We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register for real-time alerts, custom portfolio, and market movers
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Type | Share ISIN | Share Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Skil Ports & Lg | LSE:SPL | London | Ordinary Share | GG00B53M7D91 | ORD NPV |
| Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.00% | 11.25 | 0.00 | 01:00:00 |
| Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| - |
| Last Trade Time | Trade Type | Trade Size | Trade Price | Currency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | O | 0 | 11.25 | GBX |
Skil Ports & Lg (SPL) Share Charts1 Year Skil Ports & Lg Chart |
|
1 Month Skil Ports & Lg Chart |
Intraday Skil Ports & Lg Chart |
| Date | Time | Title | Posts |
|---|---|---|---|
| 07/11/2022 | 07:22 | SKIL PORTS @ LOGISTICS. much needed (New indian port) | 8,861 |
| 13/10/2016 | 11:21 | sharetips6 AKA trader-mick LSE AKA 21trader BACK AS annonymous2 NOW hatey | 1 |
| 22/6/2016 | 10:15 | SKIL PORTS - is it another dodgy foreign AIM listed coy? | 43 |
| 12/1/2016 | 16:43 | SKIL PORTS | 2 |
| 31/12/2014 | 19:03 | SKIL Ports & Logistics Ltd | 696 |
| Trade Time | Trade Price | Trade Size | Trade Value | Trade Type |
|---|
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 22/3/2017 11:48 by jimblack513 SPL has been renamed Mercantile Ports with ticker MPL.See the MPL thread for some astonishing insights. |
Posted at 18/11/2016 18:19 by clarksons1 DVI'M&G suddenly take a 15% in the company? Why would the British Steel Pension Scheme, Schroeder and L & G dig deep again?' I have no idea, have you asked them? If you have i would very much like to hear the reasons, because none of the numbers now make any sense to me. Also, could they name one small port development project they have invested in previously? And which industry consultants have been advising them in respect to their investment in SPL? Fund managers mostly restrict their investments in the ports sector to major port groups like DP World, that operate deep sea container terminals, which have straightforward, easy to understand economics. I do not accept SPL have reclaimed 75 acres to date( who did the audit?) - i think it is at best around 60 acres of partially reclaimed land. The original Karanja Plan is for a 1000m x 800m Port Area(200 acres) - the latest photographs suggest to me around 50 acres of land under reclamation inshore plus a finger out to where the berth piling is underway. I estimate 500-600m of berth piling when complete would end close to the western extremity of the existing reclamation. This would then produce a total port area of between 100 to 120 acres. It is important to bear in mind the reclamation partially completed to date is mostly the foreshore which requires only modest amounts of sand fill: to complete the reclamation of the same area out to the berth will require many multiples of the volume of material used to date because this area is much deeper and therefore needs a much greater volume of material since it is presently permanently under water. According to the design spec if they complete 300m of berth they will have around 60 acres of land behind it, 600m will have 120 acres and 1,000m 200 acres. The shareholder circular stated they currently have enough money to complete 600m of berth and well over 120 acres of land reclamation - enough for the first 3 to 4 years of operation. So why are they raising further funds at a totally ridiculous share price to develop nearly the entire 200 acres and 1000m of berths BEFOTE commencing any commercial operations - it is complete and utter nonsense. (This is twice the size of the two largest ro-ro terminals on the Thames which have a designed annual throughout capacity of over 12m tonnes). Why not develop the first 120 acres and 600m of berths at Karanja, make it a commercial success and then raise the remainder of the capital to complete the Port through debt or a capital raise at what would then likely be a very much higher share price? (If shareholders are interested in seeing their investment money again, I would suggest they repeatedly ask themselves this question until the only plausible answer becomes clear). With a draft restriction of 4.5m in the Karanja access channel, i cannot see how SPL can generate sufficient revenue from what will be mostly transhipped barge traffic and low value dry bulk cargo on very small freighters, to cover the interest on the debt payment, never mind make a profit. Have you seen any of their latest revenue, cost and profit projections? IMHO - the best £3k to £5k investment shareholders could make would be to appoint a marine engineering consultancy to audit the site development and, to produce a cost estimate for the work carried out to date, and another to complete the development as proposed. Would not surprise me if the following scenario played out over time: the Port failed to produce sufficient profit to pay the interest on the bank loans; the banks foreclosed and took the port and equipment as collateral: following which a consortium led by Ghandi buys the port off the banks for around what they are owed, and then turn it into a pure logistics park, servicing the ever growing needs of the JNPT container shippers and receivers. Without greater depth in the Karanja access channel imo, it is inconceivable that Karanja will be able to generate sufficient high paying, fast moving cargo handling revenue to make it commercially viable. For shareholders sake, i would like to be proved wrong, but would estimate the likelihood of this at less than 5%, which is why i will not reinvest at any price. AIMHO/DYOR |
