Bowleven Share Discussion Threads

[888icb] 21/3/2017 14:26

Tipped again by ST in the IC with a minimum 50p target.

[winnet] 21/3/2017 14:15

Not daft in the slightest.

COC can buy most of the shares and takeover the company. That's fine.

Until such time, Billy Allen has a duty to the "other" shareholders, let's call them "the 75%, to safeguard their interests.

Its as simple as that.

Not a complicated proposition and I suspect its more of case of "not wanting to get it" than "being able to get it" in your case log, as you seem like a bright fellow.

[loglorry1] 21/3/2017 14:09

We are all missing your point because it's as sharp as a pillow.

I actually think you believe what you write which is a bit strange. You seem to want to exclude COCs votes then say out of what's left most votes don't agree COC. That's a bit like saying let's exclude all the states that voted for Trump and agree most of the folk left are not Trump supporters.

It's not only daft it's a tautology.

[winnet] 21/3/2017 13:38

I think you are all missing my point. Or maybe this is some elaborate wind-up? I am not arguing there should be some sort of minority control of BLVN.

COC have the most votes they win the vote. Simples.

What i am arguing is that the majority of other holders (myself included) do not support COC or their strategy and it is those people who our BOD are representing as per their fiduciary duty.

Obviously, all this would change if and when another vote is held.

Until then i remain a vocal critic of the COC strategy and hope that our board led by Billy will fight in the interests of all shareholders.

[loglorry1] 21/3/2017 13:37

I can tell you the way Billy Allan voted. No way because he doesn't own a single share. Shows how much confidence he has in the company. Good luck if you think he'll protect shareholder's interests.

[ihavenoclue] 21/3/2017 13:28

winnet ... CoC shares are just the same as any other shares ... the splitting of the votes was just sour grapes by the old board who were trying to protect their future job prospects.

[d1nga] 21/3/2017 13:21

belo , your wasting your logic , you can lead a horse to water but can't make it drink comes to mind

[fatnacker] 21/3/2017 13:15

Belo crown have, as they are perfectly entitled to do so, bought into the company only very recently, you could argue that their investment is dwarfed in real terms by long term holders, could you not? I'm sure I don't need to explain the implications of that statment.

[winnet] 21/3/2017 13:15

belo - but director shareholding is about 1.5% of BLVN not 22%, so even (say) if you remove that 1.5%, the result is still overwhelmingly that holders other than COC do not support what they are trying to do or their strategy.

This is not disingenuous at all. I am well versed on corporate governance and company law.

The fact that COC hold the most voting rights is the only reason the votes were close.

[stansmith3] 21/3/2017 13:06

..and treasury shares?

[belo horizonte] 21/3/2017 12:53

As an afterthought, where is the table that shows the results with all the BLVN directors, employees and relatives votes deducted? They are hardly impartial.

[fatnacker] 21/3/2017 11:35

Belo everyone knows it's the votes in table 1 that count but why ignore the elephant in the room? crowns pro rata vote was overwhelming but it was not in line with the wishes of the majority of individual voters FACT, claiming otherwise to back your position is plain disingenuous, you haven't a clue how crown will play this, I'm astonished so many are following the piper, maybe they're not which is exactly why crown didn't get control entirely.

[royaloak] 21/3/2017 10:32

How can 60p be a bad deal? I buy shares at 36p and sell at 60p looks a pretty good deal to me! Of cause in reality that will probably not happen, however the chances of hitting 60p with the previous Board in position based on their past performance was even more unlikely.

[fatnacker] 21/3/2017 08:56

Yes, far better to ignore the facts in favour of hope D1NGA

[d1nga] 21/3/2017 08:41

I'll not take the bait and go over the same ground you've covered with others previously

[winnet] 21/3/2017 08:36

Clearly D1nga.

I think the vote proved that their interests and the majority of other shareholders interests are totally unaligned!

[d1nga] 21/3/2017 08:25

Of course COC have their own interests at heart , as you have your interest at heart you just have to ensure your interests align , it is that simple.

[winnet] 21/3/2017 08:18

Why should the board comment of press speculation.

The market is orderly (to say the least)

What an odd comment to make.

Cyman - I am interested in your comment about shareholders not winning either way this swings. I kind of agree at the moment, until such time as the BOD assure me that "they've got this".

The fact COC aren't laying their cards on the table, means i am highly dubious they have anyones interests but their own in play.

[fft] 21/3/2017 07:42

If there is any truth in the st story or what malcy has written, then blvn have a duty to respond otherwise it is a false market.

[symbo] 21/3/2017 07:40

If coc have a buyer lined up, as is now widely reported, why is that buyer not coming forward and making their interest known now. Why do we have to wait until coc have control, why is it not being Rns,d .