Amerisur Resources Share Discussion Threads

[thegreatgeraldo] 28/11/2019 11:30

sabre6
28 Nov '19 - 11:23 - 25269 of 25269
0 1 0
If unsuccesfull why would share price drop to 12p as Mp would keep the share price supported.
It then should allow management to get on with production and exploration

....awwwwwww.... a nice happy ending

[sabre6] 28/11/2019 11:23

If unsuccesfull why would share price drop to 12p as Mp would keep the share price supported.
It then should allow management to get on with production and exploration as they would/must realise that they have not got the control over share holders they thought they had.
Vote NO

[thegreatgeraldo] 28/11/2019 10:01

Any rival bidder would have picked up a 3% starting stake several days ago..... plenty of stock changing hands. Most of the buyers are presumably picking up free halfpennies

[tyler durden1] 28/11/2019 09:55

Roll

Even with 50.1pc a bidder would have insufficient to compulsorily purchase the rest

[rollthedice] 28/11/2019 09:25

Ooh err lol.

I'll vote for the deal, the only deal on the table. It's a choice between that or continued underperformance for x years ahead. I can understand why some are angry /disappointed enough to vote the deal down but in my view they have not laid out a credible alternative which they can deliver and is guaranteed to return anything better. That's the honest truth, at least as far as I'm concerned.

[acv74] 28/11/2019 09:16

You can bend over and take what's coming if you like mate.

[rollthedice] 28/11/2019 08:59

Another bidder could go the takeover route, hostile if necessary. To take control of the business they only need 50.1%. Irrevocable undertakings or not BoD wouldn't be steering the ship anymore in that scenario and so would eventually fall in line.

I think we'd have seen a move by now if one was coming but I'm happy to be pleasantly surprised!

At least our misery should end in the new year.

[tyler durden1] 28/11/2019 08:41

So they need 75pc which might not be achieved even with directors irrevocable undertakings.

Quite why even directors would give such undertakings when effectively they act as a potential block for a higher bidder is anyone’s guess.

Why would any director not seem to wish for higher bidder. Seems nuts. Unless I’m missing something.

Because the irrevocable undertakings are near to 25pc of company it would kneecap any other suitor if they have to obtain 75pc

[3roach] 28/11/2019 08:37

I could live with 12p for a while.

[xxnjr] 28/11/2019 08:23

Why? If they lose the vote, the share price goes back to 12p?

[acv74] 28/11/2019 08:18

GC can stick his dirty deal.Vote against.

[rollthedice] 28/11/2019 08:08

Any white knight now knows they have a maximum 3 week window to act. I'm not holding my breath :(

[bibdaddy] 28/11/2019 07:37

The latest RNS for Amerisur is like a getting letter from a mugger telling you when they are going to get you!!

[moneylender] 27/11/2019 18:52

Tyler you have a DM

[thegreatgeraldo] 27/11/2019 17:17

Blimey, you've worked out how takeovers progress. Price is agreed, then the paperwork & process is gone thru

[lucyp00p] 27/11/2019 17:15

So it's like inflation. Every day Amerisur us worth a little bit more as recovered oil must have a greater value than p1 reserves and yet Amerisur is simply functioning to generate wealth for a company which doesn't own a share and has fixed a bid for an indefinite period, thereby accumulating all the earnings generated, while every day, the effective discount to the NAV increases, making shareholders worse off. Neat.Of course there is no way this deal is going through so it's moot.

[tyler durden1] 27/11/2019 15:29

GENERAL PRINCIPLES
1. All holders of the securities of an offeree company of the same class must be afforded equivalent treatment; moreover, if a person acquires control of a company, the other holders of securities must be protected.
2. The holders of the securities of an offeree company must have sufficient time and information to enable them to reach a properly informed decision on the bid; where it advises the holders of securities, the board of the offeree company must give its views on the effects of implementation of the bid on employment, conditions of employment and the locations of the company’s places of business.
3. The board of an offeree company must act in the interests of the company as a whole and must not deny the holders of securities the opportunity to decide on the merits of the bid.
4. False markets must not be created in the securities of the offeree company, of the offeror company or of any other company concerned by the bid in such a way that the rise or fall of the prices of the securities becomes artificial and the normal functioning of the markets is distorted.
5. An offeror must announce a bid only after ensuring that he/she can fulfil in full any cash consideration, if such is offered, and after taking all reasonable measures to secure the implementation of any other type of consideration.
6. An offeree company must not be hindered in the conduct of its affairs for longer than is reasonable by a bid for its securities.


