ADVFN Logo

We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.

Trending Now

Toplists

It looks like you aren't logged in.
Click the button below to log in and view your recent history.

Hot Features

Registration Strip Icon for charts Register for streaming realtime charts, analysis tools, and prices.

AI. Aero Inventory

264.00
0.00 (0.00%)
Last Updated: 00:00:00
Delayed by 15 minutes
Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Aero Inventory LSE:AI. London Ordinary Share GB0004440847 ORD 1.25P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  0.00 0.00% 264.00 - 0.00 00:00:00
Industry Sector Turnover Profit EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap
0 0 N/A 0

Aero Inventory Share Discussion Threads

Showing 2551 to 2570 of 3175 messages
Chat Pages: Latest  103  102  101  100  99  98  97  96  95  94  93  92  Older
DateSubjectAuthorDiscuss
12/11/2009
09:24
I trade a few spreadbets - but I always think of it as a real shareholding - ie make sure I have the underlying amount of cash available, which I think stops me overbuying.

Alas I'm stuck with some AI. shares and a spreadbet. I too had niggling doubts about the stock value - in particular the way that no detailed explanation of stock turnover was offered, or why such large purchases of new stock were needed even when they appeared to have lots (answer: because they didn't have lots), but in the end accepted that the company was being honest. The worst I expected was a drop in the shareprice if it went wrong, not this, so I stuck with it because the risk/reward ratio seemed attractive.

When I started buying shares it took me a while to learn the hard way that cash and cashflow is a vital thing to look at. Obviously I need to learn to allow a wider margin for error in valuing assets where that's particularly important!

martinc
12/11/2009
08:05
Hey Dibbs,

I never lurk.

It is a very big shame that the people un charge have not been honest and played the game.

Nice for them and nothing for shareholders.

And nothing anyone can do. Rogues RULE THE WORLD.

hvs
12/11/2009
07:16
I am not involved and sorry to all for their loss.

I was quite heavily involved during the bid situation and was pretty sure an indicative offer of 900p was submitted , however the board refused to enter into discussions with the bidder!! I wonder if this was because they knew they would be "rumbled" if DD was conducted properly!!

cool runnings
12/11/2009
06:46
The last set of accounts showed stock accounted for over 70% or total assets. What self-respecting accounting dept, let alone auditor, would not have that valuation nailed down by a full reconciliation? It's basic balance sheet accounting!
ianguerin
12/11/2009
06:37
It now makes you wonder if the stock sale to Air Canada was purely to try & raise cash to fuel the directors' gravy train. It now appears to be well known that Air Canada was having difficulties at the time, so was this a very desparate attempt by the directors, who hoped to struggle on until February, when the Air Canada bills of exchange matured?

The inventory sale was sketchy on detail, so did Air Canada get a massive discount on the carrying cost of the stock? Perhaps somebody forgot to post that discount/stock movement in the books at the time!

ianguerin
12/11/2009
05:07
MDJ8 ... Regarding the financial pain to insider shareholdings, having very quickly reviewed last 5 annual reports I conclude that the only director who invested (put his hand in his pocket) a meaningful sum to obtain an equity stake was the non-exec Turner. All the other cronies enjoyed the gravy train of options and sky high emoluments, let's not forget Lewin bought the original company for £50,000 so he has no financial downside. Given the likelihood of fraud on such a breathtaking scale I do not imagine the management's priorities will be financially driven but instead trying to avoid the clutches of the (toothless) SFO. Its the old chestnut .... white collar crime invariably pays.
staverly
11/11/2009
23:38
HVS,

Yep, I was a bit upset last night/this morning, more upset after the RNS today though:-(

Many more pleasurable ways to get rid of money than this that's for sure. Takes me back to being caught with Homebuy, can't remember if you were lurking there also;-)

dibbs
11/11/2009
23:33
I agree with Robsy entirely.

I am now forced to re-evaluate what investing in equities means. As a minimum I must increase my perception of risk and therefore reduce my valuations of equities. It seems that published information is not reliable. This must affect the value of all equities.

I have long positions in CFDs with IG Index I must also re-assess my use of CFDs based on this experience. IG Index have cost me more than the actual value of the equities by increasing the Margin requirement to 100% with no notice and then threatening to liquidate other positions to cover this margin requirement. This left me frantically selling other stocks to cover the new 100% margin. On top of this, IG Markets are now fully covered for the purchase price of the stock but are also charging me LIBOR plus 3% on the purchase price, indefinately it would appear. I'm therefore paying twice for the finance on a share that is worthless and cannot be liquidated. From my recent experience I conclude that there is no point trading on margin if this can suddenly be increased to 100%.

I have challenged IG Index on both of these points and met a brick wall.

Building Society interest rates start to look attractive, this impacts all UK equities.

40kj
11/11/2009
22:57
RNS Number : 3460C
Aero Inventory PLC
11 November 2009

Appointment of joint administrators

On 26 October and 3 November 2009 the Company announced that, given the likely breach of its banking covenants it was in discussions with its banks regarding the Group's ability to access credit and their ongoing financial support. Following recent events and extensive discussions with the Company, the banks have not been prepared to provide additional short term funding to the Company to enable it to continue to trade.

