The latest Investing Matters Podcast with Jean Roche, Co-Manager of Schroder UK Mid Cap Investment Trust has just been released. Listen here.
rise is because of its ownership of a share of TMC surely
0
Key Highlights from the year ending 31 December: Assets Under Management - US$3.48 billion - an increase of 14.1%; Operating Profit - US$6.7 million - an increase of 17.5% at a margin of 23.4% (2009: 23.9%); Profit before tax - US10.4 million - an increase of 50.7%; Earnings per share - 3.1 US cents per share - an increase of 55.0%; Management Fees - US$22.2 million - an increase of 19.4%; Performance Fees - US$6.1 million - an increase of 45.2%; Non recurring Performance Fees - US$3.8 million - an increase of 216.7%; Total Dividends paid and declared in 2010 - US$7.8 million (2009: US$4.9 million) - an increase of 59.2%
Do not think decision to buy their own shares is cost related. Usually a buy-back is for one of two reasons. Firstly, buy-backs are a way of returning cash to shareholders by making each share worth more of the company's value. This makes sense if there is a one-off windfall. Otherwise, dividends are the normal route. Buy-backs are also a means to buy out a major shareholder if there is no other major buyer that can be identified. Given that GFM is incorporated in Bermuda, they have no obligation to inform us of major interests changing. As the sp has not been rising, and given the nature of the authority to continue buy-backs over a period, I suspect the latter. The shares they are buying must be coming from someone.
This company is now majority-owned by Westbrook, whose interest is capital growth for funds that they manage. Why would they allow non-performing directors to take everything out? You obviously have a gripe against this company. I think you should declare your interest.
I do not know what countryboy's agenda is. He only posts here, so is not a day-trader/deramper. Thought he might be a scorned ex-employee with a grudge, but if so he would have known that they had some offices in their portfolio. Perhaps someone from OTE ran off with his significant other. I do know something about Westbrook-Invesco and they have not put £35 mill in here out of charity. I have held a few from when they were higher and topped up at close to the bottom. Thinking of topping up again now that there appears to be some movement at last.
so the office buildings, such as solar house, shown in their portfolio on their website are what? Think you spend too much time in the country and need to go to a town to see what offices look like.
from latest rns regarding split into two companies: 'with shareholders in African Aura receiving one share in each company for each share they hold in African Aura'
tipped by Questor in Sunday Telegraph. usually the kiss of death.
Am I missing something. I was offered the opportunity to participate in the placing at 10.5p but thought better of it as I could buy more cheaply. There was a take-up of 24+ million, but this was dwarfed by the 333+ million that were not taken up, thus resulting in Westbrook Investco owning around 70% of the company. How do you conclude that most iis added???
Are you reading the same RNS. 'On 5 January 2011, the Company announced that ,,,, applications had been received in respect of 24,049,867 New Ordinary Shares resulting in 333,650,139 Excess Shares being available. Qualifying Shareholders who applied for their full Basic Entitlement were entitled to apply for Excess Shares in excess of their Basic Entitlement. The Company announces that no such applications have been received. Accordingly, on Admission, 24,049,867 New Ordinary Shares are expected to be issued to Qualifying Shareholders with a further 333,650,139 New Ordinary Shares to be issued to Westbrook Investco. Following Admission, Westbrook Investco's holding of New Ordinary Shares will represent 69.48 per cent. of the Enlarged Issued Share Capital.
As far as I know, companies buy their own shares when they have one-off cash reserves that need to be returned to shareholders. It is the opposite of raising cash resulting in a share dilution. The merit of buying then cancelling shares rather than giving a dividend is that a 'one-off' dividend often results in negative shareholder reaction when not repeated. I suspect that they have been hoding cash while awaiting a resumption of mining and now no longer need to.
It went up to nearly 8 because people were betting blind based on what looked like buying pressure. When it started to rise, others came in blind thinking that there must be a reason for the rise. The result was the blind leading the blind. Sorry, but the company has not increased in value.
Can anyone see anything other than hype here?
I posted this on 21 Sep ''Last Friday, MBE Minerals, a subsidiary of McNally Engineering, bought 1.2 million shares at 45p (£540k in total) to take their share of SEGR to over 10%. On Monday, McNally told Reuters that they had $40-$50 million to spend on acquisitions of engineering companies with expertise in the oil, gas, cement or water sectors to widen their business activities. The report stated that they were talking to two or three companies.' Waiting to see what McNally does before selling.'
Nine small trades. More sales than buys. Price rises by nearly 10%. Like it, but do not understand at all.
If this carries on, someone is going to notice this share.
OK this did not pan out well for the original investors, but such is life. The "ineptness and gross mismanagement" has opened an opportunity for this to become a recovery stock. If they could get to the point where they have only p'ssed 84% of the money up against the wall from the current 92%, an investor paying 8p on the £ would double his stake.