Member Info for shareaction

Is it fair and reasonable to argue that in return for a fracking moratorium, there will be a moratorium on protests against conventional drilling. No?

Vista, I'm also holding DGOC through a limited company (UK) and wonder how that will be treated withholding tax-wise. I'll find out after 19 December...

Thanks Vista, I received a good-news clarification to a follow-up question I asked my broker.

Early this year I received from DGOC refund of 30% tax withheld on a previous dividend payment as my W-8BEN had not been completed at that time. Actually, it turns out that even with W-8BEN completed we may still be refunded the 15% withholding tax also as my broker have now explained:

"US incorporated companies such as DGOC, who may be unsure of the final taxation position of their income payments prior to the end of a financial year, will pay the income in the form of a Dividend (IRS Income Code 06). A dividend from a US incorporated company being subject to taxation under the USA-UK double taxation treaty. For an ISA with a valid W-8BEN this is 15% and for a SIPP 0%.

After the end of their tax year they may reclassify how their income payments are being treated, and as in the case of DGOC your payment may be subject to an adjustment of tax previously paid if the company reclassifies their income to something other than Income Code 06."

(Note that they say that for SIPPS there is automatically zero % withholding tax (unlike for ISAs) since there is no uncertainty about a SIPP's tax position.)

RNS today:

Swiss Supreme Court declares in favour of Celamin:

The Final Award found in favour of Celamin Limited, ordering TMS to return Celamin Limited's 51% shareholding in CPSA and to pay damages and costs in excess of US$4 million.

The Swiss Supreme Court has further ordered TMS to pay the Court's cost of approximately A$21,500, plus an additional indemnity to Celamin for its legal costs in the amount of approximately A$24,000.

This was of course expected and TMS has no money to pay damages and costs. The owner will probably just declare the company bankrupt, which is normal. Shame the owner of TMS was not ordered to pay for this swindle. The company itself is only an innocent vehicle...

VistaMan,
you seem to know this. My ISA provider has deducted 15% tax in spite of them acknowledging that I do have a valid W8-BEN.

Their explanation is as follows:
"This stock [DGOC] pays out US sourced income and as such is
taxed as US. In this case, because you have a W8 Ben in place,
you get taxed at the reduced rate of 15%."

So they have deducted 15% from the 1.725c, giving me 1.466c before exchange to pounds.

No significance, Hugh-Jarse? Speaks volumes, I would call it. Polo calls it "change of advisor" but it looks like "resignation of broker" by Liberum Capital. Liberum has been Polo's broker since 2 August 2011 and this year after enough certainly was enough they flushed Polo out with this year's spring cleaning's exceptionally dirty water. What next??

From today's update from Pan Asia:

The TCM coal mine sale is still due to complete 15 August but Pan Asia says some delays can be expected.

What I don't like is Pan Asia's repeated statement about Polo's charge on the mining shares that they plan "to further engage with Polo to seek a commercial restructuring of this security" when the mine is being sold to Glory Merry Ltd.

Therefore what I fear is that rather than Polo getting the 5 mill Singapore dollar loan (plus 15% annual interest) repaid, Tang will instead settle for another a charge over another kind of project which is even "bigger and better" than the current disaster involvement.

https://www.asx.com.au/asx/statistics/displayAnnouncement.do?display=pdf&idsId=02003165

8ailey,
A great shame since direct access would be the most useful for smaller AIM shares where the spread sometimes can be 10 - 30% which is exactly where the MMs do need some competition from individual traders.

Simon, according to their web page on direct access ( idealing.com/en/help/directaccess ) Idealing do permit Direct Access London Stock Exchange to eligible private investors.

https://www.idealing.com/pdf/en/professional_client_request.pdf

Hmmm... perhaps the average person here on this discussion board doesn't qualify...

Does anybody use www.idealing.com as broker? It looks like their platform gives their clients DIRECT ACCESS to the electronic trading board thereby bypassing, or competing with, the unnecessary, 19th century, completely outdated, monopolising, so-called market makers - who really are the opposite, market preventers.

Only yesterday IC's Simon Thompson recommended buy at 210p. Currently today the price is 125p, down 42% on yesterday's close.

Joe,
"Sometimes"? I only use IC as background reading about possible new investee companies I haven't come across before and then read up it the companies at all fit my requirements. Not long ago IC were forced to admit themselves after going through their own recommendations from the beginning of this year that they got it right less than 50% of the time. In other words a RANDOM SELECTION would do better.

Can't be that bad then, or what?

"..difficult for the Group and the industry as a whole..." ?? I don't believe this is an industry-wide problem. They told us that yachts need to be coated regardless, and they admit contracts go to competitors, so the market is there.

What I do believe is when they say their reliance on yacht owner relationship as their only market strategy has been a flop. Yacht owner relationship is a person-to-person thing which follows individuals wherever they choose to work and therefore a dangerous corporate strategy for any "world leading" yacht coating group.

Shockingly naive management.

I use investegate and list the tickers of all the companies I want, for example:

https://www.investegate.co.uk/Index.aspx?searchtype=3&words=oxb,bgo,pmg,cog,gyg,joul,dgoc,swl,gmaa,ketl

Save that address as a shortcut which you can change whenever you want.

All news released by Polo is about crony agreements, 10% dilutive options to Tang & friends and nothing about the business.

Polo had a chance in today's RNS to say a few words about what they have done since the Chinese were given this coal power prospectus. But as usual - SILENCE. ( of course - nothing ...)

I agree ragnar. I know I'm dangerously far inside wishful-thinking territory sometimes when I buy. I'm sitting tight now and waiting for the price to drift topping up further. However my 'expensive' buys often seem to fade into insignificance later on when (if) the shares have re-rated. I see that IC described DGOC the following way:

"We ... note that this growth
strategy increasingly resembles
an exercise in securitisation"

Rare, reassuring words about an AIM company. The admission document does indeed give all the information you need to securitise the assets at a good price! Lets hope DGOC stays on AIM for the sake of those of us who who are old and/or for other reasons have started to take inheritance tax into the equation in financial planning! AIM is, when used correctly, a safe haven against this dreaded 40% tax.

I agree, Ragn, we retail individuals are not in the wholesale business and "luckily" my failed attempt to play their game this week only represented a smaller part of my existing DGOC holdings and all of that DID rise today which has made a big difference to my portfolio! Bought a bit more just now, just to feel better but somehow it hasn't worked.

Ordinary holders were welcome to, in fact VERY welcome according to DGOC but you would have to take the initiative yourselves and use a broker who were authorised by Mirabaud and Stifel to feed orders to them. AND the broker you used must have identified you as an existing DOGC holder. The last point failed in my case as I used a different broker than the one who hold my existing shares to order in this placing. And since I don't have my own crest account I am completely invisible on the share register... What a farce - I missed out on £15k gain compared with placing price, assuming I received 100% allocation..

Don't mind giving share options to hard working management, but effectively 9.7% dilution of ownership is a outrageous price to pay for one single year's option granting. It is completely outside the scale of any normal corporate governance conduct. And these 20 mill options to Tang increases his potential shareholding by 51%. And personally I don't believe Tang will work any harder (for ALL the shareholders) with these options than without. He has after all a considerable sum invested in Polo already which should be enough motivation for him to achieve value growth.