We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register for real-time alerts, custom portfolio, and market movers
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Stock Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Interquest | ITQ | London | Ordinary Share |
| Price Change | Price Change % | Share Price | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.00% | 13.00 | 01:00:00 |
| Open Price | Low Price | High Price | Close Price | Previous Close |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 13.00 | 13.00 |
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 01/5/2018 12:21 by mnomis Re Eastbourne1982, that is a great question that all shareholders / former shareholders should be asking themselves. Apart from selling at a loss or complaining on a bulletin board, what action have they taken? I just wasted a morning looking into ITQ as it screened well re valuation, but is not investable imho for obvious reasons. |
Posted at 15/3/2018 10:16 by sphere25 No position here but wow! What a bunch of scumbags!As if activity to date hasn't been petty enough. Is that a backdoor way of having more voting rights to take ITQ private on the cheap I wonder. Can Luke Johnson ever be trusted in future if that does happen? Let's see if that is what happens. |
Posted at 26/10/2017 19:13 by vatnabrekk I sold out a while ago at a loss but I look in here now and again to see what's happening. I'm fairly sure that in the fullness of time they will reach their target of 75% and then de-list, which is their stated ambition. What happens next is unclear, because I really don't understand how a de-listing can benefit them either. But if that's what they want to do, then I'm fairly sure they will achieve it one way or another.What does that mean for other shareholders? Not really sure, but it certainly means that no-one can sell on the market. The only possible buyers would be Chisbridge and it's unlikely that they would be prepared to pay a fair price, if anything at all. And if they don't intend to pay a dividend, then they don't need to buy out the small shareholders, they can just leave them to rot. How would that benefit them? The only way I can think of is that they could keep increasing their salaries, which of course would benefit them but not the minority shareholders. Now be very clear that I'm not saying that that is what they are going to do, I'm just saying that that may one possible course of action for them. |
Posted at 10/10/2017 12:06 by safman Peterhouse appointed.. I would of thought a little unusual for a broker for ITQ..However the share price has comeback.. strongly.. They are still looking to go private so @ 58% of equity they will have to buy on the open market to reach that 75% figure.. Well done if you bought in the 20s as I did not expect this back.. saffy.. |
Posted at 07/9/2017 14:21 by bsharman3 Hi All,There is lots of good commentary about the fiasco on stockopedia. hxxp://www.stockoped I would urge everyone to write to the FCA and AIM about this situation. |
Posted at 07/9/2017 14:11 by ih_559245 For all the good it may or may not achieve, I have reported ITQ for possible (probable?) fraud to AIM, FCA and Acrion Fraud. I would urge other offended parties to consider similar action - how else will minority shareholders be heard? |
Posted at 20/6/2017 15:19 by insomniac36 As we all know there was a failed 'sale' process at the back end of 2014, insiders reported that Ashworth had 125p in his head for a fair price to leave the business and must have been sorely disappointed not to find a willing buyer at that price ... apparently the common consensus at the time was a price around 110p was more realistic ...This is the quote from them "the Board held constructive discussions with a number of interested parties however, the outcome of these is that the Board does not believe that a sale of the Company at this time would achieve maximum value for shareholders in the medium term, having regard to the opportunities, growth potential and inherent value of the Company" in Jan 2015 So, how now can the business be worth a third of that value unless it due to incompetent management or has been engineered by following a calculated programme of undermining investor sentiment to drive the share price value down to facilitate this appalling attempt to rob external investors through a dirt cheap MBO. One should also view ITQ's performance compared to it's competitors to illustrate this ...there is no way that ITQ has been affected by market conditions/Brexit et al any worse than they have. If the acquisition of RDW has dragged the company's value downwards, the fault lies purely at the door of the Chisbridge gang (the Exec Management at the time of the acquisition).Similar |
Posted at 16/6/2017 14:06 by sailing john I can't see the original trading update on Investegate (sys error) or is it possible to withdraw statements?Anyway still listed above so for the record I have copied full RNS below and in the following post the trades that were reported between the original and amended TS Original TS Time stamped 13.32 15/6/2017 above "15 June 2017 InterQuest Group plc ("InterQuest" or "the Company") Trading update InterQuest Group plc (AIM: ITQ.L), the specialist recruiter in the technology, analytics and digital market today announces the following trading update ahead of its interim results for the six months to 30 June 2017. The executive management team and Independent Director concur that the Company, whilst benefitting from solid sector fundamentals which underpin the business in the longer term, has been experiencing weaker trading in recent months, particularly in its core contractor market. Whilst it is still early, the Company recognises signs of potential challenges ahead in the political and trading environment resulting from BREXIT, the result of the UK election and the subsequent hung Parliament. The Company continues to restructure its business in order to focus on the future technology markets it services. Mindful of these risks, together with the impact of one off costs on net debt levels, the Company considers that a more prudent policy on dividend payments is necessary and has agreed that dividends will only be declared in circumstances where net debt levels are below twice EBITDA. This amended policy does not affect the dividend previously announced by the Company on 14 March 2017 which will be paid on 16 June 2017 to shareholders on the register on 19 May 2017. This announcement contains inside information for the purposes of Article 7 of Regulation (EU) No 596/2014. Enquiries: InterQuest Group Plc" |
Posted at 15/6/2017 20:01 by keit4h After hours the Company has put out an RNS saying that the earlier trading statement contained an error and that: "The reference to twice EBITDA should have read half EBITDA."This is beyond absurd. The company has paid out dividends every year, at least back to 2011, and (as far as I can see) in every year net debt has always been above EBITDA and often about double EBITDA. Apparently the board has suddenly decided that all their dividend decisions for the last 6 years were recklessly imprudent. I wonder whether the sole surviving independent director, who is meant to represent the Company and its shareholders as a whole, was allowed any input on this latest announcement. |
Posted at 14/6/2017 09:49 by dangersimpson2 I suspect your corporate action message says 'If we do not receive an instruction from you by this time, no action will be taken on your behalf.' at the end.So if you don't want to accept the offer then take no action. This is what I suspect will happen: A. If Chisbride get less than 50% acceptance they will either extend the timeline, abandon the bid or enhance their offer. B. If Chisbridge get >50% acceptance then they will take control of the company. In practice this probably only means they will get rid of the non-exec given that they already control the company as they are all of the exec management. They cannot de-list at this point unless they have more than 75%. So they will make some vague threats about cutting the dividend or having a rights issue and then extend the offer. If they don't get >75% they will continue to be listed, those who accepted will get their 42p and those who didn't get to keep their shares in the company together with the rights to dividends, capital returns etc. They will probably keep the offer open hoping to get >75%. If they get >75% they will delist the company as a way of forcing others to accept the offer together with more vague threats. If they get >90% acceptance they will compulsory purchase the remaining shares at the offer price. Most likely is that there will be lot's of opportunities to accept 42p along the way. They don't want minority holders any more than you want to hold a small stake in a delisted entity. The only reason you would accept is if you feared the bid will fall through and you think the company is worth a lot less than the offer price. Even then you could sell in the market at a higher price. |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
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
