Cng Travel Share Discussion Threads

[the drewster] 30/5/2007 10:44

Article from 25th, not much new, other than the fact it does seem to be pitched too cheap.

and more ...


And the stockbroker report in full...
www.dolmenstockbrokers.ie/reports/23%20May%202007.pdf

[the drewster] 28/5/2007 12:18

Katy, you're such a cynic.... as if anything like that would ever happen?
;-)

[katylied] 28/5/2007 11:14

Equally 'The Drewster', as long as management have been
brewing this little scam (and odds are, for quite some
time), there has been zero incentive for them to make
the business perform. The lower the share-price, the
more demoralized the investors, the better chance
of success at a low MBO price...

[the drewster] 28/5/2007 10:08

I still feel troubled by it all.
Management want it at a bargain price, but still twice what we have been trading at recently. If nobody else shows their hand, this is all we will get, unless Finbarr decides he wants back in for a higher price.

At the end of the day, it's worth what someone will pay for it, and given the bad way everything has been managed over the last few years, that figure will be very small. Management (current) clearly see the light at the end of the tunnel, and them wanting to benefit form it at our exclusion is a damn poor show.

[robsy2] 28/5/2007 08:32

Drewster if you can get some proxies , we can at least register our disapproval.The publicity may bring another bidder in.That is our best hope.

[katylied] 26/5/2007 20:16

This article make some interesting comments about Irish companies and takeovers/buyouts. There was in the back of my mind a question about
conflict of interest, whereby (in the UK) some shareholdings cannot
be voted in (typically) an MBO. This seems to suggest, that in
Ireland, the situation may be rather less strict...



[edit] Forget (probably) an 'EGM'. That approach is perhaps
what is refered to above as 'Schemes of arrangement'
(ie. special resolution). Reading the RNS more
closely, it seems they intend to 'tender' for
shareholder support (to get 80%?). So it
could take a while and in the meantime,
someone else could make a competing
offer, but CTV have undertaken not to
consider one, unless it is 16.5p+...

[the drewster] 26/5/2007 19:13

I will write to my broker to see if it is possible to get hold of a proxy form and vote against. I think it is way too cheap on all known evidence, and looks like a ploy by management to get all of their money back, rather than all of ours too.

[katylied] 26/5/2007 11:31

Doubt it, 'cos it is all about who turns up and votes at an EGM.
And if they hold the EGM in Ireland, would any non-resident
shareholders want to spend money (good after bad) attending?
So, it is really down to Irish resident small shareholders.
I wonder what old Finbarr (ex-CEO/shareholder)
makes of it all?..

[guru11] 26/5/2007 11:12

Is there enough shareholders around to get a majority to reject the offer?

[katylied] 25/5/2007 19:47

...We recommend rejecting the current offer in favour of a higher
offer or alternatively awaiting another year of solid profitability
whereupon the valuation of the company should more closely
proximate market multiples and attract further bid interest
perhaps from one of the 5 parties the company cites as
having made an approach : REJECT OFFER...

[lingy] 25/5/2007 18:51

well its not a done deal until the vote takes place so lets vote against it as there is nothing in it for pi`s,lets not make it easy for management to rip us off.

[katylied] 25/5/2007 18:46

The Drewster... Shareholder apathy will allow them to
get away with it. These things are normally determined
by votes cast at an EGM and lots of arm twisting,
threats and/or incentives will be floated to get
a good turnout to support management. But it
will still be small shareholder apathy that
allows them to win on the day...

Still, it is nice to see that someone
is rocking the boat...

[the drewster] 25/5/2007 18:40

Katy, we all know it's too cheap, but they hold enough to get away with it. Legalised robbery almost!

[katylied] 25/5/2007 18:37

...Dolmen recommended that clients hold out for a higher offer from the bidders or wait for a further improvement in profitability, which should lead the market re-rating of the stock...



So, it seems someone has choked on the spin and called foul.
I wonder who is behind Dolmen on this one? Could it be that
Finbarr (still a shareholder presumably?) is reborn as a
shareholder champion?... Now that would be ironic!..

[the drewster] 23/5/2007 14:36

When did Winterfloods start quoting CNG? See them at a generou 12/16 quote today?!

[robsy2] 23/5/2007 13:14

Katie et al
Staggering that the accounts are wrong, absolutely amazing!
What a bunch of clowns!
Just recently I have seen 2 or 3 other examples where accounts are wrong , errors have been discovered etc. When you can't rely on the historical figures things are likely to be badly done.If you look at the wording of an audit report nowadays it tells you that you need to look after your a---e because we can't be relied on to do it.

[robsy2] 23/5/2007 13:01

Drewster
Ditto!
R

[the drewster] 23/5/2007 11:30

Assessment ... we get a single day's notice, and an RNS that goes on about the recent share price movement (which had been ZILCH!!!!)
Just feels wrong somewhere, but resigned to being unable to do diddly about it.

[katylied] 23/5/2007 11:19

Still no correction to the accounts. I checked the numbers again
and the mistake seems as glaring as ever. Surely, on the eve
of an assessment of an MBO proposal, this constitutes a
seriously miss-led market. I wonder if the non-execs
were also looking at a pre-tax loss?...

[guru11] 22/5/2007 19:03

The Drewster - same thing came to my mind, why sell 175k worth of shares at 12p when the company appears cheap on a MBO of 14.5p, doesn't make sense. In fact what does make sense was the guy who bought 200k at 13p, now he is almost on a no loose situation, and could make £3k, but one has to buy at least 50k at 14p now to gain nearly £200 if the buy out was 14.5p, as the offer price now I believe is 14p.

Are the accounts in dollars or pounds, cause if they were in pounds then the company looks dirt cheap, unless there is a 2nd error in the accounts as well as the £2,224 plus being reversed as a minus. How can they publish mistakes.

[the drewster] 22/5/2007 15:59

Course they will - we get one day's notice "in response to the recent movement in the comapny share price" ... what movement was that then?

A day later, there's the cash offer, which the boys acting for us managed to talk up 8%

And then the little snippets like the directors actually having a pice of the lucrative pie that will be left start coming out.

Amazing that there doesn't have to be significantly more transparency about these things, as it leaves a pretty bitter taste.

[katylied] 22/5/2007 15:54

This article reveals that Ross & Smurfit will
have a piece of the 'new company'. It also
(bizarrely) restates the 'pre-tax loss'
error in the accounts...

[the drewster] 22/5/2007 15:27

Reading between the lines, they have also given irrevocable undertakings to accept (or better) any offer of 16.5p should one come along, so maybe (wishful thinking) they are aware that some others are sniffing around, and want to force their hand.

The offer document is due within the next 28 days, so absolutely no point selling at 11p when you'll get minimum 14.5p (looks a done deal given the amounts the families at the top hold) in the next few months.

Roll on a counter bid and then CTH to trump even that - not totally over, just yet.

[tifosigb] 22/5/2007 15:04

So my question would be WHY is Seamus Ross Jnr and Michael Smurift Jnr backing this? They have major losses if they sell out at 14.5! Tzell is worth more than what is being offered. Why don't the two of them buy the the whole lot themselves. I'm sure one of the families could afford it outright - let alone both of them. It doesn't seem right, or we're not being told the whole story.