|Dee Valley Grp
||EPS - Basic
||Market Cap (m)
|Gas Water & Utilities
Dee Valley Grp Share Discussion Threads
Showing 651 to 674 of 675 messages
|Market not keen on buying any! I expect the price to drift up to the court case.|
|Well could be like Journey plc then - can't see that the Court will allow this through given that Severn Trent have lost the vote. They will have to offer a cash bid instead, but will probably have to pay a little more, unlike the Journey plc offer.|
Apologies, you are correct. I misread the blurb from Severn Trent. I thought that they had said that their bid was final but they were commenting on the Ancala bid, rather than their own.
So much paper has been issued that it is now hard to see the wood from the trees!|
Where did you see that the SVT bid is final??? It is increased but not final, it is the Ancala bid that is final.
If SVT increase the bid then they will go to an offer not a scheme, no need for the court case then.|
|Oh well looks like there is a chance that employees may have won and independence reigns! I'm not too bothered either way really.|
|Having declared that they would not increase their bid, Severn Trent are prohibited from increasing their bid for 6 months, unless another party makes a bid at a price in excess of that on the table.
Those are the rules.|
|Lets hope that Severn Trent are forced to pay a bit more. Serves themselves right!|
How do they get the extra 100 + shareholder votes they will require, if they lose the court case?|
|SVT can still up the offer and spring the AXA stock, then its game over.|
|Yes you are correct it was Wrexham and east Denb water, forgot the merger in 1997, memory fades
Thanks for the info regarding the articles, If this is the case ( and I don't have any reason to doubt you) it makes the court case even more dubious if these are standard.|
|Re 504 it's a Companies Act condition. S899 Companies Act 2006. DVW has a modern set of Articles and was never a statutory water company (that was Wrexham Water plc which was previously Wrexham & East Denbighshire Water Company).|
|Having given the matter due consideration, I am of the opinion that the shares should be suspended from 8.00am tomorrow, until the legal position is clarified. There is a great potential for a disorderly market.|
|Yes, very interesting. 245 individual holders with 1 share each overturn a near 90% vote for the scheme. This is going to take a while. Quite a landmark case. On the face of it, the scheme fails. No doubt Severn Trent will come back with a revised cash offer if it does fail. Really is a bit of a landmark fight this between the three players: Severn Trent, Ancala and the employees. Quite amusing really!|
|Yes, very interesting. 245 shares individual holders with 1 share each overturn an 88% vote for the scheme. This is going to take a while. Quite a landmark case. On the face of it, the scheme fails.|
|Best drop your shares at current levels then as they will drop to £17.06 if the SVT bid lapses.|
|Not sure but this could be a hangover from when the firm was a statutory water company.
The voting structure would have been known by DVW before any of this started, and SVT must have been aware. If the 400 have obtained shares and registered their votes correctly, then on what basis could any court retrospectively change the company rules to disqualify them.
Ancala would also have a view of this as well?
More twists and turns possibly, if the 400 count how could SVT change/win the vote going forward. They are making heavy weather of this, Liv must be worried.|
|So the rules of the scheme are a simple majority by number, amount of shares owned isn't a condition of the scheme so how can the votes be removed? Anyone know of a similar situation that went to court previously, if not this is a landmark case that will set a legal presidence, its all getting interesting.
Daily Mail have posted an article in their business section so it's also gone national.|
|Scheme approval requires 75% of shares voted to be in favour and also a simple majority by number of shareholders voting in favour. The latter condition is not met if you take account of the votes of the employees who acquired 1 share each.|
|How does that work if they are small holdings?|
|All down to the high court on the 25th of January now
If the 400+ shares are allowed then SVT fail to gain control by 56% to 44%.|
|Attended both meetings this morning and both resolutions were easily passed with majorities of over 85% in favour.
Because of the situation regarding the 445 recent transfers of small holdings the Dee valley board asked for a court direction on whether they should be counted. The chairman used the Court discretion to disallow these votes. As it was a large majority over the 75% the matter will be considered by the Court at the Sanction Hearing.
The room was packed with attendees (my estimate over 250 -300) Only 2 questions were asked at the Court Meeting which were whether the Sanction Hearing could be delayed from 18 January to allow representations from the 445 recent transferees and whether their legal expenses would be paid. The Chairman said the board would consider these points. Only one question was asked at the EGM whether the estimate for advice and legal costs of £3.25m was too low.
So it looks as though the Scheme of Arrangement will go through but the pay
out may be delayed.
Afterwards, there appeared to be a very gloomy/disappointed reaction from people historically connected to Dee Valley Water.|
|Anyone at the EGM/Court Meeting today? Poll results not announced yet.|
|Price action says either it's SVT's or there is another bid/bidder in the wings. That said anything could happen and probably will.|
|What a saga! Be quite funny if Severn Trent lost out to be honest!|