Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
Well management managed to do some pretty bad damage to the accounts in a relatively short period of time. Bunch of clowns, but then again a bunch of clowns overseen by an equally incompetent BoD. When the bad news broke, the funds sprinted for the door. If they hadn't done so quickly, maybe we could have all salvaged a bit more than 9p, maybe even as much as 15p, but once the new owners had built a big enough stake the price was set. Few people will be tempted to reject the offer, because there will be no market into which these shares can be sold after the company goes private. If the company were able to keep active a listing, even as an aim stock, then I would continue to hold. Sadly that is not an option. So the moral of the story, steer well clear of any company trying to rebuild a damaged balance sheet, even if you see the big guys doubling down, because they too make mistakes, far more often than you think.
Will probably be turned down this winter, and patio heaters will disappear, but that doesn't mean nobody will go to the pub, just that people won't necessarily take off their jackets while inside. Drink enough and you won't notice.
Even though I'm holding, I can see this going lower. I do think it will bounce to 550 at some point, probably after some better than expected rns, hence my holding.
It been reported that Liz may bring in tax cuts. If so, I wonder how much of the increased take-home would end up in spoons tills? Also the BoE is hamstrung by UK mortgage debt so I don't believe interest rates will take off, which would be good for both spoons and punters. High inflation and higher bills will cause punters to seek better value for money and again this could benefit spoons also. I also recon the last couple of months of fine weather won't have harmed footfall either.
Be interesting to know what legal justification the company now has for withholding publication of last year's accounts which would allow a resumption of trading. The company is still obliged to adhere to UK law and the UK listing rulebook and I very much suspect in my non legally trained opinion that their current action, which is currently preventing individuals from liquidating their holdings at the market determined price, is potentially challengeable.
https://resourcehub.bakermckenzie.com/en/resources/global-public-ma-guide/europe-middle-east-and-africa/united-kingdom/topics/delisting#:~:text=The%20main%20requirement%20to%20delist,LSE%27s%20market%20for%20listed%20securities.
.. till they get relisted? Very interesting to see SL is only selling a fraction of his stake at this low ball price.
When it comes to a liquidity situation a companies first priority is towards the creditors, employees and pension fund. Shareholder value is basically outranked by the before mentioned, hence of course they would recommend accepting any offer that fixes the solvency issue, even a lowball one like 9p. Problem for them however is that in order to be accepted it has to pass a shareholder vote and given that over half the remaining approximately 56% is owned by one person, then that person holds the key to whether the offer is accepted or not. Lastly it's pretty much accepted practice that the nominee / broker collect clients voting wishes when voting on issues as significant as a takeover, at least with any reputable brokers it is the case.
Only half of what I am reading here makes sense. If the share had not dropped so far I might too have sold, however I can't get it out of my head that I would regret selling for anything less than at half last years refinancing price. If a deal gets done by all parties meeting in the middle then we might even see something north of 20p. At then end of the day, if the offer does get rejected then we all go down together so all parties have to be willing to compromise.
Would be very interesting to hear what the companies largest INDIVIDUAL shareholder and companies namesake thinks of this low ball figure. I for one would be likely to follow his lead.
So what was the highest price paid for share by Blofeld Investment Management in the last 12 months and how does this compare with the offer being proposed. Is it not the case that the offer should be higher?
Typo - institutions
The possibility of a rights issue still shouldn't be ignored. IMO any instruments that sold shares last week did so because they were not prepared to put more cash in. I'd give it a 50 50 chance.
Imo any bid below the last year's capital raising price will get rejected, for multiple reasons though the main ones being the assets of the company and the size of the order book. At this price he will still get a bargain, and by taking it private there will be an end to this ridiculous farce about funding where placing have been oversubscribed one month and then not achievable the next. Lamprell is a strategically important company for both the UAE and Saudi Arabia and the sooner this matter is settled the better.
It will have to be high enough to satisfy more than one major shareholder. I suspect people will be surprised how high it is and those who sold since last Friday will be kicking themselves.
Very good signal. Made my day.
..was to step in and agree to invest £185m at 0.15 per share then they would assume a 75% controlling stake in a fully liquid company with a global reputation, health order book in a growing market sector.
Looks like only one of the major shareholders looking to put any money in. Question is how much. I can see why they would want to take the company private, but if the other shareholders don't accept the price then the second best route must surely be a highly diluting rights issue, something I believe (though I may be wrong) the company can do without shareholder approval, all they need is a shareholder or third party with deep enough pockets to underwrite it. Question is, does anyone in the frame have beep enough pockets?
Imo with the share price so low, an rights issue for the amount required by the lenders and underwritten by the richest shareholder is the probably the best option. If no one else takes up the rights then this will effectively mean they end up owning the company.