|That's a risk I don't mind|
|Whatever value you think is attributable to the shares post offer will not apply to minority holdings as those shares will be unsaleable as there will be no market for them|
|I wouldnt bet on the new co. doing well out of it. However, without the listing etc, they'll find profitability a slightly lower target.
I'm told Cobra has aimed at taking business from the likes of Lonza and struggled, whereas others like Angel have tried to carve out a niche and are doing much better.
I've not checked Cobra's offering, but in terms of performance that seems to be the case.
Anyway, good luck and hope you didnt lose too much here.|
thanks for the advice
As I do not need the cash now, I will wait and see what happens.
Ironically, I would expect the new company to do very well with their connections and potentially large synergistic cost savings
Who will benefit? The old management but certainly not investors|
The ONLY reason you havent lost everything is because Recipharm lent money to Cobra.
I dont think you can say there is much greater value now - of course there is, but only because it was rescued as part of a buyout.
Please note that I certainly have nothing against you and am sorry for your loss.
If you get an old holdings RNS, you may be able to find the Dixons' contact details to discuss with. Worth a go|
I am looking at the picture now, not then and IMO there is much greater value now - the order book should still be there, for example.
The Dixons had no alternative to accept as private investors with such a large stake; also, the directors 'recommend' the offer when they manage to keep their jobs and also have no significant holding, coincidentally
- I also do not want to get involved in your spat with jdb, thank you|
The order book is somewhat irrelevant if it wasnt enough to make a profit.
It is unclear if the company will ever get enough orders to make a profit.
The assets should be considered at fire sale value.
I'd see your view if this was a company that wasnt about to go bust
IMO it IS fair value, since that's the highest value that larger shareholders/the company were able to negotiate.
The alternative was to go into administration. Sorry, but if the offer was good enough for the Dixons to accept, it represents fair value.
Mark Dixon had to lend money just to get the company to survive as long as it did.
So, unless he has some interest in the new company, he will have gone for the best price he and you could get.
I dont think you have any chance of appealing, but that's just my view.
Maybe jdb will refund your money if you were unfortunate enough to believe his ramps (not saying you were)|
|Just an update - a legal contact has told me that they think minority shareholders can apply to the court if a compulsory acquisition is not at a fair value. They also state that a compulsory acquisition statement is a standard paragraph so it is unclear of the offeror's intentions.
So, I will keep my holdings and see how it pans out as believe that there is significantly more value "post-offer". Esp as there are £3.2m net assets 30.6.09/Ort-Vac IP/order book £9.3m.
|'so you are neither better nor worse off'
Yes. Those that volutarily accepted the offer did so because the alternative was losing close to everything in administration.|
|skylift - the compulsory acquisition price is the same as the bid price. You will have no say in the matter. If they had less than 90% then you could have kept your shares, but now it's over.
One of many quotes
"In the event the bidder gains 90 percent or more of the targeted shares, the bidder can, and usually does, acquire your shares compulsorily, paying you whatever was paid to those who voluntarily accepted the offer, so you are neither better nor worse off."|
|Its a good point that extending the offer might be a cheaper way to pick up remaining shares.
The realisable net assets of CBF must still be worth more than 2.25p and that probably excludes any IP that Recipharm thinks is valuable as per their offer document. With funding secure and cost synergies I believe that any compulsory acquisition must be at a fair price - to my mind this is not the 2.25p anymore although this might nave been a fair distress value pre-offer.
That is why I am interested to know how a squeeze works esp as it has been pointed out Recipharm has over 90%.|
|I didnt see that they've got 90.88% already
Yes, my guess is the same as yours, that now they've got 90% anyway, it is cheaper/easier to extend the offer rather than do through compulsory acquisition
It's a shame for CBF holders, but there hasnt been any other solution. It was take this offer that will allow the company to survive... or administration
I just hope that few were suckered into buying on jdb's ignorant ramps claiming value x, missing that they couldnt borrow money and pretending that there werent significant risks in terms of getting enough orders through.
The show almost over here and he hasnt once been man enough to concede that his unpleasant comments about my views were wrong.|
|the -doc - Yes 90% as I understand.
However, in view of the statements here, why do they need to extend the offer? -
".... as at 1:00 pm (London time) on 17 February 2010,
Recipharm either owned or had received valid acceptances in respect of
40,297,275 Cobra Shares, representing approximately 90.88 per cent. of the
entire issued share capital of Cobra."
