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 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Biofuels | LSE:BFC | London | Ordinary Share | GB00B00VD693 | ORD 1P |
Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0.00 | 0.00% | 1.50 | - | 0.00 | 00:00:00 |
Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
0 | 0 | N/A | 0 |
Date | Subject | Author | Discuss |
---|---|---|---|
30/7/2007 09:44 | 250k buy at 2.25p will he ever get his money back? | andrbea | |
30/7/2007 08:34 | what did Mail on Sunday have to say? | parvez | |
30/7/2007 07:37 | This company is delisting later this week or early next week, it was in the Mail on Sunday. | 5bag | |
27/7/2007 07:23 | Someone left the bloomin' light on! | volsung | |
26/7/2007 14:58 | Any advance on tuppence? BFC is moving out of Sh*t Street into Penny Lane where the rent is cheaper. Running lorries on biofuel is not the answer, put freight back on the railways. | ecks | |
26/7/2007 10:08 | It's not often one you can bask in glory for stating the bleedin obvious, but it happens time after time with BFC! Oh my gaaad! I'll await yet another basking!. | pierre oreilly | |
26/7/2007 03:04 | Zowee, the thread at least still lives! I wasn't aware I had missed a couple of days - would never have been so slack when holding. Goodbye Magpie, I enjoyed your contributions. Frankie I thought your wife included this thread in her BFC restraining order? Nice to see you still flying the tattered flag after rescuing the remains of your investment. My Mum told me she heard Stuart Sutcliffe on the radio talking about biofuels - Ringo could have done a better job than Sean... | ecks | |
25/7/2007 07:49 | Ah the Franco Irish alliance- well they would know if anyone would! | fludde | |
25/7/2007 07:48 | Fludde - I agree, obviously some confusion about what is going to happen here, with one exception of course. Pierre Oreilly - 24 Jul'07 - 11:56 - 37120 of 37136 No Doc, I can assure you I am correct in what I posted - Barclays will purchase all outstanding shares after delisting (whether holders want to sell them or not is irrelevant, they will be compulsorily purchased, as is Barclays right under section 429 of the Companies Act). | nfranks | |
25/7/2007 07:41 | I think the rules on D4E saving a company and a formal take over bid are different. In this case I believe the 5% will stay with the holders. Those left holding when the company delist will continue to hold their share of 5% of the business. If the company turns the corner, Barclays will re-list BFC and take whatever they can for all or part of their 95% and the other 5% holders have kept can be traded. Or Barclays will negotiate a private sale and 5% of that will go to holders. | fludde | |
25/7/2007 07:33 | "Highest price paid to anyone else in last 6m" "that's the general rule for buying out minorities compulsorily." Well if those two statements are correct then these are a stonking BUY. The highest price in the last 6 months is 42p, that makes this a 16 bagger at 2.5p. Conclusion, that can't be correct!!!!!!! | nfranks | |
24/7/2007 14:49 | If scribbler is right, there is next to no way you wont lose ~95% of your investment if you buy today and hold until the d4e. | the_doctor | |
24/7/2007 14:41 | Goodluck magpie and everyone else. I remember Biggles and the Battle of Britain banter, funny episode that one. Our spirits flew as feathers then but are much heavier now. | rebess | |
24/7/2007 14:32 | Frankie, I for one agree with your view rather than Pierre's - as there will be no listing for BFC (or earls nook) I don't see how they can be purchased as there will be no price available. Still won't touch em though | paul e 2 | |
24/7/2007 14:09 | Someone turn off the light | volsung | |
24/7/2007 14:09 | doc - not been following recent events - that's the general rule for buying out minorities compulsorily. | scribbler101 | |
24/7/2007 14:02 | Scribbler, is that what Barclays will buy the remaining 5% for? | the_doctor | |
24/7/2007 14:00 | Highest price paid to anyone else in last 6m | scribbler101 | |
24/7/2007 14:00 | spanish, a simple check on the agm would have revealed: EGM & AGM - 23 July 2007 Cancellation of the Company's AIM trading - 07:00h BST - 2nd August 2007. | lvlarky_13oy | |
24/7/2007 12:17 | Any idea what would dictate the compulsary purchase prices? | the_doctor | |
24/7/2007 12:15 | why is this still trading | spanishomlette | |
24/7/2007 12:15 | I don't believe that's possible, BFC or Earls Nook as it will become will still exist just being 6% of the new group restructured company. Barclays will own the other 94% of the group by owning 100% of the another new company set up for this purpose. Barclays WILL NOT own 94% of BFC (Earls Nook) and be able to compulsorily purchase the other 6% is the way I see it. edit - Pierre Oreilly, that's exactly what I'm trying to do, learn from this experience. Not sure attempting some research would actually help because I freely admit I won't understand all the ins and outs of some technical/legal stuff. As you say time will tell and I'll actually know what the truth is eventually. You may be far cleverer, experienced and wiser than me, but time will tell that as well and every case is different. | nfranks | |
24/7/2007 12:12 | nfranks, that statement means shareholders can get something due to the d4e, whereas without it, shareholders would have got nothing - it would have been put under administration and any shareholding would have been worthless. What is so difficult to understand about a right granted under the companies act precisely for situations like this? If you don't believe me, or don't want to learn anything (making the same mistake as six months ago), then you'll just have to watch and wait. Why not treat it as some input, and go away and reasearch the situation for yourself, instead of completely misinterpreting (again!) what the directors are telling you? As to why holders don't sell now - I have no idea - I also wondered that 6 months ago when it was clear that there were only 2 outcomes possible - broke or d4e (remember me posting that, before it caught on?). I guess they all think the same as you and refuse to accept that their shares are going to be sold for them anyway in the near future. | pierre oreilly | |
24/7/2007 12:02 | I'll second that question and if that is actually the case why would Mike Buzzacot have said this "The Board has accordingly succeeded in agreeing the terms of the restructuring with Barclays, from which shareholders could derive some potential value, and this is unanimously recommended by the Board." because there is no way it would be true if compulsorily purchased. Everyone would have sold instantly if that was the case but I don't believe they have and some parties wouldn't be able to due to lock in agreements which would seem a tad unreasonable. Magpie59 - thanks for the good wishes and the same to you. | nfranks | |
24/7/2007 11:27 | None of the above, just a nickname. Are you sure that is also the case for delisted companies? or do the d4e terms not safeguard the 5%? Otherwise, why on earth would everyone not sell prior to the delisting then? | the_doctor |
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