ADVFN Logo

We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.

Trending Now

Toplists

It looks like you aren't logged in.
Click the button below to log in and view your recent history.

Registration Strip Icon for charts Register for streaming realtime charts, analysis tools, and prices.

QED Quadrise Plc

1.49
0.0375 (2.58%)
18 Mar 2024 - Closed
Delayed by 15 minutes
Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Quadrise Plc LSE:QED London Ordinary Share GB00B11DDB67 ORD 1P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  0.0375 2.58% 1.49 1.435 1.545 1.52 1.435 1.50 7,414,909 16:35:03
Industry Sector Turnover Profit EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap
Crude Petroleum & Natural Gs 0 -3.09M -0.0021 -7.14 22.42M
Quadrise Plc is listed in the Crude Petroleum & Natural Gs sector of the London Stock Exchange with ticker QED. The last closing price for Quadrise was 1.45p. Over the last year, Quadrise shares have traded in a share price range of 0.66p to 3.30p.

Quadrise currently has 1,494,904,968 shares in issue. The market capitalisation of Quadrise is £22.42 million. Quadrise has a price to earnings ratio (PE ratio) of -7.14.

Quadrise Share Discussion Threads

Showing 7226 to 7250 of 11150 messages
Chat Pages: Latest  290  289  288  287  286  285  284  283  282  281  280  279  Older
DateSubjectAuthorDiscuss
03/8/2015
13:58
25+% IRR expected for LS.

"The Texas-based fund manager is betting that Quintain’s 5,500-home Wembley Park project will deliver 25% returns over the next few years for investors in its $5.8bn (£3.7bn) Real Estate Fund IV, which held a first and final close in April this year.

While the 131p per share offer for the company, recommended by Quintain’s board this week, reflects a 22.4% premium to the share price and a 7.4% premium to NAV, Lone Star believes there is substantial growth to come for the stripped-back developer"

hxxp://www.estatesgazette.com/inside-deal-lone-stars-swoop-quintain/?x=1

scburbs
03/8/2015
13:44
The Directors have collectively pledged 0.3% of the share capital of Quintain.

Zero point three per cent is nothing.

They are NOT in any way in a strong position to influence by way of vote the outcome of this low-ball opportunistic bid from Lone Star.

The 99.7% of the share base of Quintain which is not held in Directors' hands command the situation and the outcome.

Investors would be well-advised, in my view, to make their own minds up as to whether this is a fair offer or not. And not, in my view, to be unduly influenced by the Directors' collective puny 0.3% holding.

The tiny fraction of shares held by Quintain Directors will not in any way influence my personal decision on this Offer. I hope this will also be the case for other investors small and large. And especially institutions.

My decision is already made in advance of receiving any documents. It is to vote AGAINST the offer.

It appears to me that the interests of The Quintain Directors, in my view only, are DISTINCTLY OUT OF LINE with the interests of the other shareholders who have done the heavy-lifting of supporting Quintain throughout the financial crisis and property crash, including investing into the Rescue Rights Issue.

Management have received handsome salaries and, recently, exceptional performance-related bonuses sometimes approaching and into the £millions.

All their executive and other options stand to be paid out in full if the tabled Offer goes ahead. Such details of options are contained in the Letters of Undertaking to be readily found on the Quintain web-site

Shareholders have not even been given the merest sniff of a dividend. Big bonuses for Directors but zippo in dividends for shareholders.

This is disgraceful and unacceptable in my view.

Now that we have a clear upturn in London property, if not an incipient property boom, in my opinion the Directors want to sell out, see their options handsomely cashed in and succumb to a low-ball bid rather than wait to share the clear upside of future development with shareholders.

It remains UNSATISFACTORY that all hitherto negotiations with Lone Star were held behind closed doors and that the market was not informed of any approach which had been initiated.

This is what the Release says about the future for Quintain:-

"The Offer from Bidco crystallises value for shareholders at an early stage whilst enabling Quintain’s vision for Wembley Park to be accelerated through the addition of significant financial resources, creating more mainstream homes in the Capital more quickly than would otherwise be possible.”


The inherent value of " creating more mainstream homes in the Capital more quickly " is the UPSIDE which existing shareholders had been hoping for and waiting a very long time to enjoy. - This is most definitely not an upside which should be handed on a plate to a Private Equity firm at a low price.

In today's market, Quintain which is de-geared and lowly borrowed would have little difficulty on its own to raise finance to speed up their building plans. Indeed the Company is arguably significantly under-geared.

