We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register for Free to get streaming real-time quotes, interactive charts, live options flow, and more.
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Stock Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Eur.Conv.Dev | ECDC | London | Ordinary Share |
| Price Change | Price Change % | Share Price | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.00% | 0.07 | 01:00:00 |
| Open Price | Low Price | High Price | Close Price | Previous Close |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.07 | 0.07 |
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 14/2/2014 00:32 by greedfear Thanks.Good news for ECDC shareholders: "The Romanian real estate market has every chance of becoming important to investment funds in the next 18 months, as the foreign mature markets recover, according to David Tiplea, EY Tax&Law, Business Development Leader Central and South-East Europe. "Aside from the transactions involving individual assets, we are very likely to see the selling of entire portfolios by the big holders of real estate assets which are not developers or investors." (Source: capital.ro; Date: 2014-02-07; Author: Unspecified" |
Posted at 13/2/2014 11:24 by smithie6 ECDC....looks like a strong hold to me ---- bit of a shame the disastrous management of ECDC by Mr Whamond and Charlemagne who have turned maybe 80 M euros into a cap. value of under 10ME. original investors have been well and truly shafted, or robbed (a good part of their money is now in Charlemagne's pockets via high fees for their incompetent management) but for those investing now and since the low in 2012.....imo it looks good Cascade looks to possibly have significant value and noticeably cashflow positive imo (and personally, I would be happy if Mr Whamond and Charlemagne are replaced....with managers with lower annual cost and with separation between the bod and the inv. manager, as recommended by the Good Governance rules). One Lesson perhaps dont invest in any Charlemagne IPO ! ---- INSIDER trading perhaps ? in Jan. a co. with a Mr Patel as director (and previously with a diff. Patel as co. secretary ) bt. 300-350k pnds worth of ECDC shares "after" the year end but before the issuing of accounts I note that the controllers of ECDC and its inv. manager are all Charlemagne ...specialises in investing in Asia....and has Asian names included in the bod Patel is an Asian name A cynic might wonder if 'Patel' now has to scratch Charlemagne's back in return.... or maybe this is C. returning a prev. backscratch or favour. (it is common in London that if a large investor or 'friend' loses money with one investment (eg. investing in ECDC at the IPO price)....that the managers will try to help that investor out in return later on....in order to maintain that investor as a friend and as a client) imo the C. fund sold their stake to avoid it being visible to clients of C. and avoid damaging the arriving of new money for 'funds under management' (imo if new clients saw that C. had turned 80ME into say 10ME at ECDC then they might not be so keen to invest in current funds from C. or to invest so much) --- ECDC is traded on a London market, famous for corruption and insider dealing ...so if there was insider trading it wouldnt surprise me... in the USA they investigate insider trading....and people go to prison... not in the UK ---- to repeat ....looks like a strong hold to me |
Posted at 30/1/2014 18:32 by greedfear Glad you ask. What we need first and foremost are activist shareholders in order to get more transparency so the investors community get a better understanding of the (value of the) investments of the company and -even more important- guidance regarding exit plans concerning those investments. If one takes a close look at investment (partners) of ECDC the same group of names keep coming up (Charlemagne, Shedlin and Argo to name a few). If one takes a better look at people playing key roles there it shows they've been job hopping between those companies. Nothing wrong with that, but it may be causing ECDC to stay unnecessary long in partnerships (just for oldtimes sake?). Also if parties have obligations to each other (like Argo owes money to ECDC, and Cascade owes money to Shedlin, and Charlemagne is a joint venture partner in Sliven (a cash rich project that is getting nowhere) these friendly relationships are not per se beneficial for ECDC. As I'm convinced there's value in ECDC I would like to make sure that value remains at the least (and get acknowledged by the investors community). I believe a more pro-active shareholder behaviour is needed and I think it can be done. Just recently the majority of shareholders voted no to all AGM resolutions. As those resolutions were quite common, nothing special, it must have been some kind of disgruntled group of shareholders in my opinion. So there must allready be a group out there willing to become more active. Or the recent 10% shareholder wants to play that role (?). So in short: activists shareholders, more transparency and better guidance of exits etc. (If you don't like them I've got others [that I won't be sharing on a BB]) :) |
Posted at 29/1/2014 20:02 by greedfear Cheers Ben! This initiative might be just the start of an upwardation of the share.Chinahere! Long time. Still no ECDC shareholder? Like you say, slowly, very slowly, share price turns for the better. Not much needed for it to really take off imo. Just a little bit more investor interest and an imminent trading update confirming the 30 eurocents net asset value. You've just got to love the stock market only place where you can buy a pound for tenpence. |
