Eurodis Elect. Share Discussion Threads

[Abuse team] 24/7/2005 15:06

Post removed by ADVFN

[momentos] 24/7/2005 15:05

Deep, well thought out, challenging contribution peepee.

Thanks!

[clarendon] 24/7/2005 15:05

Your probably right

[poypee57] 24/7/2005 15:02

This dog is dead. Take the hit. Give it a decent burial and move on.

[clarendon] 24/7/2005 14:58

Malcom

It is the parent company that is in Administration - look at the parent company balance sheet not the consolidated group balance sheet. You will see that the various subsidiary companies are shown as investemnts (the cost of the shares in the various companies) This is what the Administrators have for sale.

Potential purchasers will value the individual subsidiary companies taking account of the debts (both on balance sheet and off balance sheet) in the individual companies.

Once the various subsidiary companies have been sold off the Administrators will distribute the proceeds to the creditors of the parent company (after deducting their fees of course!!). The parent company will then be either left as a cash shell (if all creditors are paid) or placed into creditors voluntary liquidation (if all the creditors are not paid). If it remains as a cash shell then there is some hope, depending upon the Preference Sharesolders position, maybe a reverse takeover or maybe a members voluntary liquidation and a return of any surplus to the shareholders (Preference first followed by Ordinary)

[Abuse team] 24/7/2005 13:53

Post removed by ADVFN

[jordaggy] 24/7/2005 11:37

Dreamer - take a close look at CCO ....bafling but worth a punt me thinks ! DYOR and all that ! only invest that which you can afford to lose...goodluck

[bungo] 24/7/2005 10:44

DD, not necessarily a pointer but I consider my telecom stock holdings as my lowest risk investments with BT being top of the list followed by CW. Both stocks doing well this year so far. Hopefully there will be further consolidation in this sector and it will continue its upward trend following the huge slump from past unjustified highs ... IMO. Also lost on ELH but it was always high risk and I still play with higher risk stocks. BTG have been very interesting this year (now waiting for news on a partner for one of its developments) and I'm sticking with RSA and ISYS as recovery play stocks. ENO dont look particularly cheep anymore but I've done well from these and would be looking to sell at my 120p target if there hadnt been so much director buying.

[nonlottie] 23/7/2005 21:38

YES...................but it seems the plan all the time was to use the majority of the money to pay off others who were already in the sh.t

As dull, incompetent and naive the advisers and board may have been in spending the cash this way they did of course tell everyone BEFORE the money was put in that this is what they were going to do.

The question is of the remaining £15m how much was lost ( sort of acceptable) compared with any additional funds went to creditors over and above what they said ( totally unacceptable and they should be accountable for this).

If for example only £5m was used in trading and the banks snaffled an extra £10m then it would seem that the company should have lasted a good deal longer leaving it in a better negotiating position with potential purchasers.

The rate of cash burn here indicates that something went well away from plan.

[the stinger] 23/7/2005 21:23

Yep, it seems as though the board have let down the ordinary shareholder down almost criminally. Would'nt be surprised to see some legal action coming from this.

[nonlottie] 23/7/2005 21:13

Al Naml

From what you've posted it seems that out of the £36m almost half was to pay down banks and creditors, and a further £5m to reorganise the business leaving £13m to finance the recovery.

Don't know whether this went to plan but careful reading should have prompted shareholders to wonder why they were putting in so much to de-risk the problems of others.....paying off banks/creditors with new money is just dull......quite ridiculous to have contemplated them being sorted from shareholders money to this extent.

If it went to plan DR and the board still leaked £15m over the period?????????

Plan looked great for the banks etc but looks in retrospect altogether naive for the shareholders who put up the money........there should have been much tougher talking with the banks regarding their position and future support....paying them off when their backs were against the wall was frankly a mug's game. they must have been laughing all the way ............

[the stinger] 23/7/2005 21:05

yes, very interesting posts, really does make you wonder why the major share holders are so quiet?

[nonlottie] 23/7/2005 21:00

Al Naml

The administrators are as likely to consult Eaglet or Artemis as they are to you any other shareholder or even consult the higher ranking prefs, suppliers and the utility creditors.

Administrators have a duty to get the best outcome but consultation/invi=olvement is unheard of.......shareholders in particular as bottom of the pile have no locus.

It's a bit like Rover......no-one knew what the outcome was going to be...it was a going concern sale in the sense that the business continues but........as it's not a sale of the legal entity....no reason to involve the creditors/shareholders.

This is another reason administrators sell the assts and then deal with the distributions afterwards......just too complex to let everyone have their two penneth worth

.....plus it all leaks like a sieve,usually against the vendor if everyone knows .

Perhaps slightly different in this case with those crazy EC laws in Holland which could involve some statutory consultation with employees.........most likely just slows things up.........ironically to the detriment of those consulted in most cases

Don't want to seem pessimistic but it's about 1m to 1 against EagletArtemis knowing anything more than you...........and they probably don't care because they're not anticipating the remotest chance of getting anything back.

Momentos is on the right track .....just ring the Administrators and see what's what...
.....standard response is " won't be a sale of the company and very unlikely creditors will get paid in full and therefore as a shareholder probably no alternative for you than to forget it, however hoping to sell as a going concern and save jobs"

[Abuse team] 23/7/2005 20:56

Post removed by ADVFN

[Abuse team] 23/7/2005 20:48

Post removed by ADVFN

[nonlottie] 23/7/2005 20:41

One interesting matter is how much of the £38m rights went to finance the company and its recovery and how much got snaffled by the banks...........

gut feel says that £38m financing trading etc in less than 18 months is an awful lot of cash out through the door.........