I have never met a Private Equity firm yet that doesn't want to max out financial return on investment/capital. I doubt Lone Star are any different.

Lone Star are ultimately funding this proposed offer through one of their funds.
This fund is called Lone Star Real Estate Fund IV which just raised in April this year 2015 a massive $5.8billion, such is the current insatiable appetite from global investors for real estate.

The Offer of 131p is fundamentally too low and is robbing shareholders, in my view only, of the long-awaited and enormous inherent value of the massive upturn in the London property market and seemingly insatiable demand for new housing.

ALL IMO. DYOR.
QP

quepassa
03/8/2015
13:21
David
You seen this ?

jaws6
03/8/2015
12:11
I would also support.
maiken
03/8/2015
12:02
QP....Why not set up a Shareholder Action Group and start a campaign on behalf of the smaller shareholders ? I am sure ShareSoc will help you if there are enough members interested and this will show how directors with miniscule holdings rarely get the best price for shareholders in deal situations !

I am fully tied up with a campaign at Vislink which is going extremely well and you certainly seem to have enough knowledge to run this one which I would fully support.

The smaller shareholders with about 25% of the shares need a voice here

davidosh
03/8/2015
11:29
Standard or not. It is still there.

The Directors are indeed on the hook to sell to Lone Star but the get-out words are that all bets are off if " the Offer lapses or is withdrawn"

If the Offer is not accepted by shareholders in general and Lone Star don't get the shareholder acceptance they want ( a massive 90% to go unconditional ), what will Lone Star do? They will either allow the Offer to lapse or withdraw it.

At that point, the Directors are off the hook.

In theory and practice what happens is that XYZ come in with a hypothetical blow-out bid of 160p which LS don't want to match, they know no-one will accept their 131p - so they walk and allow their Offer to lapse or withdraw it. - At that point the Directors are no longer obliged to sell.

The wording of " A MINIMUM OF 131p" is interesting.

It is backed up by Clause 4.6 of the same letter of Irrevocable Undertaking which further says that the Directors remain on the hook if Lone Star increase the offer as the term " OFFER extends to any improved or revised offer on behalf of the Offeror before the withdrawal or lapse of the Original Offer".


You might say that that is standard as well.

But one thing is crystal clear.

The Letter of Undertakings caters for, allows for and contemplates the eventuality of an increased offer from Lone Star.

That fact is not without a great deal of interest in my view.

The combined percentage of shares that the Directors have jointly undertaken to sell is microscopic in the scheme of things.

It's not like the Directors have committed shares totalling 30% of the Company, their holdings are insignificant in my view, other than being a token gesture.

ALL IMO> DYOR.
QP

quepassa
03/8/2015
10:40
The wording is standard to allow for a higher offer, but I suspect they would have to sell to LS even if a new offeror appears. I'm certain also that a dividend announcement would be a legitimate factor to enable LS to withdraw their offer --after all the monies to pay the dividend are in the company and they are seeking to buy the company.

Am I not right in thinking the price precludes LS from buying in the market?

Strikes me the current price makes a smallish holder sale a lower return than a completed sale and the market is hedging its bets as it is by no means certain another bidder will appear.

bscuit
03/8/2015
10:08
The main Directors have issued letters of Irrevocable undertakings to the bidding company saying that they have committed to sell their shares.

These letters can be found on the QED web-site.

The question is at what price have the Directors undertaken to sell their shares to Bidco?

The Letters do not just say 131p.

The price at which the Directors have undertaken to sell their shares is at "NOT LESS THAN 131p".

Wise precaution perhaps.

Prodding by the shareholders should push the QED management to go back to the negotiating table with Lone Star.

Of course, if they can produce a more acceptable offer, it is good for them as it is shareholders in general.

If QED cannot get a fairer offer for shareholders than the 131p so far tabled, in my opinion shareholders would be far better off to reject the initial low-ball offer.

The FT article about London property on page 3 to-day sums up the situation very succinctly:-


"Post-crisis high

OVERSEAS INVESTORS FLOCK TO SECURE LONDON DEVELOPMENT LAND"

citing for example the land-grab at Battersea Power Station and the Asian Business Port at Royal Docks in East London ( we of course know about Greenwich Peninsula and Knight Dragon)


The FT article continues

"London's housbuilding shortage has sent housebuilders scrambling to fill the gap. The capital's population grows by about 52,000 households a year but last year just 18,260 new homes were built."




At 131p, the Lone Star bid is far too low. If they fall away at 131p - which I hope they do- others will in my view soon come knocking/flocking at a fairer price.


