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 default Register for Free to get streaming real-time quotes, interactive charts, live options flow, and more.

AMB Amberley Grp.

2.50
0.00 (0.00%)
28 Mar 2024 - Closed
Delayed by 15 minutes
Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Amberley Grp. LSE:AMB London Ordinary Share GB0000273663
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  0.00 0.00% 2.50 - 0.00 00:00:00
Industry Sector Turnover Profit EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap
0 0 N/A 0

Amberley Grp. Share Discussion Threads

Showing 251 to 274 of 350 messages
Chat Pages: 14  13  12  11  10  9  8  7  6  5  4  3  Older
DateSubjectAuthorDiscuss
18/2/2004
18:26
What's going on here then? Three big buys, total 2m, early today..... P  
philmiboots
07/1/2004
19:10
I think JOB have sold a option on there holding around the 8 p mark and when this is taken up is the time to get in
muscovie
04/1/2004
18:32
With a recovery predicted in the UK, there is a increased chance of a RTO. However, there has to be a time limit in mind before its wound up - everything has its price.
azalea
04/1/2004
18:16
1.67 mkt cap. moved to aim. ok so reduces costs but why not just wind up? any one 2nd guess the motives here.property development company now?
gelp
13/11/2003
20:50
Gelp, that is a big chunk - roughly 20% and 1m more than that bought by J. O. H. when it took it stake up to its current level. No one is buying that amount just for the good of their health, perhaps things are coming to a head - R.T.O.?
azalea
12/11/2003
20:41
8 million shares bought today and price edges up. Whats happening?
gelp
18/10/2003
10:17
baggywinkle - precisely. J.O.H. had to have that 'angle' covered. In some shape ,or, form they will be planning a clean end game - cash divided up amongst all the shares in issue from the sale of outstanding properties and I suspect a RTO. Up 0.5p on Friday!
azalea
17/10/2003
06:29
azalea
agree that if JOH could have got 8p for all their shares, they would have sold. However, doubt whether they could have sold 30% of co without pushing bid price way below where it is now - so that was not a viable exit strategy. However, that is not to say that someone does not have another game in mind. Have sold all mine, so that would be academic for me.

baggywrinkle
14/10/2003
19:57
baggyrinkle

If J.O.H. was looking to make just 15% on a £1.5m investment (less than 15% if one includes the 11% stake it already held) it would have sold out when they were @ 8p. Then there are the other big investors still holding their original stakes. Although I have sold (happy with my profits), I still think there is much more to it, albeit relatively academic in my case - now holding just 948 shares.

azalea
13/10/2003
18:51
In case anyone was following me, I note that I closed out two of my shorts today at 6.75p ... I still think this has quite a bit to fall so I'll probably roll-over the remaining short position.
ianreid
24/9/2003
08:08
JOH sums could have been simply:
purchase at say 23p
assets to be distributed say 26.5p
(two divs 10p plus final 6.5p)
profit 3.5 on 23p ie 15% with little risk.
in dire markets, that is not bad going

baggywrinkle
23/9/2003
20:00
If there is little left in the AMB pot and J.O.H. cannot offload its 29.9% stake (18% = 6-7m, bought @ circa 23p) then it would mean that they will not make a profit on their investment. a conclusion that I find almost impossible to believe of them, or, other holders - I mentioned earlier. I reckon they will be looking for and end at 12 months. Clearly the property will be sold as soon as there is a buyer, or, it could be included as part of a RTO. The directors of course will want to see their shares make a profit too. If there are any negotiations in progress the directors are not going to say anything at this stage as the information might well be commercially sensitive to the company making the RTO.
azalea
23/9/2003
19:51
azalea, Paul,

I think JOH took 29.9% because they couldn't take anymore (without offering a takeover)! Given this wind-down has been going on for so long I certainly wouldn't rule out the nice safe return argument ... certainly what I was doing (on a smaller scale, granted ;-)

The chap I talked to certainly didn't expect an RTO ... when pressed he said he wouldn't rule it out, but it would have to offer clear shareholder value he said. So, I got the distinct impression that this was not on the cards ... whereas an orderly wind-up was clearly on the cards.

He could give no date on the sale of the property so I read that they were not yet under offer, but that's my reading not anything he said.

Cheers,
Ian

ianreid
23/9/2003
08:38
I agree that Hambro's stake is a significant price support assuming that they are seeking an rto end game.

They appear to have already made a good return, have justifified their investment, hence rto may not necessarily be part of their plan.

If it was, you would have expected that the director Ian spoke to would have been aware that rto route preferred option.

Plus difficult to envisage any imminent action until property sold so even if rto route chosen, likely to be long period when shares languish on minimal news flow. Again Ian said director unaware of quick resolution.