Just a bit concerning if a large slice of shareholders money just de-risked/bailed out banks etc

AS surely the intention of shareholders when subscribing was meant to provide a platform for the enhancement of value for shareholders........eg. through a sale.

[Abuse team] 23/7/2005 20:00

Post removed by ADVFN

[mike012321] 23/7/2005 16:19

Momentos,interesting. I hope the truth comes out,anyway.

Just seen this in today's Times...Peter Webb doesn't seem to be a shrinking violet(!)

Pressac directors face rebel threat

By Patrick Hosking

A SHAREHOLDER revolt erupted yesterday at Pressac, the car components manufacturer, whose shares were suspended in. May.

The value investors Peter Gyllenhammar and Peter Webb suggested that the directors were failing to look after the interests of ordinary shareholders and were paying too much attention to the interests of Pressac's banks.

They have requisitioned a special meeting to oust three non-executive directors and replace them with two of their nominees, including George Wardale, the turnaround specialist.

Mr Gyllenhammar and Mr Webb speak for 30.2 per cent of Pressac shares and say that they have the support of some other shareholders.

Pressac had not made clear the reasons for the share suspension and a planned restructuring, the pair said. They also questioned whether a management bonus scheme was in investors' best interests.

Pressac, once valued at as much as £260 million, plunged in value because of high debt and a disastrous move into mobile phones. At the time of its delisting, its value had shrunk to just £400,000. It is now planning asset disposals to repay about £50 million to HSBC and JPMorgan Chase.

The rebels, in a statement, said: "The board seems to have failed to look after shareholders' best interests when entering into this agreement [with the banks]." Shareholders, they said, "have little left to lose".

Pressac said that the board was cognisant of its fiduciary duty to shareholders and that the bonus plan was approved by its remuneration committee. Investors were urged to vote against the rebels at the special meeting on August 19.

Mr Gyllenhammar and Mr Webb issued the statement through their respective vehicles, Union Investment Management and Unicorn Asset Management.

Mr Wardale, who once worked for Slater Walker, helped to turn around Highland Spring and French Connection. The other nominee is Ewen Wigley, of Union.

Shareholders are being asked to oust John Cohen, Sheridan Comonte and Philip Dobby.Union said Mr Comonte faced a potential conflict of interest because he was interested in buying Pressac assets. Pressac said safeguards were in place to protect investors' interests.

.................

Different situation - Pressac is not in Administration and anyway can't see Webb publicly criticising the Eurodis management(?) After all,he was instrumental in putting Doug R in as Chairman!

Artemis position might be different I guess, depending upon what happened exactly.

[momentos] 23/7/2005 15:21

I too have my suspicions about that, Mike. Ultimately DR's connection with Eaglet may have done us all a dis-service. If for example Eaglet (and Artemis) made it clear they wanted say 3p min, the offeror may have only been willing to go to say 2p.

Talks break down, bank gets hump & foreclose / reduce facilities, administrators go in. We, the ordinary shareholders, some of whom (me!) would have taken 2p get stuffed. It is a distinct possibility given the speed of events.

Just a possible scenario, if a bit conspiracy theory-ish. But if it were true then DR would be guilty of not acting for all shareholders, just the two major ones.

Any one for a class action ?!

[mike012321] 23/7/2005 13:28

I did wonder if institutional shareholders on the inside of the talks were too aggressive in their asking price,thus causing bidder to withdraw,at which point Bank became concerned - just a possibility.

[mike012321] 23/7/2005 13:23

Interesting posts ,Gromley & Al Naml.

Further confirmation of slow-down in European market...

Latest Semiconductor sales data, for immediate release
Brussels, July 2nd , 2005
The European market slows down in May

May data show a stronger decline of the total semiconductor market in Europe compared to the other regions, which is still consistent with the seasonal behaviour of Q2 in recent years.

The sequential decline of the European market (3-month rolling average) is primarily due to MPU, MCU, application specific MOS Logic and DRAM. On the positive side, Flash memory products are performing better than the average, recording a 3% growth. The application specific ICs for automotive and sensors are also showing a positive trend.

European Semiconductor sales in May 2005 amounted to US$ 3.191 billion according to the World Semiconductor Trade Statistics (WSTS), down -3.9% versus the previous month. This corresponds to a +0.1% increase compared to the same month last year.
On a year-to-date basis, semiconductor sales increased by +4.9% versus the same period in 2004.

The exchange rate of the Euro compared to the US$ still has an impact on the growth data at this time. Measured in Euro, semiconductor sales in May were EURO 2.462 billion, a decline of -3.2% versus previous month and a decline of -6.3% versus the same month a year ago. On a year-to-date basis, semiconductor sales slipped into negative terrain now and show a decline of -0.7% versus the same period in 2004.

On a worldwide basis, semiconductor sales in May were US$ 18.052 billion, down -0.5% versus the previous month. This results in an increase of +4.1% versus the same month in 2004 and on a year-to-date basis it results in a growth rate of +8.6%.

(for more data please see the tables and graphs on following pages)

About ESIA: The European Semiconductor Industry Association (ESIA), part of the European Electronic Component manufacturers' Association (EECA), represents the European-based manufacturers of semiconductor devices. The semiconductor industry provides the enabling technology, which is at the
forefront of the development of the digital economy. The sector supports over 86,000 jobs in a market valued at around € 31.7 bn in 2004.

About WSTS: Established in 1986, the World Semiconductor Trade Statistics is a non-profit corporation whose mission is to provide timely, accurate and authentic semiconductor market data on industry product shipments in a product line format serving the broad marketing and executive needs. In 2004 WSTS
members are 72 semiconductor companies from all over the world representing around 85% of the world's semiconductor market.



(Figures not for the component distribution market but for wider semiconductor market)

[Abuse team] 23/7/2005 13:00

Post removed by ADVFN