PYX Resources: Achieving volume and diversification milestones. Watch the video here.
"Only difference other than that is boo have access to £300 million debt so a big safety net."
Yep they only have access to £300m pmsl.
Again you're missing the point. Rev B could take on more debt if need be to help the business but we're not talking about what the Company requires. The concern is with the actions Boo are prepared to take to take full control of the Company.
This is becoming very tiresome.
This is like talking to a five year old. I've gone through this many times. If numbers on the Balance Sheet are moved around by the new Board and the Company supposedly needs funds then there needs to be "rescue" of some sort.
Silverlight, we've had this discussion before. In a pre-pack, Boo will lose 26% and possibly gain 100%. Some of you really do need to do some homework. There is no downtime t business whatsoever. Customers leaving is just an insinuation by you, the products won't change at all and there's no reason for customers to seek new suppliers. Boo will have their own customers as well. Re: daylight robbery - not necessarily as Boo will say "RevB would be in administration if Boo didn't save them" so will have the opposite impact to the one you're highlighting.
There is no comparison between Revb and Boo. I'm not 100% sure on the exact number but the latter have around £300m in cash available to them so they're in no danger of administration. Also, the former have literally told us that administration is possible and lenders could force their monies back.
FYI I'm still holding and have no intention of deramping to add to my holding if that's what you were insinuating. I don't think any private investor has those kind of powers. I'm just being realistic with potential outcomes.
I used to post on Interactive Investor for years and there are people on every bulletin board who are in denial and when they clock on, it's too late to take action. You have to look at all scenarios in a objective manner. Boohoo clearly want the Company because its a good add-on to their empire, how will they go about gaining control of it?
Hosai, I have answered you and the statement below was specifically for you because you keep mentioning if this is possible then it would be happening more often.
Why does this not happen more often? Because RevB is in a unique situation. How many other companies have been involved in a similar accounting scandal and had a forced seller like Jupiter selling down forcing the share price to plummet providing the likes of Boohoo the opportunity to accumulate?
Can Boohoo not initiate another EGM after appointing the two Directors they're putting forward? If BH stands down, who will become the new CEO?
The business is profitable but things can change and numbers can be moved around on the Balance Sheet. You're naive if you think this kind of stuff doesn't happen.
It's obvious that BOO want the Company but are unwilling to pay fair value. How do they go about gaining control?
It's clear that a lot of people don't know what a pre-pack administration is. A quick search would explain the difference between basic administration and a pre-pack arrangement. I've said many times that a pre-pack is possible if BOO take control of the Board. It will be the Board who will appoint the "friendly" administrator for a substantial fee providing clear instructions to them beforehand in regards to sale of assets/business.
Why does this not happen more often? Because RevB is in a unique situation. How many other companies have been involved in a similar accounting scandal and had a forced seller like Jupiter selling down forcing the share price to plummet providing the likes of Boohoo the opportunity to accumulate?
If pre-pack doesn't happen, dilution is another issue. The new Board can fiddle with the books to show RevB needs urgent funding and the only investor to provide funding in such a short period is BOO.
Minto/Allsworth have large equity stakes in the Company, and have a lot to lose but they position is unclear. I'm sure they'll be following events closely but its a mystery why they remain quiet.
Onsolidground, you've highlighted plenty of positive catalysts for the next leg up.
It's clear that BH is in the driving seat and Boohoo are unable to respond to the questions RevB asked them because of their insincere intentions.
After the substantial Director buy from BH last week, I expect a positive conclusion to the uncertainty started by Boohoo soon. Maybe a surprise or two coming soon.
Dear Boohoo,
If you want to takeover the company then you’re obliged to make an offer when you reach 30%+.
The Board will consider your offer and if suitable, we will recommend it to our shareholders.
If you won’t make an offer then shut the f up and let us run the business to maximise shareholder returns.
Thank you for helping to strengthen the relationship between the Board and our shareholders.
Kind regards,
Bob
I said BOO may try to put a spanner in the works and that resolutions might be voted on at today’s AGM.
The good news is, we know the level of support BOO have now. If their holding can be diluted somewhat and the Board gain Minto/Allsworth’s support, we should be able stop them from taking over the company.
As I’ve said before, FY23 results are expected and we should have another AGM soon after so could push through the remaining resolutions then.
It’s a win win for BOO though, if they continue with their action then there’s a chance they take the company over and if they lose they still have a large stake in a valuable company. I can’t see them backing down unless the previous Directors show their support to the current board publicly, which would result in a heavy loss for BOO.
It could be a monumental afternoon for the future of the Company.
The articles of association did not allow the AGM to be postponed after the Notice of AGM had been issued. It is possible to adjourn a general meeting if those present agree but this isn't an easy task with the involvement of a hostile shareholder.
We don't know who is present in the meeting this afternoon and how many shares they own. If BOO have enough support then they may try to put a spanner in the works.
I'm not sure what happens if the AGM cannot be postponed but it might be possible the resolutions are voted on. I can't see this happening because shareholders were advised not to do anything therefore many wouldn't have voted but this is a pretty extraordinary situation so don't be surprised with any outcome.
If the Board have enough votes and they're able to proceed with the AGM, I wouldn't be surprised if they go ahead and get all the resolutions approved then deal with BOO with all the necessary tools at their disposal.
Alternatively, if the Board go ahead with the postponement and manage to move the AGM date then it will indicate BOO don't have enough support to follow through with their proposals, and may decide to back down and engage with the Board instead.
Following on from my original post in this thread, it appears the FY23 results need to be released by the end of July to allow enough time to hold an AGM by the end of August. A Notice of AGM and posting of Annual Report is usually posted 30 days prior to the meeting.
"A general meeting is required to be held by within six months beginning with the day following its accounting reference date (section 336(1), Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006))."
The accounting reference date is the date the fiscial year ends, in this case its the end of February.
We could potentially have two AGM's and an EGM by the end of August 2023. Although the EGM will probably be held on the same day as the first AGM as hinted in last weeks RNS, its an extraordinary situation to be involved in.
From the Notice of AGM and posting of Annual Report RNS dated 2 Jun 2023 07:00:
"A separate AGM will be held later in the year to receive the Annual Report and Accounts for the financial year ended 28 February 2023, the date will be announced in due course."
Based on the below paragraph, we will get an RNS tomorrow to advise the Board have been successful in postponing the AGM.
"Accordingly, the Company will propose at the originally-scheduled AGM on Tuesday 27 June 2023 to postpone the AGM to a new date, which the Company will announce in due course, but which is expected to be in late July or early August 2023. The resolutions proposed by boohoo in the Requisition would then also be put to shareholders at a separate general meeting on the same date as the adjourned AGM."
Hopefully we get some additionl information.
Silverlight, no issue having a debate but when you're asked a question you almost always deviate to something else. You're quick to ridicule someone's view but refuse to engage with the facts used on to determine the views.
404x, the interims focused on H1 FY23 not the full year. We did get some information on H2 but no numbers.
· Improving trend of performance through the second half of the FY23 year.
· Revenue for the full year FY23 is expected to deliver low single digit growth on FY22.
· FY23 Adjusted EBITDA (on a constant currency basis) is expected to show a small loss.
· These estimates in respect of FY23 are subject to audit, and there will be a number of accounting treatments to be determined with the auditors relating to the adjustments made to the FY22 results, that may alter, and potentially improve the results further.
Bonkle, the error was the incorrect comparator actually, not the period.
''The previously released announcement included the incorrect comparator period for EBITDA and cash on hand. The correct comparator is Q1 FY23, rather than Q1 FY24. All other aspects of the announcement are unchanged.''