Athelney Share Discussion Threads

[mw8156] 27/1/2019 23:01

Better outcomes now would be
1 a merger at a fair price into Gresham House Strategic

2 a takeover at a fair price by Emmanuel Pohl's firm or Emmanuel Pohl himself

3 an orderly winding down of the company and return of capital.

Robin Boyle's calling of the EGM has resulted in a disastrous outcome, and is all the more upsetting in that we were told he had announced his intention originally to stand down in Autumn last year.

[topvest] 27/1/2019 21:14

A bit harsh - last year I think the record was a 17% total return per annum since IPO in 1994. Not bad. Obviously, the last 6m has not been great!

[charo] 27/1/2019 09:28

The biggest failure of management has been the total lack of ambition.What is the point of athelney.

[charo] 25/1/2019 18:44

Who has investment mandate.The directors are in severe danger of being impotent to manage the trust.Could they be held liable for losses from appointment.

[charo] 25/1/2019 18:43

Who has investment mandate.The directors are in severe danger of being impotent to manage the trust.Could they be held liable for losses from appointment.

[topvest] 25/1/2019 18:18

Yes, fairly shambolic. Nothing happens unless the two big shareholders agree. Trouble is...I suspect that they are not even talking to each other, but throwing darts at each other’s picture! Pohl might not be prepared to exit. I voted for Robin, but am now regretting it as he has now put us in a much worse position. I think that Pohl and Boyl need to start talking. I’m going to hang in there for now. A good dividend is due shortly, but I’m disappointed in how Robin has handled his retirement. Not very clever, to put it mildly! I think the vote underlines that shareholders are now fed up with both of them. Pohl for pushing Boyl over the line and Boyl for falling into an emotional meltdown.
The consensus, is probably...let’;s have our cash back.
Next steps may well be Pohl buying more shares and having another go.
OR
Tender offer.
OR
Takeover bid.
OR
Stalemate.
The market is currently pricing in the last option in my view.

[charo] 25/1/2019 16:14

Two rookie directors with zilch plc experience.extraordinary.

[danny baker] 25/1/2019 14:35

Maybe the answer, as has already been suggested, would be a recommended shares for shares offer from another investment trust like Gresham House Strategic or possibly Miton UK Micro Cap at say a 10% discount to asset value. A cash alternative could be provided which would have a similar effect to a tender offer. That way investors could choose between rolling over their accrued capital gains into another investment trust or exiting part or all of their investment for cash.

[danny baker] 25/1/2019 11:35

And Coffin, one of the re-elected non-execs has now bailed out. Yes as people have pointed out this is a Brexit-scale shambles.

[rooky4] 25/1/2019 08:26

Surely there is a current CEO and fund manager - Pohl, who receives 0.75% in fees.
The board votes don't directly affect this.
Any termination of IT fund managers usually results in compensation: costs in this spat could quickly take a significant chunk of the assets.

[topvest] 24/1/2019 21:24

Quite amusing that Boyle and Pohl have neutralised each other. Net result.... they are both off the Board even though they are the 2 largest shareholders! What a ridiculous situation as they now have no fund manager. That being said, doing nothing is quite a successful investment strategy...so might out-perform!

I wonder what they will do on the tender offer as that was approved. Boyle and Pohl need to have a conversation to agree a way forward, although that may be wishful thinking. Who is the fund manager now?

[topvest] 24/1/2019 21:21

What a disaster unless Gresham House get involved. A totally bizarre result. Otherwise, it looks like its game over to me and time to wind-up the company.

[rooky4] 24/1/2019 19:16

According to AIC, there is a continuation vote at the AGM 2020 (March). That's the Backstop (sorry)

[mw8156] 23/1/2019 20:54

This EGM has resulted in the worst possible outcome very similar to our politics of a hung parliament: the existing Directors being voted off and Robin not being voted back on so no clear direction for the company,
think Simon Moore and Emmanuel Pohl should have circulated the shareholders with the detail of their plans long before the EGM motion was called and should have been a lot more proactive in opposing proposals 2-9,
small selling today has capsized the share price so to raise more money for the company seems impossible unless the share price miraculously revives,
best outcome would be for Gresham House or another institution to make a takeover offer or for the company expeditiously and cheaply to be wound up and the assets to be distributed fairly,
as a small shareholder, I fear for my investment and think there is a very real chance that value may not be realised or eaten up in charges.

[charo] 23/1/2019 10:14

Maybe but so,ution is to appoint Boyle as manager and put a further single issue to shareholders Re appoint Boyle as director.

[profithunter1] 22/1/2019 18:44

I think people are understandably confused by the voting at today's EGM. If you look at the voting pattern, taking into account votes withheld, other than agenda item one and two, the voting was broadly 970k-990k in favour of Boyle's proposals and 880-900k against. So,there was a strong trend in favour of Boyle's proposals. My guess is that since the Notice of EGM agenda was different to that on the Form of Proxy in respect to items one and two,some voters were understandably confused and mistakenly voted against Boyle and in favour of the proposed tender. My assumption is that the new board, consisting of Lawman and Coffin, will vote Boyle back on the board. Gresham House seem to have a reasonable track record in the smaller companies' sector and the potential arrangements between the two should solve the succession issue. Confusing I know, but I believe the result was probably best for shareholders as a whole.

[charo] 22/1/2019 18:27

Boyle not wanted on board by shareholders.Passed sell by date.
Now time to move forward.

[danny baker] 22/1/2019 17:25

Haha Rooky4 I didn't scroll down as far as that last line which presumably is a hangover from using the AGM announcement as a first draft. That's what happens when the office junior writes the RNS releases. The first resolution should also read Tender Offer not Tender off. David Lawman is a 'well-seasoned' stockbroker who I believe is currently with Daniel Stewart. If I was a director I would feel obliged to entertain a tender offer but at the same time request proposals from any interested parties to expand the trust with a placing to new investors and appointment of an investment manager.

[rooky4] 22/1/2019 17:06

Can anyone make any sense of the EGM results, as published?

Boyle's off the board, but so are the Pohls.
So we have a new board, without any info on Lawson or Coffin; if they are Boyle's nominees then Boyle is back as manager?

There can be a tender, however the fund raising was down to the Pohls, but presumably they won't be interested if they are out of control. So are we looking at wind-up, as this IT surely can't shrink and survive. Or will the new directors just forget about a tender.

Just to finish the confusion, there is the last line:
"Resolutions 1 to 8 were passed unanimously with 42 voting FOR and representing 1,302,011 shares. No votes AGAINST and no votes WITHHELD."

[danny baker] 22/1/2019 15:54

Interesting voting result topvest. Boyle and the Pohls not voted back onto the board but a vote in favour of the tender. Presumably this is a vote for partial liquidation so that shareholders can exit at asset value. Tricky situation for the remaining directors to resolve.

[topvest] 16/1/2019 10:59

Share price going down. Indicates to me that the tender offer is likely to be defeated and Robin may be getting back on board.

[topvest] 11/1/2019 20:44

Agreed, that its a bit sneaky of the company issuing this at 3pm on a Friday.

[topvest] 11/1/2019 20:41

I've decided to vote for Robin and Gresham House. Purely, because VALUE investing is what we got into with Athelney Trust and Pohl is more GROWTH investing. Its the wrong time in the cycle for that. Robin has messed-up big time with his resignation, but it sounds to me like Pohl has been moving in to take control. Gresham House are good and I have been in since the investment trust days. They have created a £2bn AUM business with 3 or 4 years, and have good track-records.

[pelliot] 11/1/2019 15:56

Athelney registrars issuing the response to shareholders this late in the day is poor show.