Silverdell Share Discussion Threads

[erb2008] 27/11/2013 20:14

when kitsons went down -"we have over £4m in bank"
at beginning of September - "we would hope to have suspension lifted by the end of the month" - that was before the new FD started.
End of November - they are struggling for cash/to pay creditors - believe they have significant debtors but whether what they think they are owed is actually recoverable is another matter!!
I have been cautiously optimistic throughout - but now think this is f@ck@d

[17paddy] 26/11/2013 18:36

Well when the shareholders are dumped like the creditors and the directors free to carry on the regulators will ignore the situation as normal. Not a good advert for AIM

[hvs] 25/11/2013 18:35

The "CITY" always looks after its own.

[bookbroker] 25/11/2013 18:18

Although no timeline as co. no longer listed, this co. will sooner or later will produce some sort of full year result, or significant write down, it will be interesting to see any outcome, at some point in the not too distant future they have to emerge from behind their wall of silence, and either the directors like Nutley and co. should be hauled off and put up in front of a firing squad, or at the very least offer a considerable amount of contrition for the grief that he has put the long-suffering shareholders through! That'll be the day!

[bookbroker] 21/11/2013 12:44

It would surprise me, the fact that this business has not been put into administration already, that they would not be prepared to sound out investors about a cash raising, I do not know the precise assets of this business, tangible or otherwise, but clearly HSBC sees it as a going concern at the current time, re-organisation albeit. It seems clear that the intention has always been to re-list at some point, and it would be in the interests of HSBC to see it that way, why all the bother this far into the suspension, they would have a good idea of cash-flow, it's how sustainable it is!

[17paddy] 20/11/2013 20:36

DavR0 Yes, they will have to make a statement prior to the 2 January 14. They will probably know already whether they are to be supported by the bank to the extent that it would allow them to relist. This is a group that was always quick to put out good news and one can only assume that they don't have any good news for us, hence the silence.
As I have stated previously my guess is that the bank are calling the shots and my concern is what action is the bank likely to take and what are the consequences for the shareholders.

[davr0s] 20/11/2013 19:46

What RNS to shareholders if they miss the deadline to resume - surely they have to explain something at some point to the owners?

[pj 1] 19/11/2013 09:54

Tried it

All they do is take messages for the Directors to return the calls

To date still waiting for any to be returned

[bookbroker] 19/11/2013 09:12

One possibility is to ring Marwyn, one of the non-execs. is a director of Marwyn, as principal shareholders in co.

[masurenguy] 19/11/2013 08:24

My understanding is that they have to request resumption of share trading by Thursday January 2nd
at the very latest or otherwise delist from AIM altogether. No position here.

[kimboy2] 18/11/2013 22:43

Yes the Zolfo Cooper administrators report says that they were called in to review the cash flow and working capital requirements of the group, as opposed to just Kitsons, in June.

This was in the run up to the administration. Presumably it was jointly appointed by the board and bank and reporting to both.

[17paddy] 18/11/2013 22:12

My understanding is that a "very experienced turnaround team" was put in soon after the administration which rather influences my opinion that it is the bank calling the shots. Can't convince myself that the BOD would have reached that conclusion.

[cockneyrebel] 18/11/2013 22:07

Isn't there a limit as to how long a co can be suspended?

I thought it was something like 6 months?

CR

[kimboy2] 18/11/2013 20:52

It is of course all possible. However I think that if anything like that had happened the bank would have lost confidence in Nutley and he would have been replaced by some sort of turnaround specialist.

I am pretty sure if they had found mammoth mismanagement they wouldn't have kept that self same management on to fix it.

We shall see - hopefully

[17paddy] 18/11/2013 20:41

Enjoy the debate and the varying opinions but I am back to disagreeing with you again Kimboy. As individuals none of us know for sure the true situation but one thought is that it's taking so long because the new CFO has identified the true trading position and has realised that there are massive losses to write off. This could result in the bank calling all the shots as to what is the best way for them to recover their monies. There would be various options available to the bank and it may be beneficial to keep the senior team in place for the time being. The CFO would have to go but that doesn't mean that he was solely responsible for the problems. Lots of water still to pass under the bridge but the clock is ticking.

