Silverdell Share Discussion Threads

[kazoom] 02/1/2014 23:04

Yes vf fairly normal as far as I am aware - it was true of the previous years interims and also true of other AIM listed companies I have. So in itself it is not the smoking gun , but whether AIM would be a better place if interims had to be audited is another question.

[yf23_1] 02/1/2014 08:14

From the half year report

"The directors have elected not to apply International Accounting Standard 34, Interim Financial Reporting, which is not mandatory for AIM-listed companies. The interim financial statements are unaudited and do not constitute statutory accounts within the meaning of section 434 of the Companies Act 2006. "

Is tht normal?

[dasv] 02/1/2014 07:43

shares cancelled:

[targatarga] 01/1/2014 12:06

I like this was planned eons ago....imho

[cnx] 01/1/2014 05:11

i am an owner of sid.
the bod have disposed of my share of the assets
who acquired these assets and at at what price?

what reports and when am I entitled to receive them?
what reports and when should I expect to receive them?

how do I obtain a list of major sharehoders at time of suspension?
are these major shareholders the best vehicle to demand full explanation?

[loverat] 31/12/2013 23:25

Reckon there might be a good case to get the regulators involved here. Issuing misleading statements to the market for starters.

[extrap] 31/12/2013 15:18

Misinformation or, possibly, disinformation, is clearly an issue here. See what Shares Mag was writing as late as June '13:

www.sharesmagazine.co.uk/news/silverdells-communication-challenge#.UsLgp6HENc8

The summary at the end of the article goes:

Analysts remain bullish on the stock and haven't found need to reduce their forecasts. FinnCap's David Buxton says: 'The shares have drifted on fears of a cash-call: management is adamant that it can achieve current forecasts with existing cash resources, with no need for a fund raise, unless an opportunity to "turbo-charge" growth arises. We therefore believe there is scope to move back towards former share price levels and for progressive medium outperformance' Stephen Rawlinson at Whitman Howard says he remains a 'strong buyer'.

[pj 1] 31/12/2013 14:29

dasv 31 Dec'13 - 12:35 - 2177 of 2178

Somewhere in there are hidden mis-truths (some would say Lies)

[garbetklb] 31/12/2013 13:12

Joe

I think you misunderstand my position. I'm all for going after the responsible people :
- once we have found out what happened
- and identified who was responsible for it happening
- and decided that we have a good chance of winning
- and are confident that they would be able to pay
And being able to pay includes the value of their car, house, pension scheme etc.....

Otherwise good money after bad - and lots of time & hassle.

Garbetklb

[dasv] 31/12/2013 12:35

it was "extremely challenging" to predict the imminent demise of silverdell on the basis of Regulated News Announcements put out by the company.

Half Yearly report:-

"The outlook remains positive and we remain confident in the full year out-turn. "

Chairman's Statement

I am pleased to report the results for the six months ended 31st March 2013. The strength of our service offering and the international spread of operations has once again helped us to achieve a resilient set of results, and good revenue growth, against a market backdrop which continues to be challenging, particularly in the UK.

Revenues for the period were £63.9m (2012: £31.4m) up 103% including the benefit of the EDS acquisition completed on 18th June 2012. Decommissioning ("EDS") revenues were £29.2m with robust performances in Canada and Australia. Stripping out the effect of the acquisition, like for like revenues were £34.7m, still up over 10% against the comparable period last year. External Consulting revenues were broadly flat at £6.8m (2012: £6.9m), while Remediation revenues were up 14% at £27.9m (2012: £24.5m).

Adjusted EBITDA* was £5.2m (2012: £1.7m) up 206%. EDS accounted for around £4.0m of this, delivering good margins in Canada and Australia, although gross margins in the UK Decommissioning were diluted primarily due to low utilisation as a result of a major contract deferral. In our Remediation business we experienced a different business mix compared to prior years, with much of the additional volumes in Silverdell being high quality (albeit lower margin) cost-plus contracts. We have successfully targeted framework and cost-plus contracts in the Oil and Gas, Nuclear and Petrochemical sectors where the annual spend is predictable and contract risk is significantly reduced. As a consequence of the strategic decision to change this business mix, underlying adjusted EBITDA* at Silverdell was £1.2m (2012: £1.7m).

