Gartmore Grp Share Discussion Threads

[andrewbaker] 24/11/2010 13:11

They have awarded themselves new shares and diluted other shareholders in order to get something in place of the sack when the takeover comes. I had a take-out figure of 150p in mind previously: now that has dropped to just 128.5p

This lot don't have a moral between them. The company should be bought for assets under management only, and all the employees from director down fired (preferably out of a cannon).

[diku] 23/11/2010 23:24

So they have awarded key employees new shares...how about awarding loyal shareholders free new shares?...heha!!!...or is this a one way street?...awards in any shape or form is normally given after the event if proven on his/her execellent performance...in the City you first get the award!!...I am all confused now!...

[roman2325] 23/11/2010 09:52

Sound advice. I've heard Buffett mention that before aswell

[edmondj] 23/11/2010 09:07

Beware bosses called 'Jeff', for example at Max Petroleum also (long-term record).

Likewise finance directors called Tony instead of Anthony.

You'd be surprised how reliable this proves.

[liquidkid] 23/11/2010 09:02

I was expecting more madness but this beyond farcical
It's the CEO Jeff Meyer that's clearly the insane cuckoo in this debacle.
First he fires one of his top guns (Rambourg) for a minor oversight after blowing it all out of proportion. Then he makes £15 million of dodgy "strategic investments" rather than paying down the debts which was his primary mandate. What were those "seed" invesments anyway? Next, Hiring Golden Sacks who's contracts make Rumplestiltskin's from Shrek 4 look credible. Then awarding himself more shares when he already is a top10 shareholder. Is it required motivation for him to get up in the morning?
"I wouldn't get out of bed for less than 1 million shares, make that 3 then, done."
If there is anyone who needs more so than to fall on his sword, sit up and examine is own guts as the blood drains away he'd finally have better vision than ever before.

[goofy1] 23/11/2010 08:50

envirovision...........I thought there was a 5% limit on new share issuance without existing shareholder permission

[envirovision] 23/11/2010 08:45

Yes they just have an agreed allocation of shares which can be issued for what ever reason, i.e. fund raising/placing etc.

Lots of small aim companies often would not have this, so that it could be later proposed at say an AGM and voted on. This gives holders confidence they wont be diluted to hell.

Other larger companies like gartmore dont worry so much as shareholders just assume the company is so credible theres no problem and nothing un-toward would happen.

Sadly GRT is anything but credible and the obscene event simply compounds this.

[goofy1] 23/11/2010 08:34

Does anyone know how the Gartmore management can dilute existing shareholders by circa 15% (partially for their own benefit in addition to fund manager retention) with no reference to existing shareholders.

[envirovision] 23/11/2010 07:43

One word. obscene

[simon gordon] 23/11/2010 07:03

Daily Mail - 23/11/10:

In a desperate move to keep more staff from following star fund manager Roger Guy out of the door, Gartmore on Friday raised eyebrows in the City by awarding key employees bumper share awards.

News of the lock-in has gone down like a lead balloon. Particularly as rumours doing the rounds suggest Goldman Sachs is having major problems in finding a buyer for the beleaguered fund management group.

Hungry bears again savaged the shares, which plummeted to a low of 95p before they closed 11.9p, or 11pc, cheaper at 98.05p. Last December's flotation price was 220p.

Gartmore has diluted the total number of shares on offer by 15pc to incentivise staff. John Bennett, who is now regarded as Top Gun and is apparently running Guy's European Large Cap Fund, is the biggest beneficiary.

He has been awarded a staggering 9m new shares to take his total shareholding up to 11m. Chief executive Jeffrey Meyer gets 3m new shares, while global head of distribition Phil Wagstaff has received 2m.

In a recent note, analyst Sarah Ing at Singer Capital Markets, said that Gartmore needed to act swiftly to protect its assets. She believes that almost all of the £3.5bn of assets managed by Roger Guy are likely to walk out the door and that it could haemorrhage further funds during this period of uncertainty.

www.dailymail.co.uk/money/article-1332151/MARKET-REPORT-Gartmore-share-boost-hits-rivals.html#ixzz165R46r5U

[envirovision] 22/11/2010 11:25

Your joking 3Mill shares, whats that all about then, performance related? hehe nice work if you can get it.

[rj allen] 19/11/2010 16:41

CEO has just given himself 3,000,000 shares! I thought these 'incentive shares' were supposed to be for retaining fund managers

[hvs] 18/11/2010 16:30

Yeah call it 155 after all its ONLY OTHER PEOPLES MONEY.

[randolph and mortimer] 11/11/2010 16:24

Well, JUPiter are now valued at 3.65 x GRT, with AUM of £3bn more. Even if GRT sank to £13BN, pro-rata Jupiter's valuation would still give £650m. Take off the debt of c.£100 and still one gets > £500m. Call it a deal at 155pps.

[andrewbaker] 11/11/2010 13:48

Bears on Gartmore must be feeling the squeeze as stake-building by Henderson and others pushes the price back up. Now, why would hard-bitten financial wheeler-dealers be buying a worthless share? Answer: because it's not worthless, no matter what those shorting, or worse, talking with no stake themselves, are spraying. This won't go back to the original public offering price, but it has enough legs to get back to 150p-ish, and will do.

[hvs] 10/11/2010 14:12

And he has already had enough of OTHER PEOPLES MONEY.

Easy if you is IN THE CITY.

[roman2325] 10/11/2010 14:05

If Roger Guy cared about his stake he wouldn't be walking away. The guy is not stupid. He clearly realises its just not worth fighting for a lost cause..

[hvs] 10/11/2010 13:54

My bet - and it is a gamble - is that the group of current shareholders who include the people left, leaving, and remaining in place, will work hard to retain funds such that the price when a takeover or re-privitisation happens, is a way north of 110p per share

lol !!!

Lol !!!!

Why is they leaving then ? And asking the mug INVESTORS to stay PUT so that they lose even more money.

TYPICAL CITY THINKING , that is if they can actually THINK.

Its OTHER PEOPLES MONEY and at then end ITS THE TAXPAYER.

Lets PARTY.