As described in the Offer Document, once Recipharm receives valid acceptances
under the Offer in respect of, or otherwise acquires, 90 per cent. or more of
Cobra Shares to which the Offer relates, and 90 per cent. or more of the voting
rights attaching to Cobra's issued share capital, Recipharm intends to exercise
its rights pursuant to Sections 974 to 991(inclusive) of the Companies Act 2006,
to acquire compulsorily the remaining Cobra Shares for which it has not received
valid acceptances of the Offer or otherwise acquired."
Perhaps compulsory acquisition, although at the same offer price, is more expensive to administer.|
|well, pre-offer the shares should perhaps have been closer to zero, so assume some funding was priced in.
Dividends seem a bit of a jump ahead!
Not sure about a squeeze I'm afraid. Doesnt sound like they're going to.
Does a squeeze not require say 90%?|
|Yes, I understand that these will be shares in an unquoted company.
Shareholders will still have right to dividends etc and it is not inconceivable that Recipharm might list in the future.
As I see it, the share is worth more "post-offer" than "pre-offer" as there are no funding concerns now. So I do not see the need to accept the offer at that price - my only concern is whether the shares can be purchased at the original offer price using a minority rights "squeeze".|
You're being offered 2.25p
The alternative (as I see it) is that you're left with shares in an unquoted company that may essentially be impossible to trade.|
|Noticed the offer has been extended again
As a LT holder (who has not accepted the offer as yet), does anyone know how a "squeeze" of minority rights works?
Can they compulsorily buy remaining shares at the original offer price or do they have to renegotiate an offer price.
Post offer, surely the shares must be worth more than 2.25p as Cobra now has no funding concerns and they must be worth at lease net asset value. So, I cannot see how they can buy all remaining shares at 2.25p as this would infringe minority rights?!
Any info appreciated|
|Interesting, well that gives you an edge.
I'll have to rack your brain about a few oil/gas/mineral stocks some time. At present though, I'm looking to wind out of stocks, either sitting in co.s awaiting near-term catalysts, or long-term value plays (some of your oil/gas may of course come under that). I'd consider a few oil/gas but most have already risen a fair way and I'm concerned the sector may move out of favour if the economy weakens (wouldnt be so concerned if sat on a profit like most holders though).
|I was a geophysicist for 17 years so am far better with oil/gas and mineral stocks.
Currently holding AYM, KAH, RGM and WTI for metals and PCI for oil/gas. Also IMG for all it's chips in iphones and such devices.|
|It may have been too late a long time ago. They were on the wrong track and that only became apparent once they'd invested too much. By then, all they could do was continue and hope. A merger with ABH was considered, but ABH felt it wouldnt work out to be a good move for them for the above reasons.
To operate as a small contract biopharma, you need to be in real niche segments where you can provide value. ABH does that, although even then it is unclear if the business model can work (I'm not a holder there by the way).
CBF paddled around in the sea, but unfortunately there werent any waves to catch. Many years ago, it may have looked like there was a much bigger opportunity in this space. ie. sometimes companies just fail due to insufficient market demand. While it is their job to assess where the demand lies, when you're looking 10 years ahead, luck plays a key role. In other words, I'm not sure Cobra made any real goofs - maybe they did, I've not followed that closely years back. More recently, they've simply tried to make the most of what they had. Perhaps management was no good at getting out there to win contracts - hard to tell.
I must admit, although I come from the biotech sector, in terms of investing, I've trimmed my exposure quite a bit in the last year or so.
Quality will continue to do well, but it is often impossible to say where the quality lies until trial results come through and it is then priced up anyway - getting in before just increases the risk.
At the end of the day, oilers are somewhat similar in that case, so high reward is high risk all over the shop.
In terms of biotechs, sticking where the pharma money and deals are going is IMO the best plan.|
|CBF could have gone down the ABH route, it did not, which was a real shame.
I do not have a working knowledge of the biotech sector and I have always struggled with my research, which is another reason for me to keep clear, waste of time for me.|
|Biotechs have had a rough run! UK biotechs in particular.
co.s like AZM and SKP have helped make the sector look worse - a little bad luck in there though, but companies make their own luck.
OXB isnt bad. Trovax failure a shame, but was always going to be a long shot.
ICX seemed high risk, but I guess you (and they) hoped deals would get them through. I'm not sure CBF ever had much of a chance - it may simply have been in the wrong area and been doomed to fail. ABH is positioned more sensibly and struggled but is not doing better.
Good you didnt make a loss here.|
Well I have one share from years back. Did not make a loss, except on that one :)
A company that had many chances and appears to have been wasted.
After my loss on ICX, I'm not buying any more biotech stocks|
|After months of big talk (not just on this thread), it seems our ramper doesnt have the balls to show his face. No surprise though, as his deluded comments always smacked of someone living in a fantasy world.
Anyway, my last post here and I'll finish by saying I hope most didnt lose too much here.|