Member Info for shylock

Click on the BGBL Media tab up ^ there.

There has been no case for wrongful dismissal brought against the company yet or we would know about it. Of course, the company would have taken legal advice before firing him; and the lack of an immediate legal challenge suggests an open-and-shut case, notwithstanding the considerable damage done to NK's CV. At least there was no reference in the interims to disappearing cash. Had that been the case I think they would have had to mention it even though any such discovery would have taken place after the period end. And yes, that installed base plus annual revenues of £5-6m gives the metering business a definite value to the right buyer and the timing may be good -- albeit the market clearly hasn't valued it too highly of late.

Now that they are out of the close period, it would be nice to see the BoD show faith and dip into their pockets.

http://shares.telegraph.co.uk/news/article.php?id=4721991&epic=BGBL http://www.stockmarketwire.com/article/4721991/Bglobal-adjusted-pre-tax-losses-narrow.html http://www.insidermedia.com/insider/north-west/104564-losses-rise-bglobal http://www.thebusinessdesk.com/northwest/news/553089-bglobal-optimistic-despite-losses.html?news_section=28384

Good enough and plenty of signs of improvement to come - especially now that the BoD can focus on growth. A tad surprising that there was no reference to the departure of the FD, albeit since the period end. More to come on that one. The metering disposal could happen any time. Interesting to see what it's worth and who wants it. The Kennedys are one obvious potential buyer.

...and probably, "...no discernible volume..."

We have already been told - weeks ago - that they are better than expected. Doesn't necessarily mean they're good. Might just be less bad. Nothing to get excited about (yet) with less than £20k traded today - including a 100k sell. They can easily drop the SP again for no good reason. It's all fun and games until/unless we see some evidence that the company is starting to perform - or that someone has a sizeable buy order on the book.

Let's hope that's the end of the pettiness and the BoD can now proceed to realise shareholder value without distractions. Unfortunately, we won't save all the money it costs to call a GM but we will have saved some.

Yes, excellent news - and hopefully more to come. But as ever with these announcements, we only hear about the contract wins and don't get told about any lost business. Hopefully this is a net gain - but if I had my way, the same regulation that requires listed companies to announce significant new contracts should also require them to announce significant lost contracts, since both are equally price-sensitive.

Yes, Kamel, I do think that, given the circumstances of PK's ousting, it was essential to go through the motions of an external review - with or without a motive to sell the company. In fact, it would obviously be impossible to sell the company if PK were set against it, which in his current adversarial mood, he doubtless would be. As for improved Board performance, we will find out soon enough. But the extraordinary fact that the CEO and other directors supported PK's removal indicates that the company could not have been running effectively with PK in the chair. I assume that relationships must have deteriorated to our detriment for the ousting to succeed. We can only speculate upon which bad decisions were being taken by PK and which good ones were being obstructed by him. I have served on a dysfunctional Board and I know how difficult it can be to make constructive progress under such circumstances - presumably made all the worse by the fact that the Kennedys could throw their weight/shares around. These things don't happen for fun. And you certainly don't effectively ruin a man's career by firing him in the full glare of RNS headlights unless it had to be done and was legally defensible. Anyhow, the BoD will be out of the close period within a couple of weeks so it will be interesting to see if any of them are minded to buy shares in the company.

jollyspeculator, as so often happens, it is what an RNS doesn't say that is at least as important as what it does say. Imho, a company which puts itself into an 'offer period' is potentially in dire straits. But we now know that isn't the case here - because of what wasn't said in the RNS. Nor would the majority of shareholders have been too thrilled to receive t/o bids at a depressed share price so it's a relief that the company isn't going to be sold off cheaply. But they say they do want to sell the metering operation so, for all we know, a buyer for that business could have been in the wings all along and the strategic review could have served partly as due diligence for him. But mostly, the review seems to have given certain value to the other parts of the business and a clear strategy going forward. I venture to suggest that the strategy would have been different under the previous chairman, without the independent review. I also suspect that the review will have proven the justification for ousting PK and for firing his son. Without it, we could have been in for a lengthy battle with no dry ammunition. So it's well done from my perspective. And it seems to indicate that important customers have indeed been visited by the new chairman and that the company may soon acquire new contracts as a consequence. The proof, of course, will be in the pudding.

This is just the result I was hoping for. Clearly, Utilsoft is where the profit is and it will become visible once the burden of the metering business is removed. If we find a buyer for the metering business, so much the better. While I'm hopeful that a buyer has been in the wings for a long time, I doubt we can expect a huge sum for a relatively small, loss-making operation. But with it gone, I think we can easily see £3mpa and rising profit from the residual business and that would transform shareholders' fortunes. Looks like we'll have to wait until next month to understand what "implementing strict cash management procedures" means but it looks like the reason why the FD was fired. Also reassuring is the lack of any dire warnings. Had the review thrown up any serious underlying problems then today's RNS would have had to reveal them.

