Entertainment Rights Share Discussion Threads

[lemmon picker] 10/3/2009 20:00

Here's a reminder of the statement issued by Chairman Sir Robin Miller on 9th Feb 2009 re the departure of Rod Bransgrove. The final paragraph of the RNS says.....

Sir Robin Miller commented:-
"On behalf of the Board, I would like to thank Rod, the founder and architect of the Company, for the last twelve years. His contribution has been huge and we wish him well in his future endeavours. I look forward to working with the management team on a successful conclusion to the current refinancing, leading to a secure and profitable future as a company with many of the world's great entertainment brands."

The statement jars in that one cannot fathom why some two weeks later the company issued an entirely differing statement....

26th Feb 2009 Update to Shareholders:-
"Following the announcement of 29 December 2008, the Board has been vigorously exploring the options available to stabilise the business and secure its long term future. The Board has now completed this process and, together with Entertainment Rights' lender, is committed to a sale of the Company's business.

The Board has received offers for the Company's subsidiaries or business and assets and is in advanced negotiations with a number of bidders who have substantially completed their due diligence in order to complete a transaction imminently.

The offers received are at a level which would be acceptable to the Board and to the Group's lender, but at which there is no prospect of recovering all of the outstanding debt. It is now clear that neither a sale nor the alternative of a bank supported restructuring solution would result in any value being attributed to the ordinary shares in Entertainment Rights Plc. No offer has been received for the Company's ordinary shares and the Company is not in discussions with any party regarding an offer for the Company's ordinary shares, accordingly the Company is no longer in an offer period.

The Group's lender has indicated that it intends to continue to support Entertainment Rights beyond 28 February 2009 to complete a sale or restructuring solution. Accordingly, the Board is pleased to announce the extension of further short term funding to the Group to enable it to complete this process."

Why such a dramatic change of view in what is only a matter of days?
Have the offers for the catalogue been so lousy?
Have these rights been grossly overvalued in the past when they were purchased?
How come the Classic Media rights library of 3,500 episodes of programming combined with the rest of the entire library of 5,200 episodes that's 8,700 episodes and the entire business (Postman Pat, Basil Brush, Where's Wally, Rupert Bear, etc, etc), is not worth enough to cover the outstanding debt which was primarily taken from Jan 2007 to pay for the Classic Media library?

[hotips] 09/3/2009 17:14

TopTrump - Pity it's not Sir ROBIN (Miller)and not Branson quoted here! But sage words nevertheless.

[toptrump] 09/3/2009 13:10

This is the link:

[toptrump] 09/3/2009 13:05

Interesting article on Timesonline, this is a section of it:

Sir Richard is concerned that the ambitions of the next generation of entrepreneurs could be scuppered by a lack of financing. Sir Richard is one of Gordon Brown's business advisers and he has been urging the Prime Minister to make the liquidity crisis the Government's top priority.

"The PM realises that the most dangerous thing is the liquidity issue," Sir Richard said. "We cannot allow perfectly decent companies to go to the wall just because they cannot get liquidity. And if your bank is behaving badly, then shout about it because no business can afford to lose that lifeline."

Sir Richard also urged business leaders not to panic and cut jobs unnecessarily. British companies have been forced to cut costs as sales have slowed and, as a result, unemployment rose to 1.97 million last month, its highest level for 12 years.

Interesting!!

[toptrump] 08/3/2009 11:04

I would encourage all involved to write to the co. and air your views its the only way they will listen!

[hotips] 08/3/2009 10:21

Lemmon Picker and TopTrump - very interesting what you're saying. Seems like this latest banking news could be good news for ER and the directors might have to take a different view about selling the assets off quite so quickly and too cheaply, just because it's "neater" to do so. Seems like they're being far too hasty to bury the bodies and the stench of the past directors' actions. Looks like they might need to reconsider and work with the bank to get a better outcome for the company. Very interesting.

[lemmon picker] 07/3/2009 18:28

Good point TT ...

Entertainment Rights lender HBOS now controlled by Lloyds Banking Group are without doubt calling the shots and are no doubt seeking a reasonable price for ER's business and assets in order to recover their loan. However in a "Closing Down" or "Fire Sale" scenario, who would be sufficiently brave to stump up enough cash for the real asset value of this business and its catalogue of 3,600 hours of content.

Now that Lloyds/HBOS has been saved as announced today by HM Governments Treasuries intervention (in effect the taxpayer that's you and I) why should they accept anything less than the full repayment value of their loans.

Lloyds/HBOS should allow the company to continue to trade in order to maximise value for itself and ultimately the beleaguered shareholders of both organisations, Lloyds Banking Group and Entertainment Rights.
Anything less than this would be scandalous given HM Governments pledge announced today to insure £260bn of Lloyds/HBOS Toxic Assets.

A little more patience from those involved in the deal making, ie, the current board of Entertainment Rights and its lender Lloyds/HBOS, could ultimately prove to be of valuable benefit to the shareholders of Lloyds/HBOS and Entertainment Rights itself.

Being a shareholder of both Lloyds Banking Group and Entertainment Rights my vote would be in favour of allowing more time to provide a positive outcome for both organisations.

I intend to bring this scenario to the attention of the Chairman of both companies other shareholders may like to follow suit.

LP

[toptrump] 07/3/2009 12:49

?Good news with the Governments increased share in the Lloyds group. Supposed to increase lending to £23B over next 2 years. With HBOS a part of this group then...

