Paq Intl Share Discussion Threads

[simonevans] 28/3/2004 18:15

Yes, I agree, but I suspect it will be taken out at not much more than the current price. All a bit of a rip-off, but I can see it coming!

[rambutan2] 28/3/2004 18:05

far far too cheap.

[ntv] 26/3/2004 21:07

this stock is far to cheap

[rambutan2] 03/3/2004 18:54

and down again...

03 March 2004

Collins Stewart Limited has notified the Company that Collins Stewart Limited
and Collins Stewart (CI) Limited hold and control 2,675,324 ordinary shares in
Property Acquisition and Management Limited on behalf of discretionary clients
of the two firms. This holding equates to 4.81% of the issued share capital of
that class.

[rambutan2] 25/2/2004 19:46

high noon does sound a bit ominous doesnt it. only ever made 2 rns...



over recent times seem to have been picking up stock from exeter and collins stewart themselves.

whatever, something seems very likely to happen within the next few months.

[rambutan2] 25/2/2004 19:41

remember, get paid on monday...

07 January 2004
Property Acquisition and Management Limited

Security Title Convertible Redeemable Preference Shares
Mnemonic Code PAQC
Sedol Code 665-108
Dividend Amount 2.85p
Period 31-12-03
Provisional Ex Date 14-01-04
Record Date 16-01-04
Payment Date 01-03-04

[rambutan2] 25/2/2004 19:38

it is a collins stewart investment trust. sold them to high noon?

Property Acquisition & ManagementLd
25 February 2004

Following the sale of 339,761 Ordinary 10p Shares on 25 February 2004 Blue Chip
Value & Income Fund Limited are now interested in 2,000,000 Ordinary 10p Shares
representing 3.60% of the issued share capital of that class

[rambutan2] 24/2/2004 12:01

who they?

The Company has been informed that High Noon Limited are interested in 2,610,960 Ordinary 10p Shares representing 4.7% of the issued shares of that class and 1,696,670 Convertible Redeemable Preference shares representing 17.44% of the issued shares of that class.

Date Company informed: 24 February 2004


thanks ntv.

[rambutan2] 11/2/2004 19:54

money well spent i reckon.
what with reits intro talk etc, the av discount on the prop sector is now in the teens, and this lot have a very impressive track record.
i see that their web page is now back in action... (for their property track record look under investment management and then properties)





perhaps you could put the above in the header ntv.

regards
rambutan

[ntv] 11/2/2004 16:44

still 2 cheap

[rambutan2] 11/2/2004 15:26

it has to be splits dumping.
good point. but would have thought not as would effectively be building up stake on the cheap.

[paulkent] 11/2/2004 10:17

cant believe those two big trades were sells at 68p...presumably therefore it means someones spending quite a lot on these??!...wonder if the bidder is allowed to add to his holding at below 75p BEFORE he can rebid?..anyone know the rules on that??

[simonevans] 10/2/2004 21:59

i agree, looks a reasonable return. wonder whether management may be tempted to trump the 75p offer now that they have some time to get the finance in place. Looks worth it to me.

[paulkent] 10/2/2004 10:33

bit of chunky buying this morning...... what i cant figger, is why the price is still so low, given that the NAV is way over 100p...and that a bid of effectively 75p has already been made even tho it had to be deferred till end march coz of takeover rules?...so why has this not even gone up to 75p or higher...presumably the bidder will relaunch bid at that level when allowed, about 19th MArch i think...so buying at 66p to get an almost certain return of 75p (15% ish?!!)in two months looks pretty safe!!!...let alone what it MIGHT go up to if anyone else comes in or NAV moves even higher..or bid may have to be increased anyway..??

[ntv] 26/12/2003 11:30

don't understand why cs don't buy in some more shares with the forced like split caps and cancel them,with prefs and zeros coming to their time of redemption .the saved interest should help on the profit front and if they can sell that land they will have plenty of cash to play with
wish i had a big bank balance

[ntv] 26/12/2003 11:24

getting interesting now

[simonevans] 20/12/2003 19:35

I would have thought the delay gives enough time for a possible counter-bid.

