|DARWEN (DHP) IS NOW OPTARE (OPE)
and has a renamed thread at
|Bolman - rubbish. RS made both companies. If you don't like RS then go elsewhere!|
|which one the one above or Bolmans version!!! Have a good week end MT|
|- neither of which would be here on the market at all were it not for Roy Stanley.
(I'm not praising the guy - the suit alone is worrisome!)|
|Looks like the advice from Stud at 25p should have been taken as this is continuing to weaken
Don't agree with a lot of what the penny sleuth guy says Stanley is the one who has screwed up big time at Tan and now has the temerity to try and blame his CEO darren Kell when he has been there two days a week himself
Darwen suffers by guilt of association Stanley should be fired as Chairman of both companies|
|So.Aberdeen hold 10.28%|
|howcan rs be exec chairman he has publicly stated returning full time to tanfield.|
|Yes, greedy institutional shareholders to blame - I agree. Roy Stanley has bought all the shares he sold in Tanfield at the top (and more) today at 5p ish (having sold at £1.63)...good man!.....
Hope he has caught some shorters with their trousers down as they truly deserve. Getting a bit fed up with the rampant shorting of stocks at the moment.
Darwen smells a bit for us existing holders..truth of the matter is if they had got this deal done on the original timeframe, it would have been done at 40p and not 30p. Oh well, that's life. I've bought this for 2/3 years anyway - great prospects.
Never met Roy Stanley, but I hope he proves everyone wrong!|
|Curious thing is that i got that email with a timestamp of 2pm - several hours before the RNS came out???|
|This was posted over on the TAN thread by Barnsey and hope he doesn't mind me copying onto here where is just as relevant:
Darwen hit by Tanfield fallout...
The lawyers are extremely happy...
Another nasty episode in the life of the City...
It was June 20th and Andrew Brian was 'delighted.' He had just announced a deal whereby Darwen Holdings, of which he is chief executive, would acquire Jamesstan Investments, the holding company for the Optare coach-building business.
By combining Optare, with its expertise in low-emission, hybrid engine technology with the traditional diesel-engine bus manufacturing skills of Darwen, the 'combined product suite' Brian said, 'is expected is expected to deliver a complete vehicle solution to its customers, and will have at its core a lightweight, diesel-engined vehicle with a low emission hybrid variant.'
OK, that makes sense to me and clearly it did to investors also. Having gone around the City presenting what he described as 'fantastic news for investors' Brian was 'delighted with the level of institutional support.' In consequence of this enthusiasm Darwen had no difficulty persuading investors to stump up the £16m that it needed to fund the deal, through the issue of 40m new shares at 40p.
That was just a fortnight ago, and within that short space of time the enthusiasm of these long-sighted institutional investors has apparently waned. Because in a shocking announcement last evening Brian revealed that the price at which the new shares were being sold was to be slashed from 40p to 30p. Now 53.3m new shares are to be issued, representing 49% of the company.
It looks as if the institutional investors, having given their word that they would buy shares at 40p have changed their mind and demanded a price of 30p. Why?
Darwen is still solid
The only good reason would be deterioration of the business prospects of Darwen, but this is clearly not the case. If the general economic climate does not look too bright today, it is hardly any different from two weeks ago and in any case coach-building is a long-term business, little affected by recession, and the shift towards green engines promises a sustained period of demand.
This much is accepted by Brian who, commenting upon the decline of Darwen's share price since June 20th, 'knows of no reason within the business for the decline.'
No. The real reason why institutional investors have reneged upon their promise to pay 40p per share has nothing to do with Darwen and everything to do with Tanfield.
The mastermind behind Darwen is the same Roy Stanley, who in a series of deals expanded Tanfield rapidly in the areas of electric vehicles and powered access. Now Tanfield has been hit by manufacturing problems at its electric vehicles division and a downturn in demand for powered access machinery. Its cash position does not appear to be as good as was thought and the shares have crashed spectacularly.
