focusIR May 2024 Investor Webinar: Blue Whale, Kavango, Taseko Mines & CQS Natural Resources. Catch up with the webinar here.
ETH
I see no reason why , with the correct news and presentation, that the sp can’t be over 80p and close to £8m raised from the warrants within the next 6 months, so absolutely no need for a further raise. The warrants prevent further dilution, beyond what is already agreed.
imo
Dallo
I do not expect 5G IF to be ‘dumping shares’. They have never done that in the last 15 months and there is no reason for them to start now. They will continue to abide by the orderly market rules. They will sell into and as liquidity allows, which is generally when the sp is rising. So you are unlikely to see sells today, imo.
5G IF have not changed their spots. As MR says, they’ve been a supportive and flexible funder. I’m sure MR continues to have a good relationship with them. 5G ‘s work is now down here, but they will exit in the correct and agreed manner, I’m absolutely sure of that. There will be no ‘dumping’.
imo
Hi dallo
Thank you for the confirmation of what I said yesterday re MR adjusting major shareholders holdings on the web site.
I note you expect 5G to notify if there are any changes, whether those changes are TR1 notifiable or not. That would be useful, I am certain they have already sold further post declaration, so be interesting to see if the web site reflects that in the next week or so. If not, I will take it that 5G continues not to adopt ‘best practice’, as is their right and the next time we will hear from them it will be a TR1 sub 5% declaration.
Obviously everyone can make their own mind up, but 5G IF have never in the slightest shown or indicated by their actions that they are a long term holder. That is not their purpose or aim. I see absolutely no reason why that would change.
On my calculations they have c 4.8m to go. Pity one of ENET’s brokers can’t find a home for them.
Hi dallo
Probably batted this one around enough.
Re ‘good practice’, I’m reminded that you told us you were advised to declare at over 3% as ‘best practice’. As we know, 5G IF have not adopted best practice, choosing to declare when they were over 5%.
I struggle to see why they would know adopt ‘best practice’ and inform every time they sold (or bought) when not being required to do so.
Imo, if they sell it’s not a vote of no confidence. That fundamentally ignores what the fund was set up to do. It was not to be a lth like you and other major shareholders.
It was to provide funds to ENET in their hour of need.
Job now done. They’ve shown no inclination to hold any shares beyond what is necessary to enable an orderly market disposal.
Quite why you think that will change now they have declared is beyond me. All the same, I will be delighted if you are correct, but the early signs are that they continue to sell.
atb
uhlf
No problems dallo.
Let’s see what happens, although to be fair to 5G IF there is no obligation to disclose unless it’s a notifiable event.
I’m afraid a lot of companies web sites are out of date wrt holdings, if ENET wish to keep the public major holdings bit up to date, that is commendable but difficult to enforce in practice. Let’s see if the latest 5G sales get reflected on the web site. All assuming they are indeed 5G.
Dallo
Re your question
‘Why do a few posters feel that 5G will never do the right thing as most (all) other major shareholders do?’.
I will try to answer that. And to be clear nothing I say impugns the integrity of MR and ENET snd I’m sure that 5G have at all time abided by the rules.
The answer is that 5G IF do not deserve and should not be treated the same as other major shareholders because the crucial difference between them and other long term holders such as yourself, myself and others is that 5G IF are short term holders and very short term at that. That is their absolute right. It’s clear they were set up for a purpose, they’ve done that job and now it should be no surprise that they are exiting.
Dealing in facts, 5G IF have received a total of 6,382,669 shares in October and November.
Come their declaration 2nd December they hold 4,898,637 shares. Ie they’ve sold down by 1,484,082 in the last 6 weeks. That’s an average of c 250,000 a week.
So they’re motive, aspirations, mode is different from other major shareholders. They’ve made their money from the discounted price they’ve paid for the shares by selling in the open market. That is their absolute right. But I suspect their 6.5% holding is also for the short term and they will go under 5% soon enough.
