Secure Property Developm... Share Discussion Threads

[1littlefish] 09/6/2015 11:26

Lambos...spdi

For reporting the dirs. are completely incompetent.( recent transaction....deal opaque..then new rns..and terms are very different !!...and not in accounts)..hopefully at doing property deals they have a better idea what they are doing.

Hopefully incompetent doesnt mean fraudulent...the big fish have cash in the game they wldnt hesitate to take action imo to protect their investment...so protecting us PIs for free hopefully....noting AIM is corrupt mkt..& FSA dont act till 10 yrs after any event ..if ever !!

[1littlefish] 09/6/2015 11:23

Charts
one could argue that 20p was capitulation of bulls...
formed a low..quickly bounced up...and phps forming 2nd low now...for an up trend...phps..

If falls thru 25p for long..bad sign...as subscription price..

[1littlefish] 09/6/2015 11:20

Risk/reward.....higher risk at present due to opacity etc...and Russian soldiers in Ukraine...hopefully means higher reward chances ??!!

[1littlefish] 09/6/2015 11:17

The 25p subscribers wont accept if recent deals are bad for them.
But/so...I see recent deals as underpinning income and nav/sh for the 25p boys...so I assume they are happy.

Effectively an opaque private co. imo...that is only listed to give big fish more confidence when putting in big cash.
One assumes the big fish did detailed due dilig. before subscribing at 25p.

I have voted against everything due to poor transparency....such as untrue accounts and not reporting % held changes and with big share issues Im sure there are % held changes.

[1littlefish] 09/6/2015 11:11

The accounts are not true and fair as required by uk law...one assumes Cyprus requires the same.

Warrants not mentioned in accounts. But the big holders will have read the rns and know the truth and can vote against the annual rpt if want.

[1littlefish] 09/6/2015 11:09

Co. seems to be owned by a variety of big fish...each with a stake

My assumtpion is that they wldnt allow anyone to take ctr since bad for all owners outside of the ctring party.

If they didnt like recent transactions they call an EGM to remove the brd. And stop any transactions before completed. They havent so far.

Big holders are stuck..they cant sell in mkt since so illiquid.

Big lack of info ref. % holding.

[russman] 08/6/2015 21:05

We are making some progress.
Say all the warrants & prefs in this deal are converted.
Have you handed voting control to the purchaser?
They are not subject to the Takeover Code

[1littlefish] 08/6/2015 09:37

At 27p its reasonable risk/reward imo

[1littlefish] 08/6/2015 09:21

One assumes that the 10p conv. ones get converted...

But not..at the moment ...the ones that convert at over 40p..cheaper to buy in the mkt.

[duplicate book] 08/6/2015 09:16

And if they dont take up the option, would the conversion price still be higher than the current sh. Price?

[1littlefish] 08/6/2015 09:13

With due respect...if dont understand "warrants"....phps consider picking a fund....

If dont know the various terms you could easily make mistakes.

Apologies. Not trying to be condescending or critical...even if appears so...

[1littlefish] 08/6/2015 09:05

Eh...

Maybe u need to look up the definition of the word 'share warrant'

It is an OPTION to buy.
---

Although...youd be right to say that current deal set up is...complicated/confusing for PIs.

(Imho they should not have mixed warrants, shares & preferentials in 1 RNS. 2 deals wld have been better.)

[duplicate book] 08/6/2015 07:35

'At current exchange rates and ASSUMING full excersise of the warrants and conversion of the RCPS's'.... Does this mean that there is no obligation to excersise the remaining warrants?

[1littlefish] 08/6/2015 07:23

Well...

New RNS out...

This time with data for warrant exercise price....

Effective conversion price seems to be noticeably higher than current sh. price.

[1littlefish] 02/6/2015 14:23

Russman

Warrants....mentioned in RNS...

they dont exist !

they're 'just an illusion' !

....according to the audited and signed off Annual Report...
it mentions in transactions after the year end....the purchases...
and mentions a number of shares...slightly different to given in the RNS (not a problem, tiny difference, could be cash held or whatever)

but

there is no mention of ANY warrants

(to check...open the pdf annual report....then do a search for warrants..and open each result....
and also go to end of doc. and read the 'after year end' part.

[1littlefish] 02/6/2015 11:25

Russman

Some warrant conditions allow dirs to issue loads without asking for permission....

But one assumes that the big shareholders would block anything they didnt like and/or remove the dirs...or at least call an EGM to try.

..difficult to try to understand this co...imho

[1littlefish] 02/6/2015 11:21

Chairman

Cant understand how he is still there after co-operating one assumes with prev. MD ...who the co. is taking legal action against..

And 93ME mostly vapourised.

Surely should have fallen on sword yrs ago.

[1littlefish] 02/6/2015 11:11

...c'mon....

Bluehouse dont receive any warrants. Just conv. redeem pref. shares.

Imho anyway...

The quality of info from the co. is poor...so difficult or impossible to follow...

Warrants...no info anywhere for those..except that go with the ord. shares.

Maybe the co. shouldnt be listed at all if not interested to provide basic data ...and Nomad not willing to keep an eye on them.

[russman] 02/6/2015 09:14

I have re-read the EGM note = BlueHouse receiving Conv Pref B 1:1 or 0.7056c.
The terms of 17m warrant would be very helpful to calculate current NTAV per share. My worst case scenario is that they are very dilutive and give BlueHouse a significant controlling stake.

[drradcliffe] 02/6/2015 07:41

Hi 1littlefish,

I’m not sure about the appropriate discount or uplift to NAV. The market tends to take its own view on that depending upon a whole host of factors as you know, and we are talking about emerging European economies here. So they’ll be a discount I suspect. As you point out there are issues valuing the Ukraine assets. But to keep things simple, I take the view that Baker Tilley Kitou will have looked carefully at property valuations – people may not agree – but never the less audited accounts are the best reference for most investors. I have to admit I’m not sure about founder’s rights but will include that in my own calculations to err on the side of caution. Russman’s NAV, he’s probably removing the assets in Ukraine (26%) and Greece (13%) in his suggestion. I think you’ve researched this share a lot and obviously an experienced investor so actually don’t need an answer to 95% of the questions you pose on this BB.

Out of interest, what’s your price target for this stock and over what time frame? Have you got an entry position in mind? I take it you have a Bearish position here.

[1littlefish] 01/6/2015 22:48

Item E at end of rns of results..

Says over 18 M shares...not 17.x !!
And NO MENTION of any warrants.

Need a team of 5 maybe to decipher it all and discovery which RNS is right ?
..no where does it reveal terms for the 17million warrants !

Bought assets from the dirs. own co. I think...hopefully nothing shady..or being hidden intentionally.

[1littlefish] 01/6/2015 22:31

Surely the dirs. will be getting pressure from big holders about the terrible low quality of data ?

Such as what is the warrant exercise price ?

Maybe it changes depending on what price the deferred convert at.
....opacity....not good...

[1littlefish] 01/6/2015 22:23

I dont know a number but Im sure its not 25p

Note...the RNS says I think....that pref shares conv. at market price....but I cant recall conditions..if have to wait one yr..or..has to be after voted..so at the mo...min. 30p

New shares at 43p...

So..warrants would have to convert at over 43p to get a mixed value of 43p

But hey ..why would the dirs. tell shareholders the data ?

(All very strange imo....


Want to ask AIM to suspend the shares until this material data is reported to the mkt ?

If big holders dont like anything I guess they maybe vote against the pref. shares. If I was a big holder I would vote no to anyone getting preference...in a crash they cld. own the co.