Over and above that, Quintain should announce an immediate 5% dividend which would close the gaping discount-to-NAV and provide shareholder value of approaching 131p without selling the Company. Irrespective of the fact that this would likely cause the 131p offer to lapse.



ALL IMO. DYOR.
QP

quepassa
03/8/2015
09:12
or sell % of holding.
r ball
03/8/2015
09:09
What can we read from all the notices are the big boys selling buying or just sitting still makes you feel should you top up for a few just in case of a higher bid. After all not much to lose
aberdare
31/7/2015
23:45
I was talking to an acquaintance yesterday who is the proprietor of a small City-based financial boutique about the Quintain offer.

He spoke very highly of Lone Star and their excellent reputation as a top and aggressive buyer of distressed assets with a great eye for spotting value. He said (in a positive/laudatory way )that in the sharks' pool of distressed buyers, they were king shark.

Lone Star know they have a good deal here with their Quintain offer.

Hopefully, shareholders will collectively come together to oppose the very low offer which has so far been tabled.

It remains unsatisfactory in my opinion that Quintain never informed the market that they were in talks with a counterparty which may or may not have lead to a bid.



As I have said before and will say again, all The Board need to do is declare immediately by way of EGM the immediate implementation of a progressive 5% dividend policy and shareholders will crystallise the same value as the Lone Star offer without the Company being sold at that low price.

With the announcement of a dividend, the share price would rise to NAV, the big discount would be obliterated and the 5% dividend would near as dammit immediately equate to the 131p being offered by Lone Star. Without the Company being sold at all.

That is the best way to crystallise 131p of shareholder value not through a low-ball bid.

That is why an offer of 131p doesn't come close, in my opinion, to offering anything like fair or reasonable value for Quintain.

ALL IMO. DYOR.
QP

quepassa
31/7/2015
19:13
Hi badtime, one would have expected that the Lone Star cowboys, might have also approached substantial holders..."er do you mind if I rob you?".

We'll see!?!

Regards, Maddox

maddox
31/7/2015
18:45
QP..whats your view (sorry if i have missed it)re a counter offer...with the directors not having substantial holdings...surely the bidder would have sounded out the larger shareholders first?
badtime
31/7/2015
17:07
Excellent post.

Good concrete reasons to further substantiate why the opening offer is far too low.

I am sure that those reasons will be picked up by institutional and big-ticket holders, as well as the smaller guy, who monitor the bulletin boards.

Any further valuation insights on Quintain would be most welcome from you and everyone else.


ALL IMO. DYOR.
QP

quepassa
31/7/2015
16:29
Hi QP,

Agreed, there is huge hidden value in QED.

Specifically, the current NAV valuation does not include the potential uplift in the Wembley development land bank. In the March 2014 B/S the Wembley development land constituted 28.3% of QEDs assets valued at £334.9m. This is clearly a non-performing asset - not currently generating any return to the business but needing to be financed. However, on receipt of planning permission this can be expected to, what do you reckon, double or treble in value?

Whereas, we are being offered a 7% premium to an already out of date NAV.

Hmmm...

Regards, Maddox

maddox
31/7/2015
14:58
911 and others


Tell your friends in the industry.

Contact the Company. Write them a letter.

Vote against the Offer.

Twitter.

Digital media.



Do you think that Texas-based Lone Star have any intrinsic interest in the Wembley Estate in terms of it being a truly important large-scale Urban Regeneration project for London and the UK?

Or do you think they view it more as an opportunistic and cheap financial/real-estate asset which they can make money out of quickly?

Additionally, if you break up Quintain, you get some nice things:-

1. Grafton Advisors

2. Wembley

3. Curzon Street Birmingham with HS2 potential

4. Salfords Surrey large scale resi development.

5. The London portfolio.

6. Other regional interests.


The sum of the parts is worth a lot more than the whole in my view.


In my view, a lot of the parts of Quintain would just be flipped for a quick profit.

The current offer is a truly lousy offer for the Company and for shareholders in my opinion.

The offer needs to be rebased to a reasonable premium over the NAV of the Company.

ALL IMO. DYOR.
QP

quepassa
31/7/2015
14:40
You start a Shareholder action group [look at what's happening in VLK]and after recovering an AR from C [cost£1] you contact holders with a view to getting 50%+ holding out for a higher price and that will keep LS away!. Fair amount of work.
bscuit
31/7/2015
14:39
david
Why big investor not asking for more ,can not understand or do we have to remind them ?

jaws6
31/7/2015
14:36
The acid test here would be.....Will these very well paid directors recommend an offer to buy the assets at barely above NAV if they are told that there will be no job for them on the other side and they just get minimum termination pay offs at the end of their contracts ?