The only way the Kennedys can become disenfranchised is if they sell their shares - which I hope and assume they won't, until or unless someone buys them off-market. Meanwhile, there is still plenty of time for the GM requisition to be withdrawn so let's hope that commonsense prevails. Yes, it's just a temporary distraction but at up to £50k a pop, a GM to vote on a resolution that was voted on a few weeks ago is a scandalous waste of our cash. If PK thinks he's winning any hearts and minds, he is seriously deluding himself.

Impossible to say - but I think we were given a clue that the strategic review would be positive when John Grant told us that he had initially secured PK's agreement to defer his GM requisition until after it was published. If the review was going to be negative, or critical of the CEO, then JG wouldn't have suggested the PK wait for it. Equally, if PK thinks the review is going to be positive then he presumably wants to get his resolutions voted on before it comes out, ie before shareholders get any "feelgood" glow. Now that PK has pressed ahead with the GM, I wouldn't be at all surprised if JG takes steps to ensure that the review is published before the event. That's what I hope to see, anyway.

Here's the circular, in case anyone hasn't been able to find it: http://bglobalplc.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/TS4-21246140-v5-Circular_in_relation_to_requisitioned_GM.pdf See also ShareProphets' take on the GM "madhouse": http://www.shareprophets.advfn.com/views/2236/bglobal-plc-hostile-general-meeting-convened-at-the-madhouse

Thanks, Kamel. I'm interested in that industry and have a fat stake in OPAY which I bought at 30-40p levels. FWIW, I think that both Ladbrokes and William Hill have been badly run for years and were painfully slow to get into new growth sectors. The Playtech partnership helped to disguise how bad WH were - but obviously won't do so going forward. Playtech themselves have performed well, albeit I'm not sure what to make of their head honcho (jailed in Israel for in Israel for stock market manipulation) so I have kept clear of them. Because of his history, I don't envisage any takeover of a British bookmaker by Playtech in its current form being sanctioned by UK regulators. That doesn't mean that Ladbrokes won't be taken over by someone but another bookmaker would be the most likely candidate imho if they can get around the Monopolies Commission. But the most attractive businesses in this sectors are those which are set to profit from the relaxation of online gaming laws in the US and elsewhere - and I don't think Ladbrokes are high on that list.

Yes, Kamel, if the CFO had done something that serious then the RNS would have said so. But it isn't good to leave shareholders in the dark about his misdemeanour/s as we are prone to assume the worst. The SP movement is meaningless when so few shares are being traded. We've been told that the company has been trading above expectations in H1 so at some point the buyers should show up... Of more concern is the disruption that PK seems determined to cause, and his mood won't have been improved by his son's dismissal. OTOH, there may be some filial misdemeanour in there which could be used as a bargaining chip to keep him in check.

http://www.shareprophets.advfn.com/views/2128/bglobal-plc-cfo-dismissed-further-escalation-of-spat-at-the-top "The spat involving ousted chairman and 23.66% shareholder, Peter Kennedy, and the current board of AIM-listed Bglobal plc (BGBL) looks to have been further escalated – with the company yesterday announcing the dismissal from office as Chief Financial Officer with immediate effect of Nick Kennedy. Hmmm, Kennedy, that name rings a bell. Nick, Peter Kennedy’s son, was “suspended with immediate effect pending an investigation of his conduct” following the August voting out of Peter Kennedy from office – Nick had been lined up by him to be interim Chief Executive until a proposed new Chairman would lead a process to find a full time replacement. The company has now updated that “the investigation has concluded”, with the result that Nick Kennedy “has been dismissed”. This comes as Peter Kennedy has already requisitioned another general meeting seeking the removals of current CEO Tim Jackson-Smith and senior independent non-executive James Newman as directors of the company – see HERE. The company updated last week that it is now “required to convene a general meeting to consider the ousted chairman's proposed resolutions by 31 October 2013, accordingly the board proposes to do so shortly”. Meanwhile, a strategic review being carried out by KPMG continues to be worked on, though long-suffering shareholders can perhaps take some comfort from the 30th September AGM comment that “the group has had a better than expected first half year of trading”. However, at least until the management and strategic outlooks are clearer, there remains no rush for an equity interest here."

So Nick Kennedy has been fired. Predictable, I suppose, but potentially harmful - at least until we hear why. On the silver lining front, we won't have to pay him 6 months' salary.

The new chairman has been spotted out and about meeting key customers, so making money is on the agenda.