To me this looks like another case of a small company that has expanded on too many fronts too quickly, and has run into a recession. Tanfield's institutional investors only have themselves to blame for financing its helter-skelter expansion, but are now trying to lay off the blame wherever they can.
So now we hear calls for an investigation into Tanfield's accounting and hear accusations that Tanfield misled the market. This is all too familiar in circumstances when fund managers who have just lost millions of their customers' valuable pounds will say anything rather than admit that they might have made a mistake.
Roy Stanley stands accused of building up the hopes of investors, and also of selling out his shares last year close to the top of the market. As to the former Tanfield's public announcements have always been full and detailed, the numbers in the accounts are there for all to see, and the company has made every effort to build relationships with the City.
The fact is that fund managers, having enjoyed a ride in one of Tanfield's electric vans, got carried away by the excitement of green technology and failed to properly appreciate the difficulties of converting this into a major profitable business.
In fact, Stanley has taken a back seat at Tanfield for the last year or so, handing over the reins to forty year old chief executive Darren Kell, forty-five year old finance director Charles Brooks and forty-two year old operations director Brendan Campbell. There is not a lot of experience here in managing a large multinational manufacturing business a point that Tanfield's shareholders might reflect upon.
Stanley sold 8.5m shares last summer at 163p, as part of a very enthusiastically received placing. But the implication that he sold these shares because 'he knew something' just does not hold water. Stanley still holds 19.6m shares in Tanfield, and as I pointed out in my newsletter Red Hot Penny Shares, he also sold five million at 19p, before the great rise of the share price got under way.
Anyway, that is Tanfield... but what bothers me is that the institutions have seen fit to take retribution on Darwen. Having said that they would pay 40p for shares in Darwen they should have been as good as their word.
Incidentally, Stanley and Brian both could be accused of benefiting from the lower price as they will be buying shares in the placing for themselves. But before anyone misconstrues that, let us at least be clear that their interests would have been far better served by the 40p price. Before the deal Stanley in particular held 50% of Darwen shares and the revised terms are a particularly unwelcome dilution to his interest in the company.
And this applies to all other Darwen shareholders.
Rather than admitting the Tanfield factor and saying that those investors who promised to buy shares at 40p have backed off and demanded 30p, Andrew Brian has explained the revised terms of the share issue by citing 'extraordinary market conditions' and a desire to 'ensure a strong long-term partnership with our investors.'
That may suit those who are buying into the placing at 30p but the price cut unequivocally damages the interests of existing shareholders of Darwen, including many private investors, some of whom may have reckoned that if the institutions were willing to pay 40p per share they were happy to follow suit.
This is another nasty episode in the life of the City. Another instance where the word of investors has not proved to be their bond; another instance in which the interests of private investors have been trampled upon with utter disregard; and another stain on the increasingly damaged reputation of AIM.
for The Penny Sleuth|
|Euro 5 on all core bus models from Optare
All new build Optare Solo, Versa and Tempo bus models are now available with Euro 5 engines if operators wish.
This is a full 18 months before the law demands this, the highest available emission standard so far.
Optare says all its Mercedes-powered models now come with Euro 5.
"We're delighted that we can provide customers with vehicles meeting Euro 5 so far ahead of the legislative date," says Chris Wise, sales director.
"We're aware that many are determined to be as 'green' as possible."
Cummins and MAN engines, offered by Optare as options to Mercedes power will meet Euro 5 from the end of 2008.
|Strong June crowns buses' best first half for years
Figures from the SMMT show that bus registrations had the best first half for many years.
Big bus registrations did better than expected, those for big coaches were at near record levels and double deck bus numbers continued their strong growth.
But for most there are signs of change ahead. "June's figures showed the first half of 2008 as the best start to bus and coach registrations for years, on the back of sales last year," said Paul Everitt, SMMT chief executive.
"Manufacturers report some signs of slower sales earlier this year, which may show as a slowdown in registrations in the coming months.
