal that keeps the company independently trading is likely to be a better deal for holders in the long run than AAL's 5.5p.

Russell Scrimshaw, chairman of Sirius, said: “We continue to face a stark choice that in the event of this transaction being unsuccessful, it is likely that the business will need to be placed into administration, which would result in shareholders potentially losing all of their investment.”

------

As FFC says "likely" and "potentially". Not guaranteed and not a certainty. Because there'll still be a month after the vote to sort something out. The SR was supposed to last until end of March. If there ever was one (and that's debatable) it barely lasted into early December.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, would this shower of **** have tried a little harder to find a plan B if they weren't being promised continued employment with their Aussie chums and a 19 million payout to share on completion of the sale to AAL. You bet they would. It's all very convenient and cosy.

I'm voting NO and then lets see how hard Fraser tries to save his 7 million quid payout/125 million shares and Scrimshaws 2 million quid payout/44 million shares.

We're being stitched up by the Aussies. Make them fight and work a little harder, or see them sink with the rest of us.

Oh might add that the voice of insanity is now a tie between FFC and Longtermview, both trying to outdo Mr Stop Brexit by shouting the same vote no, vote no rant ad nauseam
-------

BTW thanks for the clinical diagnosis. A VOTE NO has to be an option, maybe the only option to focus the BOD to continue to pursue an alternative that is good for holders. The 5.5p is good for them as it secures their jobs through to production and they'll continue to pick up salaries and ever increasing bonuses and share options as the mine progresses. We pick up nothing except a big fat loss.

It is high risk as we might end up with nothing, but we might also end up saving our investment. Worst case scenario at least it might screw up Frasers cosy deal with AAL/

Employees have contracts of employment.

A new employer cannot just tear up the employees contracts.
---

No, but an administrator can tear up the contracts. That's why there's a conflict. The senior execs dont give a stuff about sholders or creditors. they're interested in saving their own skin and pocketing the 19 million as well as future salary bonus and share options.

If Fraser had any decency he would resign, but he wont because he's a turd and in it for himself. The sholders in Yorkshire wont forget this treachery and sheer incompetence that led us to the point of ruin.

Chilting. That is a very good point about local suppliers. It is highly likely that ordinary creditors will get almost nothing in an administration and it may well push some of them under.

-----

Then they should go knock on Fraser's door. He has seven million quid of their money (and ours).

"Fraser may think he has run the clock down on his plan to fold himself into AAL"

Well, you're just speculating there longtermview.

----

Correct calamari. But the job offer on same terms and conditions with his Aussie mates and the 19 million quid to split between execs seem like compelling reasons to me. Yet more speculation, but I wonder if Fraser would be trying a little harder to secure a plan b if Rio or another miner was offering 5.5p but without the job offer and 19M in blood money?

Still planning to vote no and hope there's one final twist in this story. Frasers behavior stinks.

Agreed Franalex. Its a gamble. But to see this go to AAL and Fraser make out like a bandit cannot be allowed to happen. Lets get it rescued then sack Fraser and his cronies and move on

"You're speculating"

Isn't everyone?

----

No, they're not and that's my point. You dress your speculation up as fact. You scaremonger and you mislead and you pontificate like you have a crystal ball and know what's coming next. You don't. Nobody does. That's my point.

I wonder what Polygon are up to? I wonder how many more they've added today? I wonder why Jupiter wont talk to Sharesoc but will talk to the press urging SXX to find another way. Are Jupiter working on a plan B? Are Polygon working on a plan B? Will the financial consortium be back with a revised offer? is there another party or parties preparing an offer now the AAL timetable is firmed up?

Fraser may think he has run the clock down on his plan to fold himself into AAL with the job, bonus, future share options and all that comes with it from his Aussie mates. But it aint over just yet.

VOTE NO and ignore IBAB's pontification. He doesn't know anymore than the next man, no matter how he tries to dress it up.

There may be competition in admin - you don't know. You're speculating. You like to dress pure speculation up as fact. You don't fool me.

Agreed great8. It's a NO from me. They are scaremongering. To say they picked up negotiations with the consortium on 20 Jan and have concluded it's not a runner - that means they gave it about 5 days. FFS what can you achieve in 5 days.

The BOD aren't interested in a plan B because they have a cushy number waiting for them at AAL. VOTE NO and let's see if they try a bit harder in the remaining month to find an alterative because VOTE NO means their cushy number with AAL is out the window. IBAB may bang on about "prepack administration" That's a nice phrase but he has no idea nor do the rest of us know how things will turn out after a VOTE NO and if it does go into admin, AAL may not get it - I hope they don't - and that effs up Fraser and the senior execs cushy number and their 19 million quid blood money payout from AAL.

Plan B is probably a pre-pack admin to AAL.

-----

Butthat's just it IBAB...probably, not definitely/

The BOD haven't been honest. It's a gamble, but a NO vote doesn't make admin inevitable and nobody not even BOD has mentioned "prepack" admin

VOTE NO. Save the company and sack the board

Vote NO. That'll focus the Board to find a plan B.

after several quiet days IBAB is back with multiple posts and not invested. This fella has an agenda.

BTW I agree with your observations on a PI raise - it was possible then and is now (on worse terms regards dilution).

Don't get sucked in to thinking Fraser is losing out. He walks away with millions now, but also with a million quid salary and future bonuses and share awards under the wing of AAL. He could even end up bettering his package under AAL. He gets a second chance. We don't. It's disgusting and he is disgusting.

IBAB. That's what ONE no vote looked like. You don't know what will happen post 3 March . there is still a month for plan B. And there's still time for plan b before 3/3.

VOTE NO, sack the board

The BOD have voted yes....I wonder what their new salaries will be post the deal?!!!

-----

They - all the senior execs - keep their salaries, their bonuses, and get to split a 19 MILLION "bonus incentive" quid from AAL. It's all spelled out in the offer docs. If it's not crooked, it's at least a significant conflict of interest.

Vote NO. Save the company with a raise and sack the board. P45 not a job for life with AAL

In other words, as 75% yes vote is required for the deal to pass...
We "LITTLE PEOPLE" have the power to scupper it. There is of course a risk of administration.

But I seriously doubt the institutional holders would let that happen without a fight .

----

Agreed.

VOTE NO.

Then there's still a month for an alternative plan. Save the company then sack Fraser. Instead of a cushy number with AAL he gets a p45. Turd.