Conygar Investment Share Discussion Threads

[sleepy] 22/5/2012 08:47

Have put my tin hat on - this is now a very cheap share

[topvest] 29/3/2012 17:39

Yes, another bonus for destroying shareholder value will be on the cards no doubt ...great reward for doing nothing and placing a limit order with your broker. This company would be targeted by Laxey if Ware wasn't involved there as well. Anyone thinking he does a five day week at Conygar for his £x million remuneration would be wrong, as he is on the board of lots of others as well e.g. Terra Catalyst. Nothing against the man as he undoubtedly is an astute property manager, it's the asymmetric management versus shareholder reward here that I am unhappy with!

[ydderf] 23/3/2012 11:06

2m at 90p a couple of days ago, now 87p bid......and we're paying the management millions for this?

[davidosh] 22/3/2012 17:14

Spot the link....

Directors of the Independent Raven Mount Board Committee: Registered Office:

Bimaljit Singh Sandhu (Chief Executive)
Mark Adrian Kirkland (Finance Director)
James Balfour Hyslop (Non-Executive)
Rory Patrick Macnamara (Non-Executive)
Robert Thomas Ernest Ware (Non-Executive)

17 April 2009

[grahamburn] 22/3/2012 16:23

So who is Bimaljit Singh Sandhu? And what's his interest holding shares in Conygar?

[skyship] 21/3/2012 16:53

Yup....2m buyback @ 90p. Not many other buyers around here yet!!

[ydderf] 21/3/2012 15:34

seeing the price action today i presume it is more buying in - they will keep buying their own shares to not much effect presumably, except upon the remuneration structure, in the end, when there are only 1000,00 shares in issue and nav is a zillion per share, the shareholders who are not directors will presumably still be waiting for a return.......

[grahamburn] 21/2/2012 15:16

davidosh. The trade on 27th was for just 6,000, yesterday's RNS was for 119,000 - hence my original comment re: CGT. Also I doubt very much that ANY company would say that a director was making a trade "for tax planning purposes", and, so far as I am aware such a trade (especially by a non-executive) would not require specific consent - though I stand to be corrected. It might, however, have been possible (and indeed not unusual) for the original sale of 125,000 to have been explained as a sale "for personal reasons" - but then most transactions by individuals are for personal reasons!!

Whatever, the reasons, at least he has effectively reverted to his original substantial holding, plus he was fortunate to do the sale and purchase at the same market price! Whether he established a gain or loss on the sale, I cannot be bothered to research backwards.....

[davidosh] 21/2/2012 14:44

He sold on the 19th Jan and bought back on the 27th that is not sufficient time within the 30day tax ruling to make that trade a tax planning one. I think that if it was solely for tax planning then the trade would have required specific consent in advance and could presumably have been indicated in the RNS that it was for that sole purpose.

[esmith3] 21/2/2012 10:19

You might be right but I think it's unlikely to be a tax move, as one doesn't usually carry out tax planning by buying and selling in the market (espacially as directors presumably believe their stock is undervalued). Usually, these boys have family trusts/companies set up for just that purpose. It's also strange that he's bought back the exact amount he sold, whereas he could have easily bought a few more or a few less. I still think he's been reprimanded for short term trading of company stock but I guess we're unlikely to find out for sure.

[grahamburn] 20/2/2012 16:35

Unlikely to have been a "quiet word". More likely a tax planning move. More or less exactly a month between the two transactions so the sale would have been crystallised for CGT purposes (one way or the other).

[esmith3] 20/2/2012 16:09

davidosh - 31 Jan'12 - 13:12 - 746 of 758

I am not sure if it is me or the non exec that is confused !

Last week he sold 125k..this week he buys back 6k

The Conygar Investment Company PLC (the "Company") advises that it received notification on 27 January 2012 that on that date Michael Wigley, Non Executive Director, bought 6,000 ordinary 5 pence shares in the Company ("Shares") at a price of 88 pence per Share. Following this transaction, his notifiable holding in the Company is 211,000 Shares representing 0.2% of the Company's total voting rights.


No comparison in the scale of sale compared to a minimal buy. Maybe he is a day trader ! The shares continue to fall helped along by the large director sale no doubt.


Looks like Wigley's bought back the remaining 119k of the 125k that he sold previously. I guess someone has had a quiet word.......

[skyship] 02/2/2012 11:52

Could be construed as counter-intuitive - L&G increasing their stake(s) - see today's "Holdings" RNS in Header.

[horndean eagle] 01/2/2012 18:47

No idea David. Just a headline off bloomberg.

[davidosh] 01/2/2012 13:16

What was the reason for the downgrade ?

[horndean eagle] 01/2/2012 13:12

Oriel downgraded CIC today to add from buy. Bit late I would suggest.

[sleepy] 31/1/2012 15:46

Circumstances for refusal
8
A restricted person must not be given clearance to deal in any securities of the company:
(a) during a prohibited period; or
(b) on considerations of a short term nature. An investment with a maturity of one year or less will always be considered to be of a short term nature.

[dugganjoe] 31/1/2012 15:38

Looking for 48p on CIC

[ydderf] 31/1/2012 15:35

what is the point of this property wrapper?

the penny may be about to drop, but there are still many peeps who believe (though would never admit it) in star quality and magical beings - fact is property is property and folk are folk, and without a bull market driving values all management can do is wait and pray......

[dugganjoe] 31/1/2012 14:56

looks lame on the chart

[grahamburn] 31/1/2012 14:46

davidosh. Just to add to your (our) confusion, a quick trawl back through directors share dealings shows that on 3 June 2011 Wigley purchased 30,000 shares at 117p (to take his holding then up to 330,000). (I haven't gone back any further.)

Wigley's share dealings do seem to be a little odd (especially the small purchase today). Maybe he's struggling to manage his personal cash flow at the moment and sold too many shares a couple of weeks back! But in any event, those 30,000 in June last year haven't been profitable for him.

[jeffian] 31/1/2012 14:25

The shares getting a good kicking will be rather more effective in bringing the Directors to heel than raising questions at the AGM. The market has its way of taking revenge!

[sleepy] 31/1/2012 13:47

Can't get on to the FSA site at the moment but I thought that the Model Code restricted Directors from dealings of a short-term nature

[davidosh] 31/1/2012 13:12

I am not sure if it is me or the non exec that is confused !

Last week he sold 125k..this week he buys back 6k

The Conygar Investment Company PLC (the "Company") advises that it received notification on 27 January 2012 that on that date Michael Wigley, Non Executive Director, bought 6,000 ordinary 5 pence shares in the Company ("Shares") at a price of 88 pence per Share. Following this transaction, his notifiable holding in the Company is 211,000 Shares representing 0.2% of the Company's total voting rights.


No comparison in the scale of sale compared to a minimal buy. Maybe he is a day trader ! The shares continue to fall helped along by the large director sale no doubt.