DEFINITIONS
Acting in concert
This definition has particular relevance to mandatory offers and further guidance with regard to behaviour which constitutes acting in concert is given in the Notes on Rule 9.1.
Persons acting in concert comprise persons who, pursuant to an agreement or understanding (whether formal or informal), co-operate to obtain or consolidate control (as defined below) of a company or to frustrate the successful outcome of an offer for a company. A person and each of its affiliated persons will be deemed to be acting in concert all with each other (see Note 2 below).
Without prejudice to the general application of this definition, the following persons will be presumed to be persons acting in concert with other persons in the same category unless the contrary is established:
(1) a company, its parent, subsidiaries and fellow subsidiaries, and their associated companies, and companies of which such companies are associated companies, all with each other (for this purpose ownership or control of 20% or more of the equity share capital of a company is regarded as the test of associated company status);
(2) a company with its directors (together with their close relatives and the related trusts of any of them);
(3) a company with any of its pension schemes and the pension schemes of any company described in (1);
(4) a fund manager (including an exempt fund manager) with any investment company, unit trust or other person whose investments such fund manager manages on a discretionary basis, in respect of the relevant investment accounts;
(5) a person, the person’s close relatives, and the related trusts of any of them, all with each other;
(6) the close relatives of a founder of a company to which the Code applies, their close relatives, and the related trusts of any of them, all with each other;
(7) a connected adviser with its client and, if its client is acting in concert with an offeror or the offeree company, with that offeror or offeree company respectively, in each case in respect of the interests in shares of that adviser and persons controlling#, controlled by or under the same control as that adviser (except in the capacity of an exempt fund manager or an exempt principal trader);

Acting in concert
This definition has particular relevance to mandatory offers and further guidance with regard to behaviour which constitutes acting in concert is given in the Notes on Rule 9.1.
Persons acting in concert comprise persons who, pursuant to an agreement or understanding (whether formal or informal), co-operate to obtain or consolidate control (as defined below) of a company or to frustrate the successful outcome of an offer for a company. A person and each of its affiliated persons will be deemed to be acting in concert all with each other (see Note 2 below).
Without prejudice to the general application of this definition, the following persons will be presumed to be persons acting in concert with other persons in the same category unless the contrary is established:
(1) a company, its parent, subsidiaries and fellow subsidiaries, and their associated companies, and companies of which such companies are associated companies, all with each other (for this purpose ownership or control of 20% or more of the equity share capital of a company is regarded as the test of associated company status);
(2) a company with its directors (together with their close relatives and the related trusts of any of them);
(3) a company with any of its pension schemes and the pension schemes of any company described in (1);
(4) a fund manager (including an exempt fund manager) with any investment company, unit trust or other person whose investments such fund manager manages on a discretionary basis, in respect of the relevant investment accounts;
(5) a person, the person’s close relatives, and the related trusts of any of them, all with each other;
(6) the close relatives of a founder of a company to which the Code applies, their close relatives, and the related trusts of any of them, all with each other;
(7) a connected adviser with its client and, if its client is acting in concert with an offeror or the offeree company, with that offeror or offeree company respectively, in each case in respect of the interests in shares of that adviser and persons controlling#, controlled by or under the same control as that adviser (except in the capacity of an exempt fund manager or an exempt principal trader);
(8) directors of a company which is subject to an offer or where the directors have reason to believe a bona fide offer for their company may be imminent. (See also Note 5); and
(9) shareholders in a private company who sell their shares in that company in consideration for the issue of new shares in a company to which the Code applies, or who, following the re-registration of that company as a public company in connection with an initial public offering or otherwise, become shareholders in a company to which the Code applies.

NOTES ON ACTING IN CONCERT 1. Break up of concert parties
Where the Panel has ruled that a group of persons is acting in concert, it will be necessary for clear evidence to be presented to the Panel before it can be accepted that the position no longer obtains.

[tyler durden1] 27/11/2019 15:00

Just email takeover panel explain circumstances if you are unhappy, as they can block a bid

Article 7 of the takeover code cited in the RNS seems to refer only to FEES and CHARGES?

[e-mail]
[e-mail]

[kelotoni] 27/11/2019 14:55

Being an eternal optimist, could " In addition, a special resolution, to deal with certain matters ancillary to the Scheme" be a distribution of the cash in the bank to shareholders by way of a special dividend??? Pigs might fly I suppose.

[thegreatgeraldo] 27/11/2019 14:54

Lucyp00p
27 Nov '19 - 14:50 - 25249 of 25249
0 0 0
We don't get a penny from this tho, am I right?
Any delay to the bid is adding $300,000 per day to the pot and yet it doesn't belong to the company




Of course it belongs to the company!!! The company which, as it currently stands, is being bought by GPRK

[lucyp00p] 27/11/2019 14:50

We don't get a penny from this tho, am I right?Any delay to the bid is adding $300,000 per day to the pot and yet it doesn't belong to the company under the terms on offer.

[xxnjr] 27/11/2019 14:33

Thought you may be interested in Sept Prod'n nos, lifted from ANH.

Plat: 4503 Highest monthly production since Apr 2018.
Mariposa: 3112 Very Stable over the months.
Indico: 4747 Highest monthly number since coming online.
Sol-1 : 0

Total Sept w/int for company: 6861 Highest monthly since Dec 2017.

[bigwavedave] 27/11/2019 11:26

greatgeraldo - thanks. Understood. Still feels like they are giving away something for nothing though!