Beacon Hill Share Discussion Threads

[redbike_lse] 21/12/2014 12:27

If you want to complain about BHR to the correct body and want real success.
Remember all complaints are confidential you submit, so it is of course to okay to say "I have complained"
But should never say what it is you complained about as the nature of it is confidential.
Last thing you want is to tip off who ever it is with your complaint or complaints for them to try to cover any tracks. Once complaint is lodged your part is over and await the result of the investigation.

This is what I would advise in order to make a strong complaint to the body responsible in order that
you don't waste time in back and forward correspondence, if you want to complain about any irregularities
you feel should be investigated under AIM Rules. This would be the best way to do it.
You cant just complain BHR have broke rules, you must say what those rules are they have broken.
As already stated, if there are lots of complaints and you feel that rules have been broken saying and doing is going to bring more rewards, than just having a moan on here. Doing your bit is of equal importance.

How to be effective if you want to go the extra mile.

1.Put together a very comprehensive package to make it easier and faster, detailing your complaint or complaints.

2.List document references, dates, people, provide URLs to those documents, attachments, etc etc

3.mail the body at [e-mail] with the package you put together.


Red

[highly geared] 21/12/2014 11:53

OliversAnvil; shares being suspended and BOD salaries are not linked. It needs the BOD to resign or an EGM convened to raise a no confidence vote in the BOD. The no confidence vote might be a possibility if the PI shareholding can somehow act as an "entity" but I don't know how it would work. Ideally, the BOD need ousting ASAP as they will draw salaries/benefits until such time they leave.

I note recently with TPL that a major shareholder with PI support raised issues and got most of the BOD to resign within a few weeks and a new PI backed BOD in place. Might be a possibility for BHR.

In terms of administration; my understanding is BHR sub leased the rolling stock but have head lease liability so "cost neutral"?

The question is , is BHR shuts up shop, what's the saleable value of the assets less any debt/secured creditors? Anything more than £1.15 million and the current actions are worth it...

[dan158] 21/12/2014 09:56

Spread Betting and CFDs December Magazine now online: Why is the USA dollar climbing? How far will the Bull Market Go? Should you follow Analysts’ Consensus Recommendations? Check it out here

[oliversanvil] 21/12/2014 09:13

AS a suspended shareholder can i ask to whom and what financial terms were agreed for the sublease of train set and privileged use of the Sena Railway line.If the shares are suspended then surely the Bods salaries must be suspended until these conflict/revolt issues are resolved!

[28carl28] 20/12/2014 15:24

Hi,

I don't know much at all about this company, but does anyone have an idea what may happen next? Are the shares likely to start trading again? Sorry if I seem rather dull, but in all honesty I am & keeping investing in problematic companies.

Any help will be much appreciated.

[redbike_lse] 20/12/2014 11:55

This is around that RNS this morning that Jack posted, its a bit clearer in terms.

hxxp://timpronkster.blogspot.se/2013/09/a-beacon-hill-of-hope-for-investors-in.html

If you are to accept that's the way its always been nothing will ever change.
It might be the people that do have the power to change something are actually the ones holding the votes, but only if they muster those votes together and use them. Thats applicable in every company investors hold a position in.
If you can regulate the AIM from inside it and works then do it would be my advise.

[jack1236] 20/12/2014 11:37

Redbike, I don't hold, but don't want to see holders here losing out, because directors and others think they are smart enough to get away with it, why do they think they can? Because they've seen other companies go the same way and nothing has happended to change AIM.

You need to go through every RNS from the start, find the people and ask the questions.

hxxp://www.icaew.com/en/technical/legal-and-regulatory/company-law/directors-duties-and-derivative-actions

[wyvista] 20/12/2014 11:26

Would any administrator in their right mind really take this on knowing what backlash, investigations and criminal proceedings might follow, I really think if we stick with it we will get somewhere, obviously the existing BOD would have to be removed immediately and the shareholders would need to have very close contact and a say in appointing a new team, look like we might have 80m to start with, if we can find it!

[redbike_lse] 20/12/2014 11:09

That's odd, it was only last week that the quotes were depressed coal prices
were to blame here in 2013 and TBH at the time of writing wasnt that much difference in coal prices as they are today, we are in place to survive it at "robust" levels but today, its the coal prices to blame.


September 2013
Beacon Hill CEO, Rowan Karstel said,
"This Reserve statement not only demonstrates that Minas Moatize remains
robust during this period of depressed coal prices.
but also acts as an important step in optimising the Company's reserve inventory
to provide significant upside as coal prices recover"

Keep up the great work at ADVFN.

[jack1236] 20/12/2014 10:23

You need to find out exactly how much the assets are worth..

[redbike_lse] 20/12/2014 09:52

Humbugg,

Could you do me a favor, register on the hxxp://www.bhr-investors.com/ and send me a PM with leads as some of this looks to be a can of worms, so many things.
You seem like a knowledgeable person and any quick-wins or pointers or even shared
investigative work would be good, remember its a team effort and the team only have so much time. Its been pretty mental the last few weeks with the vote.
For this to work everyone has to come together. ;-)

Red

[humbugg] 20/12/2014 08:21

redbike,katie,
it would be very fruitful to follow the wash plant money imo. i think you'll have an amazing amount of success in that direction. keep up the brilliant work.

[loverat] 19/12/2014 19:35

Good work. Keep pursuing the criminals.

In a way, this is far worse than Langbar.

[humbugg] 19/12/2014 16:51

keep up the great work red et al. seems to me that this mob are in serious trouble. nice to know all ive been saying over the last 3 years is coming true. bring it on.