[pre] 04/3/2009 21:34

interesting view toptrump....could be some more value to be had here? There still appears to be plenty of interest circulating around this stock...

[toptrump] 04/3/2009 12:23

Thomas steams to Hollywood:
Thomas the Tank Engine is to get a Hollywood makeover following the launch of a new movie division at brad owner Hit Entertainment.

Could this be why HIT (APAX) want their hands on us - with the Lone Ranger movie waiting in the wings, this would boost their new movie division and give it a solid footing.

till think this could be leverage!

[phillis] 04/3/2009 10:33

The banks are in control here and they want their money back

They will achieve this in whatever way they can, and the shareholders will get nothing - which is what their shares are worth

[sirshagalot] 04/3/2009 08:43

the aim markets are for foolish pi,s and the aim is to seperate as much money from the said investors.
keep away from aim stocks

[typo56] 04/3/2009 07:27

Only a matter of days I'd have thought before they're suspended.

Cattles (CTT) is another one I'm surprised is still limping on.

[toptrump] 03/3/2009 23:58

Anybody see the Richard Branson interview with Piers Morgan on Sunday?

He and the Virgin Group nearly went bankrupt - he changed banks and the co. survived...and that was during the 90's recession.

Clutching at straws!

[petepostman] 03/3/2009 12:31

And who is still buying these shares???

[petepostman] 03/3/2009 12:30

The FSA probably have their in tray full with RBS/LLoyds HBOS etc..!
But you are right it does have a nasty smell about it.
If the option is call in the administrators, with the rights reverting to original owners and go bust then at least the directors will get zero as well as me.

[scrapman] 03/3/2009 05:06

Get onto the FSA and get a rocket up them , the whole thing stinks

[hotips] 02/3/2009 21:56

As a director Hemmings may find it difficult to pull a stunt as suggested by TopTrump. Incidentally, it's Trevor Hemmings who made the big money, and his son Craig who is on this board, and who has done such a magnificent job of losing it for daddy. Hemmings Snr must be so proud. Still curious as to why Hemmings is still on the board though.

Love the idea of staging a protest at the Rose Bowl! I do think that when Bransgrove seeks high office within the cricketing world his past business interests should be made known to the selection committee.

[toptrump] 02/3/2009 21:46

Hemmings I suspect will be able to transfer his share to the new co. When your a billionaire people want to be your friends. He's obviously good at making money, and co. like that.

Didn't he have a 5p per share bid turned down recently?

If so and the co. rejected it straight off he may feel aggrieved and stick two fingers up at them.

Thanks Bransgrove

p.s. anyone fancy turning up to a Hampshire game (or the one day international to be staged at the rose bowl as Postman Pat and Jess or the Lone Ranger and Tonto with big banners with a few expletives!!)

[miikke] 02/3/2009 19:30

Its all some kind of con as far as I can tell. DYOR.
The small private investor whoe hard earned cash has gone into this company will be the main losers.
The board will no doubt keep their jobs in one form or another.
We seem to be getting a pattern in this country fat cats win and everyone else loses out or picks up the tab!

[hotips] 02/3/2009 16:44

hump - the fact that you are still posting on this site and your last sentence tells me that we are both in this same, sinking, stinking boat. You and I have always shared the same opinion of Bransgrove and his monkey, Heap. Just wish we'd listened to our own advice.

Hemmings is still aboard the ship - why??? He's the largest shareholder. Something smells very fishy.

[humphbumph] 02/3/2009 16:34

hotips, you may as well reconcile yourself to the fact that we have lost everything, thanks to Heap and Bransgrove. It gives me no pleasure to say that I was right all along. I failed to act according to my rational conclusions.

[hotips] 02/3/2009 15:20

Hemmings, who is a major shareholder with Ashby Manor (over 20% of the shares), would surely not vote a rights-hiveoff deal through because he would be the biggest looser.

Unless there is more to this whole situation.........?

[garbo] 02/3/2009 14:19

If it is true that 90% of the shareholders need to vote in favour for the sale of the assets to take place, then the buying of recent days can be easily explained: those waiting on the sidelines to pick off the assets on the cheap are probably buying every share they can in order to ensure that the figure of 90% can be reached.

At this point in the proceedings the shareholders have nothing to lose - they are going to get nothing if the sale goes ahead or the company goes into administration.

If there is to be any possible alternative - and I know it sounds rather remote - then shareholders should hold on to their shares and try to prevent the figure of 90% being reached. What's the worse that can heppen? That we lose everything? That apparently is already going to happen.

The acquiescence of the board to readily submit to the proposed sale seems tantamount to a turkey voting for an early Christmas.

What has happened to this company beggars belief. The previous directors have allowed a perfectly solid business to be brought to its knees by buying Classic Media and saddling the company with an unreasonable debt burden. It seems to me that Postman Pat and Basil Brush could have done a better job!!!

It has been mentioned already on the board that this company still has good assets. It must surely not be beyond the scope of some strong management to prevent this fire sale from taking place and reviving the fortunes of the company.

[typo56] 02/3/2009 12:27

If their debts exceed their assets (at fair value) and they sell off some assets (at fair value) then their asset to debt ratio will look even worse.

As at 28 August 2008 assets exceeded liabilities by £48.63m. Where has this headroom gone?