[rambutan2] 20/12/2003 17:01

i agree, especially with the likelyhood of reits appearing on the scene and the trad prop sector discount disappearing, institutional and pension fund interest in prop as a yield play etc etc.

i spoke to collins stewart a few weeks ago and voiced my concerns re a rip off takeover. they said they understood and agreed but that with the shareholder base of splits wanting to unload, and chan prop with its 29.9% it was sort of out of their hands. i asked whether theyd been putting their clients into it as a good property play, they said yes, some.

in any case, here it is...

PRESS RELEASE
On the 9th October 2003, David Kirch, controlling shareholder of Channel Hotels
& Properties Limited ('Channel Hotels'), publicly stated that he was planning an offer for Property Acquisition & Management Limited ('PAM'). In that statement, Mr Kirch indicated that he was not prepared to offer more than 55p per ordinary share. Channel Hotels holds approximately 29.9% of the total voting rights of PAM through holdings of both ordinary shares and preference shares.

The statement made by Mr Kirch on 10 October constitutes a 'no increase'
statement for the purpose of Rule 32.2 of the City Code on Takeovers & Mergers
('the City Code'). As a result, and as was explained by the Panel Executive to
Mr Kirch and accepted by Mr Kirch on 9 October, Channel Hotels would not be
permitted to make an offer for PAM at above 55p per ordinary share. In addition, the Panel Executive subsequently ruled that Channel Hotels would only be able to make an offer for PAM at above 55p per ordinary share three months after it had terminated discussions with PAM.

Following discussions between Mr Kirch and PAM, the parties reached agreement in principle on the terms of an offer at 75p per ordinary share, 20p of which was to be deferred. The Panel Executive has ruled that, as explained previously to Mr Kirch, this would be in breach of the no increase statement made on 9
October.

In light of the above, Channel Hotels hereby announces that it is terminating
discussions with PAM and, in the circumstances, it is prohibited under Rule 2.8
of the City Code from announcing an offer for PAM for a period of six months,
save to the extent that there has occurred an event in respect of which it has
specifically reserved the right to do otherwise. Channel Hotels hereby reserves
the right to announce a recommended offer for PAM prior to the expiry of the six month period although, in the light of the Panel Executive's ruling as set out above, it may only announce a recommended offer for PAM at a price above 55p per ordinary share three months after the date of this announcement.


so, what exactly is it saying? do they have to wait 3 or 6 months. and at 55p or 75p? can management unrecommend the offer?

i noticed bc asset management buying a few the other day 62p. i suppose that if offer is 75p, then theres 10pish free money to be made ie 15%ish. not a bad percentage return over 3-6 months, with the poss of a higher offer?

[ntv] 11/12/2003 20:42

still too cheap

[ntv] 29/11/2003 21:44

wonder how negotiations are going re landsale?

[rambutan2] 21/10/2003 11:38

pk and simon, as this is still really a split capital investment trust and will probably be classified as such by the city it wont necessarily move in the manner we might hope/expect. im fairly sure that there are still a lot of shares held by other split caps who are happy to offload on any price rises/liquidity - channel islands might be hoping to take advantage of this and offer them a quick, tidy exit. also, other institutions might not be so keen to buy in, other than as a special situation, when there is such a large shareholder (channel islands)on board already? on the plus side, collins stewart hold a chunk themselves and certainly have some clout. i imagine they will be keen not to lose paq as its the perfect property vehicle for them to put their clients into and grow property interests from? in any case, whatever happens we are certainly going to make some money as theres no downside from here but lots of upside.

[paulkent] 21/10/2003 09:55

well someone was bound to do some serious profit taking at some point after the recent rise...but the price took that big sale in its stride easily!...another positive sign i reckon