Posted at 16/1/2014 13:48 by greedfear So now we know for sure who has sold.More interesting is the answer to the question who has bought? As you may or may not recall there was a (group of) shareholder(s) that voted NO to all resolutions at the latest AGM indeed causing all resolutions not to pass. I'm speculating a 100% here but I do think it possible those were shareholders from the start (having paid 80p or 95p or so). They sure as hell could not have been happy puppies and may have been a little bit p#ssed (pardon my French) that despite the disastrous performance of ECDC share price C. still got paid running it. C. allready felt the increasing pressure from these investors (as proved by the no votes). Well, in short, I think that what we're looking at is some kind of deal/arrangement that has been made between C and those early day investors that became more and more active. Just my two pennies and if so I think we're going to see these active investors shaking up ECDC (forcing ECDC to stop supporting Plovdiv, dividing the assets of Sliven (land and cash) between partners (one of them being C), marketing Cascade etc.etc.) If my story proves to be utter BS, well I've got others ! lol |
Posted at 24/12/2013 10:57 by greedfear Merry Christmas and Happy New Year ECDC shareholders !I believe next year will be a prosperous year too. Once other investors find out the Bucharest office market shows improvement and realise Cascaded Euro Tower could very well be sold in 2014 (instant double-triple share price). The Cascade loan is being paid back (approx. 2 million each year) from Cascade Park Plaza's cash flow and as ECDC holds 40% that on itself will add 0.8 million to the value of this equity investment. |
Posted at 30/7/2013 16:20 by greedfear Smithie- no offence but we've discussed the malls before. In terms of NAV the malls are irrelevant. All the investments in malls are practically written off to zero.I must say though that I hoped that with a little financial support those malls might regain value one day. But it doesn't look like improvememts can be expected short/ medium term. What's new is that questions are being raIsed about the value of the investment in Iasi/Oradea. I expect the managers here to not allow AREOF any delay in repayments (due in september) no matter what financial sh#t AREOF might be in. I'm pretty sure that ECDC will get nothing later (if banks (NEPI?) are demanding repayment of their loans. I can understand investors having issues with the way ECDC has been managed. Frankly, investors did lose quite a lot of money and probably not all of it has been caused by the terrible economic times we are and have been in. Because of that I can imagine shareholders voting no to some resolutions. What I do not understand though is why they voted against a share buy back. Looks like shooting your self in the foot the way I see it. Maybe you can come up with specific reasons to be against share buy backs? If so, do enlighten me! Cheers! On the positive side, Cascade seems to be doing very well. Reports from international property valuators seem to suggest that Bucharest office prices have bottomed out. Cascade is the only property of real importance, the others are a bonus (or a burden in some cases :) ) Edit: BTW are you an ECDC share holder? |
Posted at 08/5/2012 00:06 by greedfear scburbs 7 May'12 - 21:52 - 1215 of 1216 Greedfear, ECDC is a difficult one to value. It has multibagging potential if things go well, but can only fall 100% if they don't! I guess you like your investments high risk/high return! The key seems to be the cash burn and the equity value in both Romanian shopping centres (such as Cascade the largest equity asset which looks in reasonable shape) and Trade Centre Sliven (which appears to hold cash for a development that is going nowhere?). Do you know how much cash is in Trade Centre Sliven and what control they have over getting it back? Really the question here is do you trust the manager (the market doesn't seem to)? They have a choice of calling it quits now (and letting the dogs go) which should generate an excellent profit for shareholders from today's price or ploughing on regardless with the particular danger that recurring losses and cash injections to Galleria Plovdiv (or other dogs) could hurt the equity value. As Galleria Plovdiv is by far the largest asset by value if it is propped up then this could be a serious risk to shareholder funds (as leasing seems very weak). Perhaps they should let it go or only agree to fund in exchange for significant release of banks debts. It is noticeable that despite the discounted valuation none of the normal arbtirage/value activist investors are here. The absence of activist investors reduces the prospects for the managers being kept in check. Given the dependence on limited good assets you need serious local knowledge to invest here, but its certainly cheap. If they had a clear strategy of selling Cascade/Romanian shopping centres once let up, getting the cash back out of Trade Centre Sliven, letting any dogs go and then returning the surplus to shareholders then I would probably be a buyer. However, it looks like they might still try and prop Galleria Plovdiv up which makes them a risky investment. |
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
Hot Features
Premium