That is why highly paid and incentivised directors that have never bought shares are always inclined to look after themselves and no need to worry about shareholders.

In my view any deal to be agreed to sell a company with huge assets that can be independently valued ie. property should be done with a couple of the leading shareholders or an independent shareholder actually in the negotiation committee so that all future employment terms can be seen within the deal !

Investors who put in hundreds of millions to buy the original QED assets are being sold short here IMO. The capital providers are losing out to the incentivised negotiators. Just my honest view.

davidosh
31/7/2015
14:09
AGREED... where do we sign up!

:-)

911man
31/7/2015
13:49
That's why shareholders need to see the offer for what it is and make their voices heard that the offer is opportunistic and undervalues Quintain.

The offer is nothing other than a play on the Discount-to-NAV of the share price because there is no dividend.

The deal needs to be priced on an reasonable PREMIUM to NAV not a cosmetically attractive PREMIUM to recent share price.

In my view, you are getting nothing than you would get anyway when Quintain start paying a dividend.

If Quintain declare a 5% dividend policy today, shareholders effectively have the same value as the Offer, without the Company being sold.


ALL IMO. DYOR.
QP

quepassa
31/7/2015
13:34
I think the problem here is that Management have little shareholding and the incentives that Lone Star will put in place will greatly reward them.. they will become very rich on this!!
911man
31/7/2015
13:12
QP
Agree on both post above. They selling QED on cheap at 131

jaws6
31/7/2015
13:06
Put another way, Quintain could create the same shareholder value/market value as the Lone Star offer just by declaring a 5% dividend policy immediately.

If they did so, the share price would undoubtedly in my view quickly rise to NAV, closing the large discount-to-NAV, and investors would start to receive a 5% dividend over the course of a year.

That is effectively the same value to shareholders as the Lone Star offer without the Company being sold.

The Lone Star offer is undervaluing the Company significantly in my view.

ALL IMO. DYOR.
QP

quepassa
31/7/2015
10:26
Lone Star have a strong track-record and good/aggressive reputation in hunting out distressed assets or assets which have suffered price dislocation.

When I read carefully the Investment Approach on the Lone Star public web-site which is to seek investments where they can capitalise on dislocation in asset pricing and value opportunities, it makes me wonder whether another type of "trade" buyer wouldn't be a more suitable counterparty for Quintain which is not in a distressed situation. Far from it.

This is a link to Lone Star's investment approach:-



Does Quintain as a fully rehabilitated propco with particularly low gearing naturally fall into these investment parameters? I don't think so.

So just what is the attraction to distressed buyer Lone Star? -I'll tell you. They know a bargain when they see one.

In my opinion, there is great value in Quintain but the share price has been held back by the on-going lack of dividend. That is why there is such a difference/disparity in my view between the share price premium of 22% and the NAV premium of 7%.

One could expect the bid premium to NAV and the bid premium to share price to be roughly the same in a property company takeover situation. Here it is far apart. That is a great value in the Company to a potential buyer.

For a normal propco paying a dividend, the market cap and share price will fluctuate around NAV in a positive market such as now. There would be no large discount to NAV.

From Lone Star's point of view, the historic lack of dividend is highly beneficial- and they are seeking to purchase the Company at a mere 7% premium to NAV because of the very fact that Quintain trades at a such large discount as it pays no dividend.

Lone Star are capitalising in my view not just on Quintain but on the big 15%discount to NAV of the recent share price.

Quintain, according to the words of their recently departed FD at the 2014 AGM when questioned on the topic of timing for resumption of dividend, said perhaps in three years or so.

It seems to me that Quintain would soon in my view be able to throw off a dividend of some 5%pa or so within the next couple of years.

Lone Star will in effect be able to earn back the 7% premium on any purchase of Quintain in dividends rapidly.

This is a highly unsatisfactory deal for shareholders in my opinion.

A 7% premium to NAV is selling the Company far too cheaply in my view.


The question which every shareholder must ask himself is what is a reasonable premium on any offer over NAV of The Company - and not premium over the recent share price which was held back by lack of dividend which was however expected to be resumed in the not too distant future.


ALL IMO> DYOR.
QP

quepassa
Chat Pages: Latest  290  289  288  287  286  285  284  283  282  281  280  279  Older

Your Recent History

Delayed Upgrade Clock

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com