Perhaps Ian could confirm these two points.

ghhghh
22/9/2003
17:40
ianreid
Nah, J O Hambro don't blindly spend £1m on safe havens and why take a 29.9% stake.
That said, I did in fact hedge my bets today - sold 3k bought this Feb (19.5% profit). I still have 1k (holding to the end)- the rump of my holding after the offer @ 32p. As you will know the price fell 1p, but still there were some relatively big buys. If they continue to fall I will buy back in for all the reasons stated.

azalea
22/9/2003
07:15
azalea,

I like your analysis ... and you're right we just have to wait on JOH, but I'm not aware that they are in the habit of buying up to do RTOs. I suspect they were buying up as a nice save haven for cash in difficult times and with a good return actually!

Why not sell now ... they can't - try to sell 30% and you'd hammer the price before you got 1% out. Not much point them shifting a small amount ... just wait for the closure. To be honest, I doubt this is even on anyones radar at JOH ... they will have told AMB what they want to happen and will just expect!

This week should be interesting.

Cheers,
Ian

ianreid
21/9/2003
23:19
Azalea,

I agree, I've followed this all the way down, making good returns. But there's now, I reckon, 5-6p left ... maybe 6-7p if an RTO but unlikely.

RISKS:
- time to return
- property being sold under value ... it's been on the market quite some time now
- any hidden nasties e.g. pension deficit, problems with land/buildings - unlikely I think - AMB directors have done a nice job of closing so far

With the price at 8p this is very silly. Six months ago, with these risks I'd have been looking to buy at 2.5-3p (given cash is under 2p and the rest is unrealised).

Cheers,
Ian

ianreid
21/9/2003
23:14
Mark,

Just look at the recent news releases e.g.


See other thread for my main postings, but here's a summary of what's left:
Property in Hull still has be be sold.
By my calcs:
1.1+1.72 = 2.82m = 12p cash (23.46m shares)
Cost of divi £2.5m leaving about 1.35p/share
Still to collect 120k (0.5p) from sale of business and sale of property - that's the unknown but in books at 975k so say 1m (=4.25p)
So should still be 6.1p modulo differences in property sale price and closing costs - let's say 5p.

Hope this helps ...

ianreid
21/9/2003
20:48
StewJames
If J O Hambro was not still holding and had sold inevitably a significant amount, then some of us (not least the MM) would have heard/read about it, either through a company statement or via RNS. That said, J.O.H. certainly would not have sold before the mouth watering 10p div xd 17/9. Of course, they might still yet. Moreover, any sales by directors would have to be declared, I am not aware of any in recent times.

Equally interesting, when the 32p offer was made, Claesson and another major holder(6%+) submitted none of their holdings. As far as I know they still hold.
So there are two others who believed even back then that there was significantly more to come.

As to why the share price has risen post xd could be because its the last, leaving the way clear for whatever might be envisaged. An RTO would presumeably involve making an offer for the outstanding shares whilst taking into account the cash.

Really and truly, the people to answer all these important questions are the J O Hambro boys. IMHO, they simply did not go back in earlier this year - building their stake back up from 11% to 29.9% without knowing the end game - having already identified the company for the RTO. Until there is a more convincing angle I am inclined to be dictated to accordingly.

azalea
21/9/2003
18:51
azalea, butting in :-) and answering your questions in order...how can you be sure J O Hambro are holding their stake and not trying to sell? Besides which, such holders rarely move quickly to take advantage of short term fluctuations.
There are a number of posts on this and the other thread showing this has been actively traded by momentum and other short term traders. Unwise to place any meaning in shareprice movements in such a case IMO. I'd further qualify this by saying IF there's RTO or other activity behind this, it's a big coincidence that it didn't start rising BEFORE the XD.
A reverse isn't impossible, but why choose AMB? I admit I've not been keeping up to date, but just a few months back there were a number of shells trading at or near cash...why pay a premium for one that isn't even a clean shell?

stewjames
21/9/2003
17:36
ianried

My problem is not necessarily with your analysis but with the fact that if you are right why is J O Hambro of all people sitting there still holding its stake and why is the share price rising above 8p after going XD? If someone backs into AMB will that not put significantly more cash into the pot?

azalea
20/9/2003
14:46
I don't quite follow some of the above posts regarding AMB. Overall, its been a good investment for the patient. Since it bought in shares @ 32p, JO Hambro from a resulting reduced stake, bought more taking its holding to 29.9%. AMB then paid out a 10p Div and about to do the same again - now XD; despite which the share price continues to rise. I bought in January this year @ 23p so effectively with 20p of divs in the bag, I am still making a nice profit. With still more to come from the sale of properties there is a possibility that another company might be backed into AMB. Failing this, having disposed of all of its assets to shareholders the company will be wound up. As far as I know, J O Hambro still has its large stake, therefore I shall follow that stance until it changes significantly.
azalea
20/9/2003
14:06
ian, in an earlier post u say this company is winding up, can u elaborate on this for me please?
ta

mark sloane
20/9/2003
12:10
Paul,

Nice to have your backing! I agree RTO would be best for value, but I got the direct impression that this was not even on the cards at the moment ... but wouldn't be dismissed if they were approached.

Cheers,
Ian

ianreid
Chat Pages: 14  13  12  11  10  9  8  7  6  5  4  3  Older

Your Recent History

Delayed Upgrade Clock