Separately the Company has been actively exploring other financial options to secure working capital to continue to trade and protect value for shareholders. These options have also failed to reach a satisfactory conclusion in the time available. It is therefore with deep regret that the board announces that it has today appointed James Robert Tucker, Richard Heis and Allan Watson Graham of KPMG LLP, 8 Salisbury Square, London EC4Y 8BB as joint administrators to the Company and its subsidiary Aero Inventory (UK) Limited under the Insolvency Act 1986.

Following the announcement of 3 November 2009 the contracts of employment of Rupert Lewin (Chief Executive), Hugh Bevan (Finance Director) and Martin Dodge (Chief Operating Officer) were terminated, although Rupert Lewin and Martin Dodge remain as directors.

The reviews into the value of stock as well as the accuracy of recent financial reports provided to the banks referred to in the Company's announcement of 3 November 2009 have yet to be completed. These matters are now under the control of the joint administrators.

Enquiries:KPMG LLP (Joint Administrators): Tel: 020 7694 2597 / 07831 314 671

masurenguy
11/11/2009
21:26
extract from FT article......


Last week Aero effectively removed its top three executives and admitted that physical items of stock were missing.

KPMG said that they would "be investigating these matters fully," as part of the administration process but added that the "priority now is to stabilise the business".

Analysts fear administration could wipe out existing shareholders, including Lansdowne Partners and HSBC Private Banking. Aero's cash intensive business model had generated net debts of $466.2m at the half year.

Its main assets consist of £751.9m of stock but the problems with valuing the inventory have raised questions about its worth.

link to article.


whilst stock of £751.9m and debts of $466.2m makes it sound like there might be something left, before i clutch at any straws that there will be anything significant left for shareholders please correct me if i am wrong with any three of these premises..
1) we have no idea much stock there is really and it is likely to be vastly less than estimated for the situation to get to this in the first place.
2) someone will snap this up at a bargain price and nothing like its worth
3) the administrators will largely settle for enough to cover the bank debts and have little interests in getting anything for the shareholders.

The standout statement that jumps out and i think needs accepting for now is.....

Analysts fear administration could wipe out existing shareholders.

bizochio
11/11/2009
20:06
This really is worth a read from a few years ago at the AGM....Note the comments about

Generation of cash, auditor change, money paid to Rupert Lewin Racing etc,etc

davidosh
11/11/2009
19:05
The directors share holdings as at30 June 2008, excluding options are as follows:

Directors' interests
The directors' interests in the Company's issued share capital were:
Ordinary shares of shares of 1.25 pence
H C Bevan 54,552
R W J Davis 1,008,681
P M Docker 13,265
M P Dodge 302,973
L Heyworth (appointed 7 September 2007) 463,848 –
P R Lewin 1,289,559
H N P McCorkell 109,309
C L Trupp – –
F Turner 616,046
M J Webster 45,562

They obviously have an interest in trying to get something for shareholders.

mdj8
11/11/2009
18:53
I really thought this was a great business idea, free up the customers cash flow, carry relatively lower stocks parts due to bigger fleet size and good statistical management, you really couldn't screw it up.
DD thanks for reminding us of the salaries required to run this really complicated business.
I'm off to the gym, feel a need to punch something! K.

kramch
11/11/2009
18:09
I've mailed Deloittes to try & find somebody to speak to about this fiasco.

Might be worth a few others doing the same.

They night start to understand that there are a few livid folk out there.

evaluate
11/11/2009
18:04
There is absolutely no reason why the annual audit should be less stringent just because it is an AIM company. There are no 2nd class and 3rd class audits ! The RNS about the delay being due to the full listing was probably a total red herring. When did the company first advise shareholders that it was the intention to go for a full list ? The results were delayed because there were clearly auditing problems but they did not spell it out....that was Deloittes 5th audit as well so not newcomers. Had they become too close to the situation ?


I am absolutely staggered by the last recorded salaries to June 2008 (apologies for the formatting). The board cost $6m last year and probably near $8m this year if rate of increases were maintained. That is huge reward.

(Page26)

Director Benefits Pension Salaries/Fees Bonus Total 2008 Total 2007
$000 $000 $000 $000 $000 $000
Executive directors:
P R Lewin 837 594 86 105 1,622 1,124
H C Bevan 416 149 5 55 625 713
P M Docker 470 238 1 45 754 537
M P Dodge 490 297 3 62 852 672
C L Trupp 456 238 1 37 732 467
M J Webster 304 186 3 38 531 148
T C N Davey (resigned 17 December 2007) 146 15 2 – 163 –
3,119 1,717 101 342 5,279 3,661
Non-executive directors:
H N P McCorkell 223 – 2 – 225 141
R W J Davis 106 – – – 106 34
L Heyworth 99 – – – 99 –
F Turner 106 – – – 106 141
534 – 2 – 536 316
3,653 1,717 103 342 5,815 3,977
Note: Included in the 2007 salary/fees paid in respect of the services of F Turner are consultancy fees of $75,000: there were no such payments in 2007/08. During the period
$178,000 was paid to one former director, T C N Davey, as compensation for loss of office and termination of employment (2007: nil).
A bonus provision of $2,000,000 (2007: $1,449,000) has been included in the accounts for the year ended 30 June 2008 and will be in relation to potential bonuses payable to
executive directors and senior managers. This bonus has not been included in the above table as the final bonus amounts have yet to be determined.

