We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Type | Share ISIN | Share Description |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Berkeley Tech | LSE:BEK | London | Ordinary Share | GB0000942184 | ORD US$0.05 |
Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0.00 | 0.00% | 4.31 | - | 0.00 | 01:00:00 |
Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
0 | 0 | N/A | 0 |
Date | Subject | Author | Discuss |
---|---|---|---|
08/3/2011 16:32 | FOR IMMEDIATE PRESS RELEASE March 8 2011 Berkeley Technology Limited Notice to Shareholders London, March 7, 2011- Berkeley Technology Limited (London: BEK.L) (the "Company") is an international venture capital consulting company incorporated under the laws of Jersey, Channel Islands. At the EGM held November 23, 2010, shareholders approved a special resolution to windup the Company. On or about December 6, 2010, we noticed shareholders that we would be proceeding with the distribution of the Company's assets to shareholders who own shares in the Company according to each shareholder's ownership interest in the Company, and requested a photocopy of stock certificates to confirm such interest. On January 5, 2011 we established a record date for the first distribution to shareholders. The first distribution was mailed to such confirmed shareholders on or about March 7, 2011. Sincerely, Robert A. Cornman Company Secretary | hugepants | |
04/3/2011 09:41 | Seems someone sold 12500 shares at 4.29 today - fed up with waiting I assume. It also assumes that a MM believes that 8p will eventually arrive. | 25babies | |
23/2/2011 11:33 | maybe time for shareholders to request the call for an EGM, to allow the company an opportunity to inform us? as they are not willing to do so volontarely...... | baner | |
23/2/2011 10:31 | Both my brokers trying to get response from these characters again. No response to anything. Neither can advise on any other course of action than wait. | 25babies | |
17/2/2011 10:09 | Got my sledge and huskies at the ready. | 25babies | |
16/2/2011 22:21 | Confirmation..... Further to the approval of the Winding Up of the Company on 23rd November 2010, we have received notification that the Berkeley Technology Ltd shares are no longer eligible to be held within the UK Settlement System. As a result, we have received a certificated holding from the registrar which will now be reflected on your account. Money in due course..probably, if you personally deposit your certificates at the time of the summer equinox, at the north pole. | rabiddog | |
15/2/2011 10:35 | I can only assume they are doing it this way because they can get away with it. It may be a perfectly legal way of liquidating a company. If you are a shareholder though it sucks. | hugepants | |
14/2/2011 19:56 | Huge pants Total agreement, however i am inclined to write "devious" rather than amateurish. Or maybe both. But again, where is the LSE in this!? | baner | |
14/2/2011 19:28 | Actually you're right baner the shares haven't been delisted. I think they have just been suspended. But of course there should have been an RNS detailing a timetable, with record dates, initial distribution, a suspension date etc. This entire process looks amatuerish in the extreme. | hugepants | |
14/2/2011 13:25 | huge pants - i believe this is only because you cannot claim your money from the liqiudation if you buy the shares now - so no reason to deal in the shares. again; where is LSE in all this - this is terrible behaviour towards "other shareholders" and the LSE people should of course take action to protect the "outsiders". for example, i doubt a public company could be allowed to threaten shareholders with no-payment if they have not registered their shares directly. and where is VISCOUNT TRENCHARD in this - a member of the English aristocracy and also the House of Lords, lending his name to this disgraceful charade......... | baner | |
14/2/2011 11:32 | baner I just assumed they had deslisted since you dont seem to be able to buy/sell them now. | hugepants | |
14/2/2011 11:30 | Huge Pants - are they delisted? i have not seen the EGM for that to happen? where did you get the info? KR baner | baner | |
14/2/2011 10:41 | The lack of transparency here is a concern. Now that its delisted (didn't even bother to tell shareholders) will we even see another set of results? Also I guess if you were on holiday, in hospital etc you may not have known of the requirement to send a photocopied share certificate. Just tough luck I suppose. | hugepants | |
14/2/2011 10:24 | i think they are too busy attending San Fransisco ballets and similar events. i am not surprised Cornman and Treuger demonstrate this level of arrogance, however VISCOUNT TRENCHARD should know better, one would have hoped. and where is the LSE in all this???? | baner | |
14/2/2011 10:05 | Still no feedback despite continual chasing. Anyone received anything? Is there absolutely no censure on these individuals? | 25babies | |
06/2/2011 12:46 | I use Selftrade. the latest from them (2/2) "Our Custodians has confirmed that they have provided the company with proof of your holding and are awaiting payment. The company have not informed them when that will be. However, they would like to assure you that they are chasing them periodically." | philut | |
20/1/2011 16:44 | I have shares through 2 nominees (big brokers). Both have written over a month ago and received no feedback. | 25babies | |
19/1/2011 19:02 | i believe they cannot delist without shareholder approval? the lack of information is terrible - "arrogance" has been given a new and terribly ugly face!shame on VISCOUNT TRENCHARD - the americans only confirm their real personalities. | baner | |
19/1/2011 18:25 | Am I right in thinking these have officially delisted. Advfn are not showing any bid-ask prices. | hugepants | |
19/1/2011 18:24 | Name and address is here. But you should have asked your nominee to do it. Since you've missed the 6th January date I think you will have to wait longer for the 1st distribution whenever that is going to be. | hugepants | |
14/1/2011 22:19 | Finally managaed to dematerialise my holding and the certificate has arrived, please can someone advise me the name and address of where to send it? Thanks in anticipation. | neilrich | |
13/1/2011 10:40 | This is what my broker recently wrote to me. I am sure you get the drift. Dear Mr XXX Thank you for your email. In regards to your enquiry I can confirm that my Corporate Actions Team sent a letter to Berkeley Technology during December and have sent subsequent letters since. We are currently trying to dematerialise the shares however due to the nature of the corporate action we are unable to specify a time frame as to when this may be completed. If you have any further queries please do not hesitate to contact us. Yours sincerely | 25babies | |
06/1/2011 18:04 | Note that the liquidator "Zurich Trust Ltd" has connections with Andrew Cunningham, who used to work for Trueger Mr Cunningham is a member of the Chartered Insurance Institute and a Director of Zurich Fund Management Services Limited. He held a variety of senior positions within the Berkeley Technology Group, formally Berkeley Govett & Company Limited within its Private funds, Venture Capital, and Insurance operations. He continues as a Director of its insurance subsidiary London Pacific Assurance Limited as well as the investment company LPAL Investments Limited. JFSC Jersey Companies Registry https://www.jerseyfs | adam | |
06/1/2011 16:20 | #StewJames i think you are spot on - and i doubt they have backing for this in the Company´s Act and even less so in the LSE Rules. there is a VISCOUNT TRENCHARD on the board who should also be held responsible for this charade: probably another ballet-loving "friend" of Treuger - no wonder most of them live in San Francisco. what are the people at the London Stock Exchange doing in this case? have they had too much port during Christmas? | baner | |
06/1/2011 14:45 | Dodgy as hell. Surprised it's even legal. But not surprising. After several years running the company for the benefit of the very few, I'm far from shocked they would put in a hurdle which should result in never having to pay quite a lot of small shareholders. | stewjames |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions