||EPS - Basic
||Market Cap (m)
Brixton Share Discussion Threads
Showing 1151 to 1173 of 1175 messages
|Appalling that he held the board to ransom like that and of course shareholders were unaware. I always wondered why the company did not raise money earlier to protect their position. That delay caused weakness and they then fell to Segro IMO. Other companies will have been aware of problems and moved in to kill. Shareholders paid the price. There should be a class action against the BoD for allowing this to happen.|
|Wow. Glad I wasn't in it when it was worth something. That's a real kick in the teeth to shareholders !|
Now we have an idea why the company did not get a Rights Issue done in time.
|Thanks for a nice little earner BXTN. It would have been much better had you not sold out almost immediately before sentiment on property shares went through the roof! Share price would be over £1 by now IMV.
Based on a SGRO closing price today of c.365p then BXTN shareholders are receiving just under 64p per share. An excellent result for those buying near the bottom.|
|bye bye brixton|
|DOWN TO 50P TODAY OVER VALUED AND VERY HIGH DEBT:
INDEXES PEAKED WILL FALL 20% BEFORE A RALLY:|
|Had a letter from Broker today, 'in lieu of every 1 Brixton share, I will receive 0.175 shares in Segro' effective from 25 August.|
|Correct, the 4.6p dividend (which BXTN holders won't receive) is the consolidated value, in other words 0.46p in terms of the current SGRO share or 0.805p in terms of BXTN. I think it explains why BXTN isn't trading a bit higher than it is, SGRO still being cum- dividend.|
|The disappointing thing about the SGRO deal to me is that BXTN holders lose a lot of potential upside. It was possible to imagine BXTN going up by a factor of 5 or even 10 but with SGRO we will be lucky to see a factor of more than 2 even after a recovery in the property market. It is already fully valued at its current price. Very difficult to track what Segro's price is actually because they keep doing dilutions and consolidations, after the takeover they are doing a 10 to one consolidation which will see the price go to 250p I suppose but without benefit to shareholders. The 4.6p dividend relates to that consolidated share price I believe so it is no big deal.|
|Yes, I was thinking than BXTN/SGRO might be a good arb, with BXTN looking to be trading at a discount to SGRO. However, in these situations one needs to check for dividend entitlements. In this case the dividend seems to account for most of the discount. I had to hunt it down this morning. It's tucked away on page 55 of the 336 page Segro prospectus and states:
The Firm Placed Shares and the Open Offer Shares (but not the Consideration Shares) will be entitled to receive the interim dividend for the financial year ending 31 December 2009 which is expected to be 4.6 pence per SEGRO Share (after taking into account the proposed Share Consolidation). The interim dividend is expected to be declared with the Company's half-year results on 27 August 2009 and to be paid on 2 October 2009 to SEGRO Shareholders on SEGRO's register of members at 5.00 p.m. on 21 August 2009.|
|It seems illogical that they would pay any dividend at all having
just agreed to do a rights issue (as it's paying cash they've just
asked for straight back to the shareholders that contributed it).
That does't mean they won't, of course.
It's also very good way of frustrating arbs, I guess.
Where did the 4.6p figure come from? Not based on historical
dividends, is it?|
|Okay, found the answer. Expected to be 4.6p per SGRO (post consolidation).|
|Could a knowledgable holder please tell me about the interim dividend on SGRO.
Accoring to the prospectus for the proposed acquisition of Brixton there may be an interim dividend declared with an ex date of 19 August. Has an interim dividend actually been declared yet?
My understanding is that Brixton holders will not receive this dividend. If so, how can BXTN shares be valued at the moment without knowing the SGRO interim dividend (if any)?|
|If the M-Lynch legal people had been advising any other group of people than M-L, over that Greycoat debacle, they would all have ended up with fraud charges I have little doubt. ( 'advisedly') .
|Segro will reveal on Thursday that the final terms of its purchase of industrial property rival Brixton have been approved by the company boards, bring the takeover near completion, the Financial Times reported.|
|Well if the company anticipated that they would be likely to breach
covenants then yes they would pre-emptively approach the bond-holders,
but it's the likely breach that brings about the circumstance.|
|OK - split hairs - They are a significant factor over BXTN actions (if they were not involved BXTN would not be in a takeover situation).
Do you think that if they relaxed covenants its wouldn't effect share price and takeover negotiations, they can scupper the deal anytime they want- if thats not a say in procedings I don't know what you think is.
Its a very narrow view to think that the covenants actually have to be tested to influence events.|
|Jpendle - how do they have a significant say unless and until
covenants or other conditions are breached?|
|The bondholders have a very significant say - if they are prepared to play ball with BXTN then there is no need to do a deal with anyone, then the terms can improve significantly, also snubbing bondholder is a huge mistake - remember Serco can still walk away and the bondholder goodwill will be the difference between sink or swim.
I hope the management are talking to all parties to get the best deal.|
|LOL! Personally I wouldn't have described the Merrill Lynch scheme in quite that manner! (it appears to have been legal, but very aggressive).
I agree that bondholders don't have much of a say, but that won't stop them trying to have a say!|
|My point is that, blatant fiddles notwithstanding, the bond-holders
don't really have much of a say unless covenants get breached.|
Any security for the bondholders would be buried in a subgroup (although the need to preserve credit ratings may protect them). There is much more scope to manipulate that as Greycoat bondholders found to their cost after a Merrill Lynch backed takeover.
"The bondholders are angered that Greycoat has sold some £400m of assets in the past four years, and in the process bought out their investors and paid back a large part of their debt. None of the cash has been used to pay off the bondholders."
The £400m was used to repatriate to the takeover vehicle. Before the Greycoat takeover the bondholders had a very secure position.|
|From the article it was a 'bondholder' that proposed the changes, this individual may have had another motivation not in common with the other bondholders.|