Densitron Tech. Share Discussion Threads

[pixi] 26/3/2010 11:27

heartylaugh

The company has recently come back into profit. If they get planning permission to build, their investment in the land is going to be worth a lot more than they paid for it. My investment is speculative and long-term: if it goes back down to 4p, I'll buy some more.

Their assets are worth more than the share price and micro caps can jump.

[heartylaugh] 25/3/2010 19:18

pixi

What effect do you expect the possible granting of planning permission to have on the share price? Note, I understand about the land this company owns and what may or may not happen with it. I am interested to know why a micro investor would spend £1K on these shares and with what expectation.

Perhaps I should buy a few more?

H.L.

[pixi] 25/3/2010 16:26

I dipped my toe into the water today and bought a grand's worth. I probably should have waited until it went back down to 4p, but what the hell, they might get planning permission before then!

[woodcot] 25/3/2010 10:06

Des,

In that case we will just have to agree to disagree.

W

[deswalker] 23/3/2010 17:35

woodcot,

I disagree. No need to wait for Arthur or JakNife, I'll put you right. The 2/3 working day rule is breached all the time and diclosures often happen weeks after the event and sometimes not at all.

The sale was clearly Venaglas, and they've sold the lot. They're hardly going to dump 3.3mill but keep 800k just in case. Equally any buyer will have been in for the entire 4.1mill and not stop at 3.3mill.

Also, the drop and recovery in the share price is clearly the pattern one often gets when a large sale has been agreed and an overhang cleared. If Venaglas were still sellers then it wouldn't have recovered.

Des

[woodcot] 23/3/2010 00:17

Deswalker,

But it was not Venaglass who sold on the 3rd of March when you posted, because there would have to be RNS within 2/3 working days (stock market rules)
It is also clear that Venaglass have not sold all their stock, but they do have less than 3% now.

The buyer also has less than 3% otherwise there would have been another RNS stating so within 2/3 working days of the purchase.

Anyone over 3% is classed as a major shareholder and any purchase or sales by that person or company must be reported within 2/3 working days.

In my opinion it was Venaglass who crossed the stock at the beginning of March but since then someone has bided the price up and have done a private deal with Venaglass for some of their stock.

If I'm wrong about the 2/3 days stock market rules, I'm sure Arthur or JakNife will put me right!

W.

[davidosh] 17/3/2010 15:53

Where else do Venaglass have holdings ?

[deswalker] 17/3/2010 15:02

Confirmation today that it was Venaglas who sold. Interesting to see that it was also them that sold out of TND to Andrew Burgess this past week. Maybe they're looking to get out of this market in which case there might be opportunities for cheap stock elsewhere ...

[woodcot] 03/3/2010 21:07

Hi Des

You may be wrong. Someone just crossing the stock for tax reasons. The 120k at 4p was a buy in my opinion.

If I'm wrong there will be a holding in company's announcement by the end of the week.

Good luck with Leeds

Regards
W.

[deswalker] 03/3/2010 19:49

Arthur - that has to be Venaglas selling out. The funny numbers are the giveaway.

According to the website Venaglas own 4,181,308 and we see a sell of 3,381,308 yesterday and another 500k today. As for the remaining 300k then that is either the sell of 12 Feb or is part of the 150k buy today with the remainder going on the mm's book.

Either way Venaglas have sold IMO.

I suspect it will be Sterling Property Trust that have bought and with the exception of TJ Emmott holding 3.9% we may well be approaching a situation not dissimilar to that at LDSG with two large holders and everybody else wondering what they'll do.

Des

[arthur_lame_stocks] 02/3/2010 18:40

Big volume today. I wonder who that is?

[arthur_lame_stocks] 18/2/2010 18:07

Hi Des

Interesting that you're into RNSM, i've been watching them for ages. Not quite sure yet though.

[deswalker] 12/2/2010 12:52

No probs. I'll send you back the email if you want to see it.

Had a few words with PG about DSN at the LDSG AGM last week. He seems optimistic for the long term but says they are in deadlock until something happens with Evervision or the land. Mentioned that funds could then be used to grow the displays business but says they are in limbo at the moment.

