Member Info for Only1Gibbo

Yes good spot. The heading on that page also makes it very clear
“Maximising Security & Revenue Generation at Ghana’s Ports” (plural).

Aiming, the RNS stated "at 10p per Ordinary Share to raise £1million before expenses together with the issue of warrants. "

So the expenses clearly came out of the £1m and the warrants were not given as payment of those expenses.

DHC. the SP might be 9.6p to buy now but I bet you couldn't buy 10m shares for that on the open market. The warrants have a two year life. If when the administration is finalised in say 6 months time, if the SP is say 50p post TEMA, then the warrants will have a value which the administrators will have a fiduciary duty to pass on to the creditors.

Whether they went to SVS or their clients they are still in existence. If they went to SVS then the administrators could exercise the warrants for the benefit of the creditors if the share price was above 12.5p. They could even assign the warrants as a dividend in specie to the creditors. If they went to the placees, they will still receive them, but only when the administrator has sorted out whatever mess he/she is faced with. They do not go away either way.

Sure is!

The warrants were given to the placees, so they won’t be dead in the water, but I doubt anyone will be in a position to exercise them for a while until it is all sorted out, much in the same way they won’t be able to sell any shares they hold.

Also I can't see the bad debt being linked to the African airport MOU as we have already signed the contract. That wouldn't have been the smartest negotiating tactic if they were linked.

However Mike, I don't think that the bad debt in those accounts of £545k has anything to do with Sudan.

The Juba contract extension for $2.72m announced in November 2009, required payment for all goods (circa $2.5m) in advance of shipping with balance payable on installation. So the balance would not be enough for the £545k write off in the 2010 accounts.

The original Juba contract for $4.7m was awarded in 2008, I can't see us having done the extension if there was debt outstanding on the original contract.

Here you go Mike - they are on the website, but in the list of old RNSs

https://polaris.brighterir.com/public/westminster_group_plc/news/rns/story/w33vgjw

HB, yes of course they could have obtained finance for it, but they needed the letters of credit which have arrived late. They could have raised finance against this but that would have taken time, time which appears we didn't have. Are you suggesting they should have just taken the risk and just borrowed without obtaining a LoC first?

The fact that we had a intra day RNS suggest to me the decision to issue the placing had only just been taken. Therefore I don't think it was forward selling with the shares already allocated, I think it was shorting. The fact that CC suddenly, with so much good news around. sold, but only part of their holding, which was immediately followed by another seller to make it look as those they were one and the same makes me think it was a concerted action by the two of them.

Tbh, if my theory is correct I don't think he had options. The share was shorted, there is nothing he can do to stop that, he needed cash and a gun was effectively placed against his head with the risk of going below nominal and missing the window of opportunity or taking the cash and not risking screwing up whatever is the aim is in Asia. Hindsight is a wonderful thing and with the benefit of that he would probably have been better prepared for the interview or may not even have held it at all. As I said earlier, I know I wouldn't have foreseen such an outcome.

How would you have stopped the shorting then if you were in his shoes?

Absolutely win4call. Couldn't agree more. Need to ditch them once we get Tema over the line and can show some decent revenue and profit growth.

No way will we find out the detailed terms of the deal Martyn. That would be madness. We know we have ports in our sights in KSA, plus SE Asia. It would be stupid to let both our prospective customers and our competitors know what we have negotiated in Ghana.

A. You are making an assumption that that is the reason for the hold up, which may or may not be the case.
B. It doesn’t necessarily impact whether the contract is in the bag or not, it might just impact terms.
C. We also know that the secondary screening is additional work not included in the original scope. That may equally be the reason for the delay.

Thanks Feeks. I should have added, that scenario is also why I think we were screwed over on the terms with the warrants. But I agree it is absolute steal at theses prices. I just wish I had more funds available to buy more tbh. I did drop a note to PF on Friday. His comment to me was that if we close the Tema deal this week it will have been a bad decision to take the cash, if it takes 2 to 3 weeks it will have been the correct decision. I took it from that, first, Tema could still drop any day now, but timing isn’t under his control and he doesn’t own a crystal ball, second, there is a genuine need to get cracking on the Asia tech deal. He stressed the decision was made for the good of the business, and as he has more skin in the game than any of us, I believe him.

The placing was unfortunate, but in the grand scheme of things I don’t think it is too much to worry about. For those with spare cash, a golden opportunity that rarely presents itself to private investors.

Investinvalue - just catching up on posts and saw your Friday 9.07 post re the placing.

FWIW the more I think about it, the more I think we were stitched up by CC and SVS working together.

DHC suggested there had been naked shorting, but I am not so sure now, I think they were covered shorts. When PF did the last interview he clearly indicated that we would be needing funds. Once the holding RNS for Tema came out, I think that SVS smelt blood and approached CC to borrow stock to enable them to short us. CC agreed but only after they had taken profit at the higher price on a large portion of their stock first. Hence the TR1. Once CC had sold a block of shares, I think they loaned the balance to SVS who then proceeded to continually drop 250k blocks of shares into the market. As it started to approach nominal they then approached WSG with an offer of cash.

With an approaching requirement for cash for the Asia tech contract, WSG then had to take the tough decision do they risk the shares dropping further and lose the window of opportunity to obtain the placing, knowing the the timing of Tema is not in their control, or play it safe and take the cash.

WSG took the decision to play it safe and take the cash. I think there must be a higher prize at stake in Asia, maybe in similar fashion to KSA following the ME tech contract, for us to go down this route.

If anything, it was PF’s sheer excitement in being able to give us some good news that led him to inadvertently indicate a placing was coming up. Maybe the brokers saw his boast that the placing would be at a higher price as a challenge? I don’t know. You could argue that PF’s answer to the cash question was clumsy or naive, but I think excitement got the better of him and he dropped his guard momentarily. If I had been in his shoes, would I have foreseen the consequences and answered differently as a result, no I wouldn’t have. Was the cash question foreseeable and therefore should have been answered better, probably, but like I say , I think the excitement of a number of good news items led him to drop his guard.

And they ignore the fact that transporting goods on larger container ships now the port is able to accommodate the largest carriers will reduce transport costs, offsetting any increased port handling costs.

Yep disappointing but c’est la vie. As I see it: -

Cash required for WC funding of Tech contract has been diverted to closing the Tema contract. Raise only covers 25% of tcv so the client has probably made an upfront payment but not 100%.

PF knew the raise was needed, he alluded to it in the Proactive interview. He just though it would be at a higher value.

He didn’t foresee CC pulling the rug from under him. He didn’t raise at the higher price as he didn’t foresee that level of retracement, but hoped that he might get the upside of a signed contract

CC pulls the rug and then maybe to meet contract timescale / deadline he has had to raise at a lower level. That is the only logic to raising now unless the closure of Tema is a definite delay, which I don’t think it is. Maybe even concerned that CC could have pulled the rug further beforehand forced his hand.

DHC - Your naked shorting theory was closest to the mark. When you look back it was fecking obvious with no TR1 from CC. Someone had to be selling and as it wasn’t any of the large holders on here we should have sussed forward selling given the history of fund raising here.

What they mean is that they are ****ed off that they will no longer be able to offer back handers to get goods through the port without proper inspection and payment of customs duties.