Assetco Share Discussion Threads

[the drewster] 15/9/2011 17:51

Ultimately, who is accountable here?

Previous management?

The auditors for signing off the accounts?

Were there false statements made in regard to the financial health of the company?

Or are there gaping holes in the regulations that allow this to happen and hence happen again?

[nico9] 15/9/2011 16:08

DOH, another one bites the dust for me then. it was exciting while it lasted lol just dont tell my Mrs!!

[pre] 15/9/2011 15:31

looks like curtains here...another aim stock hits the wall:-(

[topinfo] 15/9/2011 15:30

DJ Arcapita Statement re no intention to make an offer

TIDMZZZZ TIDMASTO

RNS Number : 3353O

Arcapita

15 September 2011

NOT FOR RELEASE, PUBLICATION OR DISTRIBUTION IN WHOLE OR IN PART, IN OR INTO OR FROM, ANY JURISDICTION WHERE TO DO SO WOULD CONSTITUTE A VIOLATION OF THE RELEVANT LAWS OF SUCH JURISDICTION.

15 September 2011

Arcapita Bank B.S.C.(c) ("Arcapita")

No intention to make an offer for AssetCo plc ("AssetCo" or the "Company")

Following extensive negotiations with the Company and its creditors, Arcapita has decided to withdraw its offer proposal and confirms that it does not intend to make an offer for AssetCo. Arcapita invested significant time and resource into assessing an investment in the Company but it has been unable to reach satisfactory agreement with the Company's existing lenders and preference share holders, and is therefore unable to put an offer to the shareholders of the Company.

For the purposes of Rule 2.8 of the City Code on Takeovers and Mergers (the "Takeover Code"), Arcapita reserves the right to announce an offer or possible offer or make or participate in an offer or possible offer for AssetCo (and/or take any other action which would otherwise be restricted under Rule 2.8 of the Takeover Code) within the next six months following the date of this announcement:

(i) with the agreement or recommendation of the Board of AssetCo;

(ii) following the announcement by or on behalf of a third party of a firm intention to make an offer for AssetCo or AssetCo announces that it has received an approach in relation to a possible offer from a third party;

(iii) following the announcement by AssetCo of a "whitewash" proposal or a reverse takeover, other than the current "whitewash" proposal (including any subsequent amendments) announced on 9 September 2011; and

(iv) if there is a material change of circumstances.

Enquiries:

[leedsu36] 15/9/2011 08:34

I thought it was Borating...lol

Caledonia you've been Boratted!....

Now don't blame others for your gambling attitude towards investing.
Remember he who dares wins.

Only this time Rodders you lost.

The wake up coffee smell time here was yonks ago and you never saw the woods for the trees.....perhaps Treacle toffee was hindering your view...

[greedfear] 12/9/2011 16:57

I forgot: there's ALWAYS hope!

(and....it's only money, just some numbers on a piece of paper [or on a screen])

[myun] 12/9/2011 15:56

dose any one has any hope getting some money back

[rorrys] 12/9/2011 07:30

You really are an idiot .
You have no idea how to read financial reports etc.
With such a vast ignorance of such matters you shouldnt be allowed possesion of a piggy bank let along a share dealing account.
Give it a rest son its over the deal you are being offered is the best you are going to get.
And, you should think yourself lucky your getting anything at all.

[greedfear] 12/9/2011 01:37

Treacle- The investors group (in orchestration with the BOD) are only interested in ONE solution. To get (almost) full control (financial interest) in Asto group paying the absolute minimum for that (giving the current shareholders the finger)and in an Asto group that due to creditors sacrifices is in a sound financial condition (profitable with decimated debts).

Personally I think they're balancing on the edge of legality here (misuse of power, not acting fair and reasonable towards other shareholders etc.).
The 25-7 RNS mentioned 'material' write downs for creditors and preference shareholders and 'significant' dilution for existing shareholders.
I believe in financial terms material is worse then significant.
Further more, given the dilution that the proposals from the investors group were to imply the RNS should contain the strongest possible wording regarding that point. Substantial dilution would have been better.

It is highly, highly, unlikely that after receiving the investors group refinancing proposal "it is expected that this proposal will require shareholder approval (RNS 25-7)". Expected? There's nothing to be expected here: the proposal will require shareholder approval.