Posted at 18/11/2016 15:06 by mount teide DVI -'I was annoyed that they didn't raise the funds at a higher level but unfortunately AIM rules didn't help us this time because the company were obliged to announce that it would need to raise further funds before it had done all the work to find out exactly what funds were needed.' This is all disingenuous nonsense from SPL - the design spec has not changed, and anyhow they would be well aware once reclamation work commenced if there was likely to be a material cost over-run, outside the fixed price element of the contract by ITD. I would remind SPL shareholders that Singapore which has one of the top three largest container ports in the world(currently three times the size of all the JNPT terminal combined)has been enlarging its land area for decades and current reclamation costs are around $25/sqm - $100,000/acre. If Singapore can reclaim 200 acres of coastal land for around £20m today(including buying in the sand land fill material) - how come SPL need another £36m to cover over-run reclamation costs, on top of the £110m they have raised in debt and equity to date? As for the spec not changing - Pavin needs to have a look at his own Karanja video presentation, where SPL states the the second 600m of the 1000m of berths will have 10m of water depth alongside. So how did SPL propose to do this if the access channel was going to remain at 4.5m? Its misrepresentation - Answers on a postcard to the Mumbai fraud squad! These guys are totally incompetent amateur port owner/operators who are out of their depth to a level that beggars belief or they are involved in operating a XXXX). It would not suprise me that for around £150m, all shareholders see before the money again runs out, is around 300-400m of berths with 4.5m of water availability, and around 75-100 acres of reclaimed land - something that could probably be built today to a very high spec for £40-50m. |
Posted at 04/11/2016 11:21 by mount teide Hi DVI - my main concern is that the management has been unable to attract a third party port operator(the smart money) as a partner in a port development project with such high commercial potential. I would have been far happier if SPL had raised any further funds from an experienced port operator, or say 50% of it as a further bank loan, than to raise the entire £36m via equity investors and attempt to go it alone - in light of experience i no longer trust Nikhil Ghandi.I do not believe a new port development in Karanja Creek built to what is a very modest technical specification( it does not need to be any more) should be costing anywhere near what management now suggests is needed circa £145m - a huge amount of money for such a development. The Port of Tilbury is around 1,500 acres and has 50 deepwater berths and was bought by Forth Ports for £130m. London Gateway when complete will have 2,700m of 16m draft deepwater berths, 1500 acres of container storage and light industrial/rail fed warehousing - for a total budget cost of £1.5bn. Also at Karanja most experienced port operators would have built a third of the total design specification(say 350m of berths and 60 acres of hardstanding) as a phase one development - got that fully operational and earning revenue BEFORE attempting to complete phase 2 and 3 of the development. For example,at London Gateway the total development is expected to take 20 years to complete since after phase 1, the next two phases will be built in line with commercial demand. It makes zero financial sense to virtually complete the build out of the entire port terminal before starting any commercial operations. Also, i am not happy with the very vague contractual relationship between SPL and ITD that has been publicly disclosed, considering the size of the contract value. Despite considerable effort i have never been able to get any detailed information as to what exactly is in the contract for 'Marine Facilities at Karanja'. I suspect it is considerably less than shareholders will see and expect before the cash again runs out. I estimate management has spent around £65m to date in cash and debt - an almost unbelievable sum of money for what is currently on show at Karanja - the numbers just don't add up! If i were L&G, i would call in a shipping and ports industry professional and go through the entire project with SPL management in considerable depth - and unless SPL came up with satisfactory answers to the questions i have raised, and many others that i would want clarification on, advise L&G not to put in any further cash. Lord Flight is putting in just £100k of his own considerable fortune at 10p - a 96% discount to the IPO price. I would suggest if he was offered the opportunity to invest in a part completed commercial property development in London at a 96% discount to the original investors, he and his investment funds would take up the entire £36m himself and leave nothing for other investors. Sorry, i am unable to be more positive but the numbers, company statements, progress to date and revised development timetable and cost for the project simply no longer make any sense to me - and presumably the ports Industry too since SPL appears to have been unable to find any interest from any of the major port groups, who are currently cash rich. The Ports Groups are not suffering like much of the shipping industry is today, since the ports industry has increased capacity in line with the growth in world GDP, not many multiples of it as the low cost to entry shipping industry has done. AIMHO/DYOR |
