Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Ep&f Capital LSE:ECA London Ordinary Share GB00B0218289 ORD 5P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  +0.00p +0.00% 88.91p 0.00p 0.00p - - - 0 06:30:09
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
- - - - 0.00

Ep&f Capital (ECA) Latest News

Real-Time news about EP&F Cap. (London Stock Exchange): 0 recent articles
More Ep&f Capital News
Ep&f Capital Takeover Rumours

Ep&f Capital (ECA) Share Charts

1 Year Ep&f Capital Chart

1 Year Ep&f Capital Chart

1 Month Ep&f Capital Chart

1 Month Ep&f Capital Chart

Intraday Ep&f Capital Chart

Intraday Ep&f Capital Chart

Ep&f Capital (ECA) Discussions and Chat

Ep&f Capital Forums and Chat

Date Time Title Posts
01/10/201708:17NETT CASH 37.5p SHARE PRICE 26.5p457
04/10/200517:55 The new beginning47

Add a New Thread

Ep&f Capital (ECA) Most Recent Trades

No Trades
Trade Time Trade Price Trade Size Trade Value Trade Type
View all Ep&f Capital trades in real-time

Ep&f Capital (ECA) Top Chat Posts

frjdnverijtnhj8568934: EP&F 2016 Financial Results (may the farce be with you) The 2016 financial results can be viewed here at the Companies House website. Where do you start? First of all the accounts were released to shareholders in August 2017. That's despite the financial year-end being December 2016. Again, given that EP&F are an incredibly basic operation that looks like it could be run from a coffee shop a few hours a week, why on earth does it take so long to issue the annual accounts every year? It is pathetic given the magnitude of the salaries being paid to the directors. The second point is EP&F actually posted a profit, the amount being £43,628. This is astonishing and a very rare event for any company with Lance o'Neill as a director. However this profit was in fact due only to an unrealised foreign exchange rate gain on their 700,000 euro-denominated bond investment with Syntaxis. Brexit caused sterling to depreciate significantly versus the euro. On a constant currency basis the company actually lost £13,836. Since the company has finally posted a profit it's valid to ask why has no dividend been declared? After all as well as posting a profit equivalent to a 1p dividend, the company is also sitting on a relatively large amount of cash. However this misses the obvious point and the raison d'etre of the company which is of course to enrich the directors, not the common shareholders. The Syntaxis bond comprises over 50% of the company's net asset value. It pays a 12.5% coupon. There is no indication of the term of this bond. Obviously parking the majority of the company's assets in an instrument such as this is an admission of failure regarding the company's investment strategy. Cash comprises 30% of the company's net asset value. Investments account for 11%. As previously noted we can find no evidence the company has ever invested in any business unless one, or both, of the directors have a pre-existing financial interest. The remaining 8% of the company's net asset value is the net value of debtors to creditors. The related party transactions section explains that the debtors are Andes Energia and Mediazest, companies which require no introduction. The directors, aided and abetted by the dubious and secretive City and Claremont Capital Assets (CCCAL), have the company's assets well and truly tied up, working for their benefit. It's textbook. As reward for doing this the directors' pay themselves salaries comprising 4.8% of the company's net asset value (£55,000). After all investing the company's cash in their own businesses is only half the story. They have to be paid for doing this as well. The total running costs of the company are £109,000 and comprise 9.5% of the company's net asset value. The company is clearly not viable but does not have to be for the directors' to clean up. The directors' salaries are key here. As long as they keep collecting their salaries, and as long as the losses can be controlled, they are guaranteed winners. As an example ask yourself how much Benjamin Edwards paid Nigel Duxbury for his EP&F shareholding. Then ask yourself how few years salary from EP&F will cover this cost. Another point of interest is that EP&F have documented the value of their Mediazest shareholding at the 2015 and 2016 year ends. At the end of 2016 the book value is noted as only £8,566. However the last documented shareholding of EP&F is 26,448,571 shares and based on the Mediazest share price of 0.11p at the end of 2016, it would appear EP&F had sold down about 70% of their shareholding by that date. This is interesting given the CCCAL controlled Mediazest continually go cap in hand to investors looking for cash to remain solvent. EP&F remains a near perfect example of a company run by the directors, for the directors. The business is managed very diligently in a manner that ensures the directors are the beneficiaries with the smaller, minority shareholders completely squeezed out. The directors are very careful to ensure very little of the company's cash is actually at risk. After all this cash represents their salaries for the years, and the decades, to come. As explained previously the cash that has been "risked" so far has been used to support companies where the directors are already taking salaries or have some other financial interest. As an example if EP&F take part in a share placing with barely solvent Mediazest (as they have done several times) then Lance O'Neill's £50,000 salary as a non-executive Mediazest director largely removes any risk of financial loss to Lance O'Neill himself. Not so the smaller minority shareholders who can only sit back and marvel at the blatant self interest.
frjdnverijtnhj8568934: The results are out for 2012 and they are terrible. The loss is 1.99p per share The net asset value is down to £1.802 million The debtor book is ballooning and is £357,811 current asset investments are £487,407 Cash continues to dwindle and is now £969,714 O\'Neill and Duxbury continue to pay themselves £30,000 each Alba Minerals owe the company £96,000. Nigel Duxbury is a director of Alba. This company is barely solvent. Its share price is 0.2p and it floated in 2004 at 5p. MediaZest owe the company over £150,000. O\'Neill is a major shareholder in Mediazest and was paid £50,000 by them last year. Nigel Duxbury is the company secretary of Mediazest. Take a look at the latest results of both Mediazest (MDZ) and Alba Minerals (ALBA). Both companies are consistently loss making and have neqative assets. So O\'Neill takes a £30,000 salary from EP&F. He then loans Mediazest over £100,000 of EP&F\'s cash to keep Mediazest solvent and takes a £50,000 salary from Mediazest. Nigel Duxbury will also receive a salary from Mediazest. Both have significant shareholdings in Mediazest. The Mediazest share price is 0.4p per share. It floated in 2004 at 50p.
hugepants: Berkeley Technology (BEK) Share price = 5.75p Net cash = 15p Q3 results were released yesterday. Revenues growing, costs reducing and cash burn almost down to zero now. See the BEK thread for further info.
hugepants: Yes pleasing to see the share price holding up well. Sellers (and buyers) appear to have dried up completely.
Ep&f Capital share price data is direct from the London Stock Exchange
Your Recent History
Gulf Keyst..
FTSE 100
UK Sterlin..
Stocks you've viewed will appear in this box, letting you easily return to quotes you've seen previously.

Register now to create your own custom streaming stock watchlist.

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

P:43 V: D:20180225 10:04:53