I want to like DSN but can't get past my dislike of the Evervision situation - minority stake in a Taiwanese company run as if it belongs to the main man and valued in the DSN books on some arbitrary valuation. Certainly good news they coughed up some cash though.

If it was just Displays and Blackheath then I'd be in like a shot but not with Evervision.

Des

[deswalker] 11/2/2010 19:25

Arthur - I've had two emails from your hotmail account in the last week or so. There is no subject line, a cc list of about 10 people I don't know and the only content is a google link. Very strange. I'd check you ain't got some sort of virus ... Des

[arthur_lame_stocks] 11/2/2010 19:18

There's been some reasonable volume the last couplpe of days. Looks like somebody wants out.

[heartylaugh] 05/2/2010 16:55

Valhamos

Thanks for that. One more question, (for the moment). Everyone here is talking about a low gearing but this very website shows the Densitron gearing as 54%. Is that an error or historical or what?

Cheers,

H.L.

[woodcot] 05/2/2010 13:31

Densitron seems well placed for any recovery in the markets that they operate rate in. 2009 was a hard year for most companies and at least the company has stated they will be in profit all be it a small profit.

As for Evervision I'm hoping that the £1.1 million is the start of returning money back to their shareholders. Would prefer Evervision sold and approx. 25% returned to DSN.

Again would like to see progress on Blackheath this year but feel that will not be easy with an open metropolitan land order in place.

With low gearing of 9% and an upturn in the market it shouldn't take much to push the share price up regardless of what happens with the assets.

Small cap stock have been left behind with the raise of the larger companies over the last 12 month however I'm sure there will be a correction.

[valhamos] 05/2/2010 07:35

heartylaugh

Evervision had surplus cash which it wanted to return to all its shareholders. It recent performance suggests it does not have sufficient retained profits to pay the amount as a dividend. Instead it chose to reduce its share capital, in effect a share buyback from all shareholders pro-rata.

It is a one-off, though we are expecting future returns from this investment; in the form of dividends or eventual sale. It's worth pointing out that Densitron has steadily reduced its gearing - from memory it was over 60% four years ago.

[heartylaugh] 04/2/2010 23:29

Valhamos

Thank you for the explanation. I think I follow all that A and B business. Although I remain confused as to why Evervision made that sort of (i.e £1M) payment to some investors rather than a dividend to all their share holders. If you have the patience to explain I would be grateful - am learning here with your help.

Anyway, to clear the fog, is it safe to say that the £1M payment from Evervision to Densitron was a one off? Also that the 'gearing' change of Densitron was primarily due to that one off payment?

H.L.

[valhamos] 04/2/2010 08:09

heartylaugh

Just to set the record straight; where Company A exercises control over Company B, then A consolidates B as a subsidiary, where A exercises significant influence over B then A treats B as an associated undertaking (that is A includes share of B's profits in its income statement), and where there is no influence A treats B as an investment on its balance sheet.

It used to be that subsidiaries and associates where purely defined by shareholding thresholds (50% and 20% respectively) but this is no longer the case, and control and significant influence are decided by looking at the evidence - board representation, involvement in decisions about dividends etc. Although it may happen in practice, I am not aware under UK law that an investment of 25% entitles the investor to a seat on the board.

For Densitron some years ago Evervision was treated as an associate, then it was reclassified as an investment in 2005, as it no longer played an active role in the company or had any signicant influence over its policies.


As Arthur has said Evervision has had surplus cash and has returned some of this to all shareholders equally by way of capital reduction. Therefore shareholder percentages (24.5% for Densitron) stay exactly the same as before the reduction.

[arthur_lame_stocks] 03/2/2010 22:31

I would hazard a guess that due to prior losses Evervision is not able to pay dividends, however these losses are caused by a very large depreciation charge and the company has a substantial net cash balance which I believe may still be around £12m after the repayment (I think we'll have to wait for April's results to confirm that one).

I hope that further cash will be forthcomig from Evervision in the future.