Posted at 04/11/2016 01:21 by mount teide When the news changes - i change my mind.The reason i invested is because i am familiar with Mumbai Port and always believed the commercial prospects for a new general cargo port on the Uran Peninsula handling the type of shipping historically handled at Mumbai's Indira Docks in the Old Harbour is a commercial 'no brainer', due to the much improved geographical location, road and sea access. It very much remains the case. SPL Management with a little prompting identified that Karanja would in fact be particularly attractive to short sea ro-ro operators - a branch of shipping that although mature in Europe is only just taking off in India. It offers by far the most productive berth and land utilisation - many modern ro-ro terminals now handle the equivalent of 8.0m tonne annual throughput with just two berths and 80 acres of hardstanding - but they need at least 6.0m of depth in the approach channels to handle the ships. What changed my view of SPL is two things: I grew progressively tired of the embarrassingly naive and evasive answers i continued to get from the MD, who i got the impression does not really like India, has no professional experience running a port or a shipping company, and is supported by a now COO also with no shipping industry experience and whose port experience/professio The NED's although highly experienced have also been disappointing. IMO they have failed to provide investors with the necessary oversight as to how so much money can be 'spent' for so little physical asset return - i know of fully complete ultra modern 600m twin berth, 50 acre port terminals built in Europe for less money than SPL has currently spent to date. This is the primary reason i believe SPL has been unable to attract a third party partner from an industry which initially had considerable interest in the project and its prospects. When a management is forced to raise a sum more than 50% of that raised at IPO, but at a 96% discount to the IPO price, to complete a port development project, something is very, very amiss with that management. IMO none of the executive management would still be in the job if they worked for a major port group and had delivered the standard of project budget control shareholders have experienced at SPL. AIMHO/DYOR |
Posted at 20/9/2016 12:52 by george short lefrene: "Once the thing becomes an earner there is likely to be a change of sentiment"At the current time SPL is, frankly,a somewhat speculative investment in terms of how the whole project will pan out. However once the thing becomes an earner it has been derisked and the share price will be many multiples of 10p. I have taken the view that it has greater value than the current share price but will be "digging up the acorn" at every bit of news so reserve the right to re-evaluate my involvement as time progresses. |
Posted at 18/9/2016 12:02 by jojaken Thank you Hatey (8376) for helping us understand why the SPL fell by so much on Friday afternoon. Clearly there wasn’t any insider manipulation etc. behind the fall. It was just there wasn’t anyone buying on the other side of your trades. I was actually mildly surprised you could get your full 90k of share away at all within the day! Unfortunately for management this compelled the statement at the market close. While I’m often cynical of such statements, in this case I am not. There was nothing in the statement that we didn’t already know *expect the size of the shortfall*.We knew it would be large, but had hoped not this large. Now we have a figure. But what would a finished port be worth to the likes of say JNPT? Well SPL have spent very approximately US$150m plus this additional £36m ($50m) for a total of $200m for a functioning port mid next year. Having taken at least eight years to get to this stage, this being India, it would difficult to replicate. So its value lies in how valuable is this port capacity compared to when the port was conceived. By all accounts the port capacity shortage has worsened. So I would argue if a fund raising is difficult, it would be better to sell the port, clear the debt and pass on any cash to the shareholders. With a debt facility of $50m (partially but not fully used yet) that should leave multiples of today’s share price to distribute. All IMHO. |
Posted at 17/9/2016 23:37 by deepvalueinvestor Clearly not good news but why bother with the new directors if it is such a hopeless case? It also seems very strange that they don't raise the funds months ago when the share price was much higher. As mentioned, a placing at 40p when the share price was 80p would have seemed logical. I am sure the trolls will love this. Just relieved I reduced above 70p to provide funds for a future placing. Good luck to all the genuine investors who have been let down by the mismanagement of what continues to be a promising opportunity. |
Posted at 14/9/2016 07:52 by hatey GUERNSEY, St. Peter Port – SKIL Ports & Logistics (AIM:SPL), which is developing a modern port and logistics facility in India, is pleased to announce the appointment of Lord Flight as Non-Executive Director and Jay Mehta as Chief Operating Director of the Company.This is a transformational period for the business and these appointments bolster the Board, supporting the Company’s execution and operational phase. In addition, the appointments are part of a series of initiatives planned to further enhance the Company’s communication with UK shareholders. Lord Flight, aged 68, joins SPL with significant experience operating both in the City and in India, and has long campaigned for closer commercial relations between Britain and India. He has acted as Chairman of Arden Partners and Joint Chairman of Investec Asset Management, as well as a Director of Panmure Gordon and Co, and joint founder and Managing Director of Guinness Flight Global Asset Management. Lord Flight also enjoyed a successful political career, acting as Conservative MP for Arundel for eight years. During this time, he held positions as Shadow Economic Secretary to the Treasury, Shadow Paymaster General and Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury. Jay Mehta, aged 41, is appointed to the Board having been with the Company from inception. Jay is Chief Operating Officer of Karanja Terminals & Logistics Private Limited and SPL. He has 13 years’ experience in port operations and management, port marketing, logistics planning and financial services. Jay is an electronic engineering graduate, and holds a Diploma in Port, Shipping and Transport Management from the International