[redbike_lse] 19/12/2014 16:36

This was sent to the board of BHR to show how PI's feel a few days after the
announcement on the 1st December, it makes interesting reading.

hxxp://docdroid.net/mfdu

As you can see from that announcement and subsequent announcements, there was nothing in this survey that they did not know on how shareholders feel and which way their intentions were going to go on the day.
Still we have to endure the senior stylist saying were getting a good deal.
They had plenty of time to come up with something different but had no intentions of doing so, dilute the 80% and then its not a problem.

18th December people were diluted as the company did not instruct brokers that the the dilution wasn't taking place and to revert peoples holdings back.
We had to advise shareholders to contact their nominees and do what the BOD failed to do. They thought that the vote was a done deal with the bought votes.
Sad really when you consider that's what $500k + thinks is value for shareholders. ;-)

Red

[librag] 19/12/2014 16:28

redbike; I respect your position and your hard work. Although my opinion about the vote was different to yours, we are where we are and who knows, I might have been wrong, we'll never know.

Only time and hard work from some PIs will tell whether we can now get anything back. I await legal advice with interest and will support action both with votes and money. It will no doubt cost us to sue the original directors or nomad or auditors but I'm up for it.

[cuthbert cuthbertson senior] 19/12/2014 14:58

WHERE DID THE MONEY GO THEY SPENT IT AT A CLIP JOINT
MORE TO THE POINT, THOSE THAT TAKE OUR MONEY AND MANAGE OUR SHARES must ensure WE ARE GIVEN THE RELEVANT VOTING FORMS
CC

[redbike_lse] 19/12/2014 14:43

The no vote hasn't shot anyone in the foot, if you had voted yes you would have been wiped out at 1/1000 consolidation and took to the cleaners in 2015.
It appears that the question was asked at the EGM on the funds that have been spent in two years to get it to T1, and the board didn't have that answer.
That factual answer from RNS's is Total to date: $80m


Here is our latest survey open to all PI's, I encourage you all to fill it in.
hxxps://www.surveymonkey.com/s/RWZMXHT

There are lots of things going on in the background at the moment.
Katie on here is aware we are doing our best.
As said before greed isn't one of them, fairness for PI's is what we are after.
Lets face it we own 80 percent of the company but second fiddle for everything.

My favorite quotes from the Salon.
Justin Farr-Jones, Chairman of Beacon Hill and Senior stylist at Toni & Guy, commented:

"I have been in constructive dialogue with our debt holders and a number of our
private and smaller shareholders about the fairest method for such shareholders"

"I am convinced that the inclusion of an open offer prioritizing existing smaller shareholders together with a loyalty warrant package, alongside Vitol's repayment extension, ensures that we now have a comprehensive plan in place to address our existing shareholders' concerns"

Which private investors exactly, wasn't anyone off LSE?
Anyone here fess up to having any constructive dialogue off ADVFN?
Couldn't have been that conclusive when allegations to try to rig a vote have surfaced and a NO vote, polls shown to BHR post 1st December show exactly how PI's felt but was ignored by the same directors.
Not very constructive if you ask me, comprehensive plan.....nice touch...dilute existing shareholders to oblivion.

Shareholders are here and ready to listen when you have something that is comprehensive and constructive to say.

[librag] 19/12/2014 14:06

cj; come on. It wasn't JFJ's hairdresser really, it was almost certainly JFJ himself. Something about voting rights, yes?

Yes we need an offer. The trouble is it will now be an offer whilst in administration, which means we will have no chance. I honestly think the No vote has shot us in the foot, but best to forgive and forget.

Our best bet is to aim for compensation through the courts against the auditors and individual directors who we would argue have misled investors. It's worth noting that simply by threatening / starting proceedings, we are likely to convince certain directors that it's in their interest to pursue a more generous offer to us. The auditors are likely to be keen to encourage resolution too, I think.

Interesting times.

[cjl2112] 19/12/2014 13:38

Don't give up folks, lots can still happen here. The bod look to have been up to no good reading other boards. The only safe way out IMO to shut up shareholders would be to have someone like Vitol place a bid for the whole company. Why would Jfjs hairdresser be interested in buying 56k worth of shares if there was no value in the company with the chance of losing their vote.
Stinks IMO and still a long way to run.
Watch this space & I hope the bod read these boards as I'm sure they do.

[roks] 18/12/2014 20:45

There goes my life savings...........my 8m shares are worth nothing now.

Hope something comes out of this.

[oliversanvil] 18/12/2014 19:23

It takes" a fox to catch a fox" D Lark probably money laundering through the Charitable Foundation? HMRS needs to investigate all of the a/m affairs! Old mate!

[bam bam rubble] 18/12/2014 17:25

It seems clear the Company essentially issued itself 12.24% of new voting shares
to increase the yes vote in an attempt to maintain their AIM director lifestyles.
The Chairman arranging them to be held in the name of a friend wasn't very subtle.

Piercy v Mills Ltd. Directors issued voting shares to themselves (to be held via
their supporters) not because they needed that additional capital, but solely to
influence the vote at a General Meeting. The court held the share issue was void.

Suspicious transactions should be reported using the following form and sent to:
The Market Conduct Team, The FCA, 25 The North Colonnade, Canary Wharf, E14 5HS.

[katylied] 18/12/2014 16:59

Don't forget the Nomad (as TW has already pointed out). They were only appointed on 1/12/2014 in conjunction with the re-structuring plan. Their fast-track handling of Mr.Lark's shares, appears to have lacked any credible scrutiny...