We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
In demand I'd say 8-10p per share is true value.
But if key shareholders are now pressuring management to pursue an 'exit' then more likely 4-5p.
About time.
They’ve had more than long enough to grow a meaningful and profitable business. It’s time to create some share holder value by selling up.
Is he really still spouting that Questionable Business Model crap. Really!
HVO has nearly no competition, its clients are the biggest Pharmas in the world, they pay the majority of the fee up front, they make a profit and now pay a dividend.
What the hell is their questionable about that. Unbelievable Jeff.
It'll be back no doubt and beyond, it doesn't take much to move share prices up and down on AIM (unfortunately).
The story at the end of the day will be the same - sold, probably to PE - but who knows by what route it'll get there. You just have to make a few extra pounds (or shares) on the roller coaster in the meantime. Whatever I took out on the way up will go back in as it falls
Still a great Company. Nothings changed. JPM didn't invest up to 29p to lose money.
Interesting. AA is anything but predictable, other than his predictability in finding a deal somewhere.
Stick around if you can.
Also btw, trading platforms make it simple for you to buy and sell shares in any quantities (if the liquidity exists) at any time, but it isn't the only way. It's just the easy way.
You can make a direct approach to any shareholder (CF has a few shares left over) and make them any offer at any price. It's not the preserve of IIs doing it that way.
The irony here is that today you can get a better deal on 10 shares than they got yesterday on millions.
I don't have a problem with Board members selling shares. A very weird small minded UK attitude. Why should they have to tie up their own money for as long as they choose to keep a job?
CF is an entrepreneur. He saw an opportunity with OO, made 4 to 5x on his money and is starting to exit. Well done him. I don't really like him, but he did the leg work, raised the funds, put together the team and this time it worked out. He's walking away from a cracking business in great shape because I assume he feels he can make more on another venture with his capital.
As for selling to an II at 28p. He was a seller and he found a buyer, then they agreed a price. How is that wrong?
Would you rather he drip fed 25million shares into the market? Really?
We had that situation with an ex-employee selling into any rise for months. It took the share price down to 10p. Be careful what you wish for (and what you're complaining about) - rant over
Although re-reading it again they're not really making any secret of the fact that he's shifting role so they can pay him more, albeit in options. I hope he's going to have the impact that he's suggesting he will.
CN - I'm obviously only referring to the first part of the RNS, the EPI part is ok ;-)
I try to be balanced and see the whole picture when RNSs are issued, but I can honestly say I don't like this one.
I can't see CF shifting from non-exec chair to exec chair being for any other purpose but to pay him more.
They've just installed a massively increased exec team for Christs sake. There's no meaningful exec chair role for him.
True elrico, if a little one-sided.
There's a fair argument that it was IIs buying in the open market that created the majority of the rise between 20 and 30p.
RIs have plenty of advantages too, like being able to buy any (smaller) amount at any time, and then sell again when they want, unlike larger IIs and Directors.
It's more the apparent inside information and upfront nods that grate at me, but we do seem to bemoan the lack of IIs then criticise when they buy-in.
Besides there was plenty of opportunity for RIs to buy at 28p yesterday and you might even get them for less today.
T1 - We’ve no idea what the ongoing II demand is, it could still be plentiful. It will be interesting to see how long it takes to regain 30 and then move beyond. The move to 28 does give IIs interested sub 30 another hit.
SZ - No apology required. CF has plenty of faults and certainly divides opinion, I won’t miss the unfulfilled promises for one thing. But, he did get the OO ball rolling and to his credit the greatest masterstroke, he gave us Mo and knew it was time to step back.
SZ - I typed something similar in my last post but when I reread it looked bitter so I deleted it.
CF is an enthusiast, an opportunist and ultimately a (self-serving) deal doer. But, so are most entrepreneurs.
The fact is we wouldn’t be where we are today without him, but yes I agree, if his remaining 3% can find its way into II hands in due course I won’t cry.
Done, and twice as much sold as suggested.
Very strong take-up and proves 28p was below where it could have been.
These guys aren’t buying to sell again in the low 30s so onwards we go.
Everybody knows about them, but you've just shown your true colours. One for the green box.
Meetings call. Have a good day all.
H, maybe I'm naive but I can see what's said as being totally true.
HVO want more IIs. They simply can't buy any decent quantity on the open market without pushing the SP through the roof. CF want's to reduce, sees the opportunity, so the answer is obvious and an accommodation is reached.
The only hint to the level of desire (desperation) on each side is the price, in this case 28p.
If the II's wanted in desperately and CF was begrudgingly selling they would have paid him (say) 32p. If he badly needed the cash and they knew it then maybe it would have been 24p. I think 28p is fair. I can't see anything bad in this.
To be fair, as good as HVO is, POLB has more upside than here albeit at far greater risk. HVO is now a good solid investment that in another 2 to 3 years might turn another 100 to 200% plus divs with eventual sale. I think the skies the limit at POLB. Very happy to hold both.
It's just a different part of the same market. They can only buy for an amount that someone is prepared to sell at.
What you're saying is that if CF want's to sell some (how dare he) then he should only sell on the open market and in effect crash the share price, but I guess that would be wrong too? It's all supply and demand.
Bill - I think that might have been provocative deliberate misinterpretation of a troll (I don't think anyone is really that thick)