[kimboy2] 18/11/2013 19:42

All things are possible because we, or at least I, don't know.

However I am inclined to think that there aren't gaping holes in the contracts. The reasons for this are firstly that these things tend to emerge quickly, especially with a new CFO.

Secondly Nutley is still running the show. I find it fairly surprising that he is. However the fact that he is and that only the CFO has gone would suggest that the problem was fairly narrow.

The company said in August;

The Group is currently assessing the impact of the administration on its trading performance and therefore the capital requirements of the business for the remainder of FY2013 and for FY2014 in order to work towards lifting the suspension from trading of the Group's shares.

The question is why is it taking so long ? Could be anything. Perhaps their relationship with HSBC has broken down and they are looking for another lender, which would be interesting.

However I do think that SID has benefited from the administration.

[salpara111] 18/11/2013 17:22

You would think they were trying to refinance a FTSE 250 multinational business!
They are clearly intent on utilising every single day of suspension they can.

[extrap] 17/11/2013 11:36

This reply recently posted on another board:

"At the current time our shares remain suspended.

Under the AIM rules the Company has six months to apply for the shares to be relisted which would be early January 2014.

Any further news would have to be announced on the market

Best wishes
Mark

Mark Hazlewood
Chief Financial Officer"

[17paddy] 16/11/2013 15:33

Just finished reviewing investments and this is the worst one of all. Fluid situation but I no longer think it will relist. I have it down for shareholders as Book Cost £60m Market Value £NIL.
A loss,yes,but fortunately sold most before suspension.

[maddox] 13/11/2013 20:47

Hi Guys,

Thanks for an interesting and constructive debate - whilst we wait for this protracted calamity to be resolved. It'll be both interesting and educational to see ultimately whose interpretation proves the most accurate.

FWIW I wouldn't be surprised if Kimboy is closest - administration appears to be increasingly weighted against external creditors.

Regards, Maddox

[bookbroker] 13/11/2013 18:30

PJ - I have written it off, my basis being that it is held in my portfolio as a suspended entity, and that any projection forward has to take into account its current value, however until April next year it stands as a potential tax loss, nonetheless I would still like to believe that this co. will possibly re-list, I agree with DavR0s that the board should without hesitation be more informative as to the 'status quo', do the shareholders not have a right to regular updates irrespective of the cos. suspension, or are they largely irrelevant as the case may be. I am chilled about the fact that in terms of sentiment I no longer hold any desire or belief in the management of of this co., they have let the company and themselves down badly as regards their stewardship of Silverdell, and the only reason they are still in a job is to resurrect this business and their own reputations, some of whom have already walked the plank.
I was aware of the winding-up petition against Kitsons, little did I believe that they must have believed that by letting it go into receivership that it was most probably the best way for the parent to remain a going concern!

[pj 1] 13/11/2013 12:26

bookbroker 13 Nov'13 - 11:45 - 2039 of 2039

Why the change of outlook? Few weeks ago you were stating you had written this off completely and that ''Investors'' (shareholders) should effectively chill out?

[bookbroker] 13/11/2013 11:45

Yeah, too true DavR0s, this co. shows appalling disregard towards its shareholders concerning news flow about the potential lifting of suspension and true upcoming results statement explaining the the full outcome surrounding the the disgraceful mismanagement of this co. If this was the US there would be class action suits against this co. for putting out falsified statements concerning the level of optimism in terms of business prowess at the last set of results issued. My only hope for this co. is that Marwyn have a non-exec, director within this board, which I suppose provides some sort of belief that as the the largest shareholder they are playing an active role in so far as the future of this co. and its survival! Next set of results will at least be a kitchen sink job, they need to alter their business model, can't carry out these projects in the hope that they make them pay on the basis of turning a profit on some rusty turbine that they have salvaged, hardly covers the cost of the workforce!

[davr0s] 12/11/2013 19:49

Silverdell you can't hide away forever! People aren't going to forget you ever existed though it is starting to feel that way given the IR (or lack of)