One could ask why material write downs in the end seems to mean 77% for creditors of the company but (only) 50% for preference shareholders.


Etc.etc.

(Only one hope left now: a white knight, otherwise ....)

[greedfear] 11/9/2011 18:02

I'm going to vote no as well.

I too think the suspension is not intended to prevent pi's from selling but to prevent more powerfull parties from buying.

Now the shares are nicely distributed over a large crowd that have every reason to think they've been had, but can't get organized, making their opinions in effect meaningless.

The financial year change serves only one purpose: stop trading and make as sure as possible that this rip off will take place.

The parties involved have got no scruples, no ethics, no consideration with others, but I've got to admire the scenario they've been written and are following.

I thought a 10p placing was possible (in lalaland, yes), I thought a 2p placing would be reasonable, I thought a 1p placing to be my worst case scenario.
But this outcome? A dilution above imagination and no way of getting out or preventing it, no that was not in my book.

Another lesson learned. Not sure if it will contribute to me being a better human, because what comes to mind now is I'm going to f. each and everyone in future! No integrety, no mercy! lol

[effortless cool] 11/9/2011 17:03

Agreed - all very fishy.

Possibly suspension engineered to stop potential purchaser buying in market, rather than to prevent PIs exiting?

Also, note that Tudor Davies has installed himself as company secretary, so will directly control all minute taking.

It's a bit unfair to blame current employees. It's original management that were at the root of the problem, although I would say there are questions regarding the behaviour and competence of curent management.

[spiker4] 11/9/2011 16:45

Finished reading the company circular. and many questions come to mind.

Is it legal to suddently suspend the company trading on AIM on the basis that companies' financail year has changed? or because the accounts need to be audited? Hence, a means of stopping us PIs to sell even when we want to.

If the negotiations with regards to the takeover had reached a very advanced stage why did it suddnetly go dry? And why is there no info about this in the report. Need to find out what terms would have been reached and whether the shareholders would better of with that offer.

Also, why are the current employees not getting a pinch on this, all their jobs and employment rights will be protected if the resolution gets passed. Their incompetence and mismanagement is the primary cause of this financail disaster.


Is it fair that I loose 90% and the creditors loose 70-80% whilst the new shareholders will get 88% discount on the new shares.
Personally, I am going to vote no. If I am going to loose 90% of my investment (@ 2.4p) loosing the 10% is not going to be that material for me.

Regards

[john09] 11/9/2011 14:02

So much fighting on here? Look u all knew what u were buying here. It was always hit or bust . It's a wrecker this. Move on. Close this board down or at least stop fighting

[rorrys] 10/9/2011 15:11

Immature kid who is far to emmotional to be involved in this game.
Shoots his gob of like all cowards.

[grannyboy] 10/9/2011 13:38

Caledonianman grow up!! you really are showing how imature you are....

[effortless cool] 10/9/2011 13:16

The best way to view this thread:



RorryS - 10 Sep'11 - 11:51 - 2130 of 2131 (Filtered)


Caledoniaman1 - 10 Sep'11 - 12:53 - 2131 of 2131 (Filtered)

[caledoniaman1] 10/9/2011 12:53

post me your e-mail address RorryS and I will e-mail you mine - we can then meet to discuss further.

[rorrys] 10/9/2011 11:51

Caledoniaman makes his threats from behind the safety of his keyboard , he uses the annonymity to save his face yet accuses others .You couldnt make it up!!!!
But he did , he threatens like a playground bully and has the audacity to say I am the bully when anyone reading his posts can see him for what he really is.
A read back of this thread and you will see his cretinous ramping and fantastical price predictions which were and are completely and utterly wrong in every possible way.
He has lost a lot of money here due to his own incompetence and idiocy.I hope nobody listened to him and did likewise.
Remember that the next time you see him posting his utterly unfounded nonsense on any other share.

[grannyboy] 10/9/2011 10:23

Caledoniaman and the like, except the inevitablility of your gung ho pumping of ASTO and the wastefulness of your capital, So you should be thanking the likes of RorryS and Effortless Cool for endeavouring to save gullable investors being drawn in, rather then slagging them off....