Following the restructuring of our Remediation business last year, we achieved savings of over £0.8m in underlying group administrative expenses for the six months ended 31st March 2013 however some additional expenses were incurred at the PLC level with the centralisation of certain group-wide expenditure, such as marketing and IT infrastructure.

The EDS acquisition has performed well, despite a material UK contract deferral which was compensated for by strong performances in Canada and Australia. We continue to strengthen our management team in these territories to support our growth plans. As we anticipated, the cultural fit of the EDS and Silverdell has proven to be very good and the current order book and pipeline of opportunities gives us every reason to believe that our strategic plan to grow revenues by 15% per year is achievable.

We generated operating cash of £1.2m (2012: £0.2m), including a significant working capital investment in two contracts in Australia and Canada. Net debt ended the period at £15.8m (2012: £6.7m), including finance leases of £8.1m. As in prior years, the second half of the financial year is expected to see and improvement in operational cashflow.

I would like to take this opportunity to welcome to the Board a new independent Non-Executive Director. John Matthews, as Senior Non-Executive Director brings with him a wealth of sector and PLC Board experience.

The outlook remains positive and we remain confident in the full year out-turn. "

[acta_topup] 31/12/2013 12:32

Agree completely - there has to be the fear of prison when shareholders are misled by management. There has to be a very big stick to prevent such disgraceful behaviour which is tantamount to crime and sadly pervades the AIM (and indeed occasionally the main market).

[roddiemac2] 31/12/2013 12:19

Joe , your energies would be better employed in trying to obtain information as to exactly what has happened . Perhaps Sean can be persuaded to give a precise explanation . He should certainly be invited to do so . A refusal on his part would speak volumes.

[joe say] 31/12/2013 11:52

Imo Garbet has NOT summed the position succinctly - in fact its the exact opposite.

The very fact the brits are so timid in complaining or raising concerns is imo the exact reason why we have the culture we do, and for the very existance of 'Rip Off Britain'

Adopt the US approach and make them all accountable - may not help here per se, but it minimises the chances of a repeat.

[roddiemac2] 31/12/2013 11:36

Gabetklb, you have summed the situation up with admirable clarity.

Since investors have hitherto been the victims of propaganda by absence of information, we need more facts.

[garbetklb] 31/12/2013 10:53

I'm sure we all feel like ranting & raving - and it may help relieve fury.

But it won't achieve anything. And if not prepared for the occasional disaster, don't buy AIM shares - and recall that some much larger companies have gone bust in spectacular fashion (Rolls Royce, Polly Peck, Railtrack).

But here, we do appear to have a special blend of incompetence, dishonest communication & contempt for shareholders.

The role of the bank is interesting and, as they have deep pockets, may be the first place to start to look for some sort of redress. Whilst they (possibly inadvertently) pulled the trigger, the patient was already in a far worse state than they had admitted.

Garbetklb

[roddiemac2] 31/12/2013 10:34

Joe, " it seems that those at fault are never subsequently challenged " I know of one AIM listed stock where a private investor is bringing a derivative action against management.

The problem with AIM and light touch regulation is, that if you make it easy for thieves and incompetents ,you will get thieves and incompetents.

It will be interesting to find out what part the bank played in this affair.

[joe say] 31/12/2013 10:18

I would echo the call for the directors to face striking off - how on earth can they run the company into the ground, seemingly not being aware of that fact ?

The companies acts imply duties on the directors - however in the 'call me Dave' society it seems that those at fault are never subsequently challenged, with the punishment merely being a hollow sound bite

Where are those observing/policing the market ?

And how long do you really think AIM will survive with this apparent disinterest when other markets seem to be far better regulated ?

[pj 1] 31/12/2013 10:06

I'm writing mine off now. If any dividend is paid in the future I'll just add it back

[alter ego] 31/12/2013 09:44

at what point is this going to be eligible as a loss for cgt purposes?