Member Info for schwee

But not covered by eps. Never a sensible strategy.

As mentioned previously, probably a ramp and thus a false market. Don't hold your breath expecting the FCA to investigate.

As there has been no announcement from either the alleged buyer or Equiniti, beware of a ramp.

The trouble is all these one off charges which are not one off at all, as the previous CEO also demonstrated.

Suggest you sell them as since the change of strategy earlier this year, Troy has been a serious under performer. Heads should roll at both manager and director level, and fees all round drastically reduced.

The real published eps is 158p rather than the concocted 254p that IMB put their gloss on before disclosing their nasties. Even so they still trade at less than 10x earnings.

Disappointingly the UK is not the US when it comes to financial services. As evidenced by AJB announcing yesterday that it is increasing some of its fees up by an inflation busting 20% to its loyal customers.

Until regulators take action over failures such as the outages at a whole range of financial services companies during the market rebound last month, there is every incentive for these companies to continue with their rip off business model.

Physical car dealerships are similar to department stores: a relic.

OEMs will bit by bit learn to sell direct to the punter online, whilst second hand transactions are already trending fast online.

Lookers and all the others will have to adapt or die.

Nothing to write home about. Financials as ever peppered with 'one offs'. Stocks and inventories have increased despite reduced turnover, whist net debt is only down because of huge increase in payables i.e their suppliers are effectively acting as a bank.

Yes, lots of numbers in the release, except there are none of the important ones covering profits and cash.

I think the Arabs own 25% or so. Perhaps they will put SBRY out of its misery.

At 685p per share a no brainer.

So why have the Panel given Apollo an extension?

Not really, but certainly once upon a time S o As were advantageous from a stamp duty point of view. But I do believe Boy George did eventually wake up one morning and try to put a stop to it being avoided. Whether any of our incompetents at the top were successful in this endeavour, who knows.

Coz with a straight 50pc vote, individual shareholders have two bites at the cherry. First the vote itself, and assuming it is passed, secondly to accept or not to accept the offer. In these circumstances CSR have to have acceptances for 90pc of WMHs outstanding issued share capital before they can compulsorily buy out the
remainder. Quite apart from any recalcitrant shareholders it is quite an ask to get to 90pc by the offers closing date as there will be shareholders who are ignorant of what a takeover means, dead, gaga or have moved to a different address as to that shown on the Register.
CSR then would have to appoint agents to search out these shareholders one by one until they reached the magic 90pc. And this is hellishly time consuming and expensive.
Hence the scheme of arrangement and the 75pc vote, as if it is passed, all shareholders have been deemed to accept the offer and thus CSR own 100pc, and thus obviate the downside issues from a straight vote.

Mr Beach,
A scheme of arrangement has little to do with retail investors. In essence it allows the CSR to acquire all 100% of the issued shares of WMH providing it gets its 75% threshold.

Of course if CSR believes it will not get 75%, it could increase its offer, or alternatively go for a straight 50% vote which it would undoubtedly win. But then it might be left with some minority of WMH shareholders who will not accept the 272p
offer.

My best guess is that CSR will increase their offer to 285p ish so as to buy off the hedgies and ensure the 75% vote.

Guitarsolol,

Unsure whether a W-8BEN form is relevant as Somero is a UK listed company not a US one. Nobody has given me an unequivocal answer so far. Anyhow I did complete the form, but still received divi net of 30% withholding tax.

The 75% majority is required for the scheme of arrangement that CZRS are going for. From a taxation point of view this is cheaper than going for a straight vote from WMH shareholders which only requires 50%+1. There is still time for CZRS to go for the straight vote which they would almost certainly win.

Hills have never said it's a done deal. Only Caesars have intimated as such. A big difference.

The clue is in Caesar's RNS, and the weasel words of the WMH directors 'intend to recommend' rather than 'will recommend'.

Clearly at least one if not more of the Directors is far from happy, so any RNS from WMH has to be very nuanced unless said directors resign or issue their own RNS.