Helpfully, shifts in bus ridership may hold better prospects for the future."
|wot is this market like the guys top slice the price by 25% and what happens .......................the stock soars to be 5% below the placing price
makes one weep|
|they did well to save the placing at 30p I bet the institutions were trying to get it to 25p
25p might have been a better long term result
Loved the bit about building long term relations with the city institutions.......................like the long term ones they have had at TAN the institutions have taken the door frame out on the rush for the exit|
|Good news I suppose. This is a transformational and very good deal. I'm not particularly happy at buying at 38p (which was a good buy) and now the placing is being done at 30p, but that's life! Roy Stanley will make a go of either Tanfield or Darwen or both, provided there is no more major negative fall out from Tanfield. Personally, I think this has loads of potential. Buses are back....watch people ditch their cars over the next couple of years, if petrol prices stay where they are!|
|Ah - hang on... (EDIT)
advfn timestamp says 3:48pm but the RNS itself is timestamped an hour later..
And the other news report clocked by advfn at 4:23pm is also timestamped an hour later.
Not that there's anything unusual about RNS announcements being issued after hours - it's quite common.|
|Why was announcement made after market closed?|
|meanwhile, back with Darwen --
A significant announcement about revised placement terms, which concludes:
Commenting on today's news, Chief Executive Andrew Brian said:
"The current capital market climate is extraordinary, and we are keen to ensure a strong long-term partnership with our investors, so we are revising the terms of the Placing in response to recent conditions.
"The acquisition of Optare remains a transformational deal for the Group and the outlook for the business is strong, particularly given the favourable macro-climate for the public transport industry and the operational progress achieved within the Group to date. The Directors' personal investment in the Placing reinforces our confidence in the future success of the business."|
I agree completely
The issue is that Chairman Stanley has not ensured that he is rigorous with the facts and we are left guessing
The TNT press release offers no clariciation only more mud
Stanley and his cronies need to be explicit
I notice on his TAN website that even Stanleys mates including Karl Watkin have had a word with him and Kell about the clarity of his RNS statements
The job of the Chairman is to look afer shareholders interests currenlty he looks after his "perceived" own, if he got his act togethr he would be outstanding, I hope he does and soon|
|Stud 69 - that whole TNT press release was very odd because though it speaks of 100 new vehicles when it breaks it down it suggests 50 TAN (as 1st tranche - maybe another 50 after???) 2 EV's from china and 10 hybrids from Aus. Either way that means either 62 vehicles or 112. Left me puzzled. I don't hold DHP and will wait for the air to clear before re-considering, but I do hold TAN|
|Dr F Strange
If you actually read the link which you posted you will see that it actually confirms the fact that the order was for 50 units, "a first tranche" and that the other 50 units making 100 in total come from other global manufcturers in China Japan and Australia
I don't believe anything that comes out from thiis lot anymore as they have consistantly misled us and if you read the telegraph article it confirms that this has been a theme running trhough all businesses in Stanleys history|
|Bolman - 6 Jul'08 - 11:35 - 277 of 279
who wrote that article?
see below...who is telling the truth, the author of the article or TNT ??
"A month later, Tanfield released arguably its most ambiguous statement to the market with the news that TNT, the Dutch delivery firm, had ordered a further 100 vehicles from Smith. Chaos followed as checking calls by analysts could find 50 vehicles ordered by no one who could confirm the second 50.........the much trumpeted TNT order was overstated by 100%"
extract from TNT's site confirming purchase of a "100-strong fleet of battery-powered 'Newton' delivery trucks"|
dr fillip strange
|The guy who never failed is usually the guy who never tried doing anything.|
|Everyone seems to be rounding on Tanfield. A tad harsh in my opinion, but that's the market. At least they have raised a US debt facility which is a positive development. I suspect that they can ring-fence the US operations now and if they fail, it won't bring down the rest of the group.
As to whether the Darwen acquisition goes ahead, that's anyone's guess. I sincerely hope so as it appears to have lots of potential. Maybe Roy Stanley has made mistakes, but there seems too much sour grapes here from those that invested at over £1. The smart money could have invested much lower and got out way before this trouble. As always, there are winners and losers. Standing back from it all, Stanley has created jobs and value...give the guy a break I say!|