I wish it wasn’t so and that they would be lo g term holders, but actions speak louder than words and the facts are undeniable.
atb
uhlf
Icepick
I’m sorry you feel that way and that is not my intention.
This is a BB for discussion and I put points of view across. Ive been wrong, as well as right, plenty of times before.
I value the contributors here as esp the likes of dallo, who is one of the best.
atb
uhlf
dallo, my comments weren’t so much to do with 5G, but the suggestion that Mark could change the holding of a large shareholder and make that public via a web site without confirmation from said holder. Imo, that is incorrect. That is the thrust of my post.
Regarding 5G itself, clearly there were set up to fund ENET and it’s obvious that the plan was to sell the shares they acquired. Whether they hang onto the rump remains to be seen, I don’t think they will, as evidenced by recent selling, imo. 5G got ENET out of a hole, it’s worked for both parties, as ever with due respect to their help etc. But I’m sure I won’t be alone in breathing a sigh of relief when they are out. Their actions to date are not one of a long term holder, such as yourself.
All imv
atb
Uhlf
Thanks for the report dallo, appreciated.
Re
‘However Mark said it can track large buys/ sells as with the recent Miton increased holding following the placing.
So ( my words) if 5G SELL LARGE AMOUNTS OF SHARES THE COMPANY CAN TRACK AND ADJUST HOLDINGS ON ITS WEBSITE.’
Re your words, with the greatest of respect I believe you are wrong and MR is not at liberty to alter large shareholders amounts on the web site unless he has been informed of a change by the large shareholder. Large shareholders only have a duty to inform if they move through a notifiable anount. I don’t expect 5G to declare until they move below 5%. Of course, there is nothing to stop a large holder voluntarily declaring a buy or sale to the company, even if it does not require a TR1.
The crucial, imo, thing here is that a company cannot adjust a leading shareholders amount unless they have been informed by that leading shareholder. Ok, they can privately but not on a public web site.
So if , for example, 5G sell, as it looks almost 100% they have been doing, that will not be reflected on ENET’s web site unless 5G inform the company and/or it is a notifiable event.
I am sure the above is correct.
Let’s see if the 5G quantity changes on the ENET web site.
If it doesn’t, it suggests the above is correct. If it does change, without being notifiable, then I will be totally gobsmacked and surprised that 5G are informing ENET of their every move.
That’s my take fwiw.
Bottom line is we still have c 5m 5G shares to shift
Atb
uhlf
Martyn
Here’s the relevant bit from the FCA rule book
https://www.handbook.fca.org.uk/handbook/DTR/5/1.html
(1) reaches, exceeds or falls below 3%, 4%, 5%, 6%, 7%, 8%, 9%, 10% and each 1% threshold thereafter up to 100% (or in the case of a non-UK issuer on the basis of thresholds at 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30%, 50% and 75%) as a result of an acquisition or disposal of shares or financial instruments falling within DTR 5.3.1 R; or
Martyn, that’s not correct re major shareholder. They don’t have to declare every time they make a sale, or a buy. Only when they move through a notifiable level. In 5G’s case that will be below 5%, or about another 1m sales. Unless they turn buyer, in which case a move through 10%!
Hi dallo
I hope you are correct re 5G being a lt holder.
Re ‘double taps’, imo it’s almost undeniable that that is 5G.
Re Marks list, do you inform mark of a change in your holding and Mark changes it accordingly? If so, then there is no obligation on 5G to inform MR and I don’t believe MR can just change 5G’s holding unless he hears from them. I suspect we will only know when they go below 5% and that any sales, if indeed they do sell any, won’t be reflected in MR’s list as there is no requirement to do so.
All imo, happy to be proved wrong. The proof of the pudding is in the eating. Newsflow and strong sp appreciation will put 5G to bed.
Right now, their intentions are not clear, least not to me
atb
uhlf