Maritime Transport Academy, Rotterdam and a Masters in Business Administration (MBA) from Fordham University, New York. In addition to these appointments, the Board is pleased to announce that Andrew Henderson has joined SPL as Head of Finance and will report to the Board. Since qualifying as an accountant, Andrew has worked for both Deloitte and Grant Thornton. More recently Andrew has held finance roles for companies in the UK and internationally. Commenting on his appointment, Lord Flight said, “I am delighted to be joining SPL. This is an exciting time for the Company as it aims to progress the port to commercial operations. I have been impressed with the work that has been achieved to date and I share in the Company’s vision for its future direction as a key player in India’s high growth economy.” Managing Director Pavan Bakhshi said, “These appointments will not only bolster the Board at such a pivotal time, but will help us to maintain regular dialogue with our shareholders. Lord Flight’s experience, both from a PLC perspective but also his invaluable commercial understanding and relationships in India will be a huge asset to the Company. Jay Mehta’s tenure with SPL has been impressive and he is highly regarded, both internally and externally. Having been involved with this project from the outset, Jay’s input on the Board will be key. “ Nikhil Gandhi, Chairman said, “We are making good progress on the ground in India. The Company as a whole is adapting to moving away from a concept to an operating reality. With that being said I welcome Lord Flight and Jay Mehta to the Board of Directors. The coming months will be exciting times for the Company as a whole.” |
Posted at 28/7/2016 14:03 by guernseymoney I thought I’d better get this down sooner or later, so I don’t forget it. Here goes…So I attended the SPL AGM this morning here in a not-so-sunny Guernsey. In retrospect, I should have challenged more, asked different/more difficult questions, but was the only shareholder there and it was tough asking the questions, writing down answers and thinking of next questions etc. Also, you always think of good points to make or retorts once it’s too late… That said, I feel I personally benefitted from seeing the board members in the flesh and meeting them and hearing from them directly. Anyhow, the AGM itself took all of ten minutes to go through. Further my earlier post, here is what I took away (E&OE): What is “Phase 1”? What will be completed by end of 2016? Jay Metha answered this on speakerphone. They expect 300m of jetty to be completed by end of this year. When built, the jetty will be 1000m long. At 300m, it will be able to accommodate a big ship/barge. Re logistics park, 30 hectares already reclaimed, going well, now things on the ground have gained traction. Once port built, around 200 hectares reclaimed. Will logistic operations (and associated revenue) begin before port operations or at the same time?: Same time most likely, not beforehand. Idea of ship repair facility: SPL’s location is not a 3rd/4th tier city, at Navi Mumbai, it’s the “gateway to India”. No other facility closeby and has huge potential, lots of passing ships. Again, per RNS, not something they will do before port is operation. Pavan has had loads of earache about that point from disgruntled shareholders. Cost overruns: So much time spent doing environmental clearance, things stopped and started above what was predicted in fixed price. Community-based involvement (i.e. CSR responsibilities) for SPL: Not likely to have a material cost to the company. Villagers/Locals politicians objecting to construction of port: This was not exclusively directed at SPL as some shareholders believed, but more of an uprising against modernity/loss of jobs in the area. Slowed construction down a lot at the early stages, but now been rectified. Infrastructure for actual port: Covered in remaining funds, but costs are likely to be higher than they were in 2013. Not using much Chinese imported goods (subject to import embargoes perhaps). Additional NEDs: I asked why they wanted additional NEDs, when Messrs. Sutcliffe and Jones were so well-experienced. Pavan said that, as the company was growing, they wanted to attract NEDs with different skill-sets (perhaps to woo City/II’s) and now the project was in full swing, would be good to have someone on the ground. Why no directors have not bought shares: I didn’t have the balls to ask! It’s an interesting one though. Maybe they plan to soon. Other info: Pavan said his vision was for SPL to be a UK-based leading Indian infrastrucure company and he was fully aware how the delays etc had damaged his and the other directors reputation, but he had no doubts the port would be built. He said he understood the frustrations of investors and was aware of the ADVFN bulletin board and was kept updated as to the chitter-chatter on here. He actually asked me if my pseudonym was “guernseymoney He added that he took retail/private investors just as seriously/important as II’s and said he is available to answer questions for anyone who wants to ask them. He gave a positive outlook for India, none of which was new, but he was very excited, clearly, about building the port. This I believe was sincere. In sum, just as I did before the AGM, I genuinely believe this is a good, undervalued investment and will transpire and materialise. But what I can’t predict is where the share price will be next year or the year after or what weight to give the financing risk, but all-in-all, I think the many positives outweigh this risk. This is still so totally oversold in my opinion and once they finalise the financing, it’s got so much going for it. Right place, right time, etc. But is painful to see the share price where it is. Watch and wait. I am going to be off-radar now for a few days. Good luck all. |
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions
Hot Features
Premium