davidosh
11/11/2009
17:31
Robsy, you reflect my own astonishment, did the due diligence, ticked the boxes, thought I could fully trust this one.
I have been a keen AIM investor, but this should shake everyone's confidence in the AIM market. It seems it was only the due diligence work for a full listing which opened up this can of worms. How many more cans are unopened on the AIM market?
I still believe there has been gross incompetence in valuing \ auditing the stock, did anyone actually open boxes, count the stuff inside and verify the prices? It's sort of what the company's all about isn't it? K.

kramch
11/11/2009
17:25
Robsy,

My (sadly long) position was also via CFDs.

I'm pretty sure we'll have to wear the full loss - anybody got any experience of similar situations?

I'm keen to support any action that seeks to gain redress from management / Deloittes.

Anybody got a clue what they are doing here?

Who are the biggest institutional losers here? Will they know how to address this?

evaluate
11/11/2009
17:18
Well said Robsy and I fully endorse your comments.

May I suggest all shareholders download the histroic report and accounts from the website before these disappear. These may be useful in the future.

I fully intend to take my complaint to Deloitte and appropriate authorities but no doubt this will have greater weight en masse.

Is anyone aware of any precedent situtaion where the auditors have let down shareholders in a public listed company so badly and where there has been a successful result for shareholders in terms of a PI claim and/or compensation?

PB

porsche boxster
11/11/2009
17:05
I am absolutely shocked by this.
I am also kicking myself.I had a niggle about stock in the back of my mind.The niggle was based around the "possibility" that some of the stock might have to be provided for because they had too many Widget xyz in the warehouse and demand for Widget xyz was pretty near zero because they only fit into plane type abc which is fast being retired from service because its fuel inefficient. Something along those lines.In my scenario the parts are there in the warehouse, they are in perfect condition but the prudent accountants were writing down the value and this could be a drag on the P&L account.
How niave. There was nothing in the warehouse!
I am shocked because, like many others here, I invest on the back of public information and wrestle with many factors which are beyond my control. Investing is buying into a future stream of profits and it is risky because the future doesn't always unfold as you would want it to.I depend on directors to behave responsibly and within the law. I expect the accountants among them to adhere to the professional accounting standards that their profession demands.
I expect auditors to verify the accounts,paying particular attention to stock, particularly in Ai's case because they know that unless they can feel comfortable with the stock valuation then the P & L account and the B/S cannot be correct so they can't sign off on the accounts. These people sign off on the accounts as giving a true and fair picture of the companys affairs. As a back-up I expect bankers to also verify the stock positions that they finance and if they don't see any problems then I am comfortable. Mistakes can be made but any reasonable systems analysis and stocktaking procedure would quickly identify areas of concern.I took heart from the long-term contracts they had with prestigious customers, Strong Buy recommendations from Institutional brokers, big share buys from directors and the strong loyal support they had from a number of large institutional investors. Not to mention a great track record to date. Basically an award winning company and a rare exception to a lot of the companies on aim.
How wromg I was.I am utterly embarrassed by being caught out like this.I would think that there must be some recompense for this?I will join any class action that is generally thought to be able to prosper. The likes of Bevan etc must be stripped of their professional qualifications and all directors sued. It is unthinkable that they should be allowed to keep the salaries they have earned when they have clearly not exercised a basic duty of care for at least the last 2 years. If we must suffer make sure others in future don't suffer the same fate.
I would think there is a strong moral and legal argument for investors like ourselves who have bought in good faith to be able to seek compensation from the auditors for their failure.

robsy2
11/11/2009
17:04
If you wish to be cheered up, have a look at the following from Rupert Lewin Racing website. I like the phrase 'produce the goods'. Obvioulsy RL can't produce AI goods as he has lost them all.



Rupert Lewin
Rupert Lewin, Team Owner and Director, lives in West London. Chief executive of Aero-Inventory plc, an Aerospace parts service provider. Rupert has managed and directed Aero-Inventory since 1994, and after going public in 2000, decided it was time to fulfil his dream of owning a Porsche Race Team.

A passionate Porsche enthusiast and collector Rupert starting racing in 2002 in a 964 Turbo. 2003 was Rupert's debut full season's racing with the brand new PSI Motorsport built 996 GT2R.

Great achievements were finishing the year in one piece plus numerous wins and seconds.

Despite running a hugely successful business Rupert still manages to find the time to be there when we need him, and produce the goods.

porsche boxster
Chat Pages: Latest  103  102  101  100  99  98  97  96  95  94  93  92  Older

Your Recent History

Delayed Upgrade Clock