Hambledon Mining Share Discussion Threads

[grbaker] 23/10/2012 16:20

Thanks all.

[phillis] 23/10/2012 16:17

Quite correct Chip
Any overseas entity doesn't have to follow these rules because there is no sanction

[chipperfrd] 23/10/2012 16:12

grbaker,

Trouble is, there are no real sanctions (as far as I know) against anyone submitting a holdings report to the issuer late - or for that matter, ever!

So it remains up to the new holder to make the report at a time of their choosing - or not, as the case may be.

Let us hope that in this case we will finally see who has taken this tranche of stock and that we can then finally put to bed this current crop of speculation.
Chip

[grbaker] 23/10/2012 16:04

P.P.S. For completeness (there's another four working days give or take by which we should hopefully know what's fact and fiction!)

DTR 5.8.3
20/01/2007
The notification to the issuer shall be effected as soon as possible, but not later than four trading days in the case of a non-UK issuer and two trading days in all other cases, the first of which shall be the day after the date on which the relevant person:

(1) learns of the acquisition or disposal or of the possibility of exercising voting rights, or on which, having regard to the circumstances, should have learned of it, regardless of the date on which the acquisition, disposal or possibility of exercising voting rights takes effect; or

(2) is informed about the event mentioned in DTR 5.1.2 R (2).

And for the purposes of (1) above a person shall, in relation to a transaction to which he is a party or which he has instructed, be deemed to have knowledge of the acquisition, disposal or possibility to exercise voting rights no later than two trading days following the transaction in question and where a transaction is conditional upon the approval by public authorities of the transaction or on a future uncertain event the occurrence of which is outside the control of the parties to the agreement, the parties are deemed to have knowledge of the acquisition, disposal or possibility of exercising voting rights only when the relevant approvals are obtained or when the event happens.
[Note: articles 12(1), and 12(2) of the TD and article 9 of the TD implementing Directive]

From:

[grbaker] 23/10/2012 15:54

P.S.

1. When do I have to make the notification by?

UK Issuer:

Shareholders must make the disclosure as soon as possible but no later than two trading days after the date on which the person learnt or should have learnt about a change to their holdings.

3. When should I have learnt of the obligation?

A shareholder shall be deemed to have knowledge of the acquisition, disposal or possibility to exercise voting rights no later than two trading days following the transaction in question. Unless the transaction is conditional upon the approval by public authorities of the transaction or on a future uncertain event the occurrence of which is outside the control of the parties to the agreement, whereby knowledge is deemed to have arisen when the relevant approvals are obtained or when the event happens.
Refer to DTR 5.8.3

8. When does an acquisition/ disposal arise?

A person must notify the issuer of the percentage of voting rights he holds if he acquires or disposes of shares in the issuer to which voting rights are attached reaches breaches or falls below a relevant threshold.
Refer to DTR 5.1.2

10. What are the thresholds?

A shareholders has an obligation to disclose their holdings in the above interests when their holdings amount to 3% or above of the total voting rights and capital in issue. Additional notifications also need to be made when their holdings reach breech or fall below every 1% above that. Or in the case of holdings in a non-UK issuers on the basis of thresholds at 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 30%, 50% and 75%.
Refer to DTR 5.1.2 (1)

[grbaker] 23/10/2012 15:48

Major shareholders (from Morningstar):

Shareholder Type Amount % Holding
Nicholas Bridgen - 88,448,936 9.03
Henderson Global Investors - 65,554,240 6.69
Majedie Asset Management - 60,786,814 6.20
European Bank for Reconstruction & Development - 58,794,708 6.00
TD Direct Investing - 51,165,671 5.22
Barclays PLC - 50,566,800 5.16
BlackRock Invt Mgmt (UK) Ltd - 48,014,190 4.90
Selftrade - 40,040,957 4.09
Hargreaves Lansdown - 36,074,319 3.68

Director Holdings

Name Type Amount % Holding
Tim Daffern - 250,000 0.026
George Eccles - 194,750 0.020

[tymedici] 23/10/2012 15:34

It does prove that in spite of our economic travails our country still has the ability to produce fine works of fiction.
The problem for us is that to retain our sanity it would be better if this talent were directed elsewhere and not on a HMB blog.... since this company has enough problems of its own and doesn't need people using their creative skills and imagination to dream up new ones.

[grbaker] 23/10/2012 15:27

Anything's possible!

And if no notification of a new/changed major holding is forthcoming, then what would you say is the explanation to where the shares went???

P.S. It's very strange that anybody (even more so a single buyer IMO) would pay that premium... but that's what the RNS says!

[grbaker] 23/10/2012 11:26

Phillis
22 Oct'12 - 16:54 - 16093 of 16102

at 1.8p?
absurd


Yes, that's a fair point (I forgot about the 1.8p bit, it being above the current SP)... still, it does not mean that there wasn't more than one buyer does it?

Time will tell anyway. It'll have to be declared at some point if there was a single buyer.

I did find this page on the FSA (regarding notification of major holdings):



So I think that HMB has to wait for whoever bought the shares (assuming it's one or more buyers who's holding(s) has/have gone above e.g. 3%) to notify... so while HMB may know who the buyer is, I think it is up to the buyer to notify...

...anyway, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong (it wouldn't be the first time) ;)

[phillis] 23/10/2012 08:26

nuts

your 16094 accuses NB and the Board of criminal activity
you might want to try thinking long and hard next time you have a fanciful theory

[1nf3rn0] 22/10/2012 19:41

So we still don't know who the buyer is.

My thoughts are that given that HMB leaks news as much as tailings waste, and that presumably TD and the Board know who the buyer is, their cosy friends in the city would no doubt have got wind by now if the identity of the buyer suggested something exciting was on the horizon (like an attractive takeover offer). So I think we can rule out the miracle 5p offer.

Also if NB only managed to get 1.8p I'm not sure why PIs would be offered more.

I feel a re-test of the low around 1p may not be far away...

[chestnuts] 22/10/2012 18:08

Zimbi

I am sorry Daffern told every one at the agm that the Akmola deal would go through with in 6 weeks, and then i was told by others that Zorab went around and told every shareholder, ( but not to me ) that it wouldnt happen so quickly, i found this out just a little while ago. So make of that what you wish.

[zimbi] 22/10/2012 17:50

dofmeister 21 Oct'12 - 23:28 - 16083 of 16098

Daffern now wants.....

Daffern envisages....

He hopes....

.......in a deal he hopes to conclude next year.

[chestnuts] 22/10/2012 17:43

Phillis

NB will have notified the company who is buying his shares, he as to, he will know who it is, so why not release it at the same time as todays rns, they dont have to wait for the person to notify the company, because he bought from a director.

[chestnuts] 22/10/2012 17:36

Phillis

HMB have twisted the rules a few times in the past its like releasing the name of the buyer , why havent they , they know they should have, so why havent they, so at the moment until hmb start with more clarity, i will think the other.

[phillis] 22/10/2012 17:29

no they don't

Like most other people I am sitting on a loss here
but your post is amongst the most stupid, unintelligent and ill considered one ever sees on a BB

urrgh
words fail me again

[phillis] 22/10/2012 17:26

Nuts

you are brain dead
don't you think that if NB had been selling the Company would have noticed the reduction of his holdings in the share register
His position as a Director would have been untenable, not least the Company's for not holding him to account

Words fail me......
(PS he remains a Director)

[chestnuts] 22/10/2012 17:21

GrBakeer

That crossed my mind, you never know, this last 3 months with hmb as lost all my trust,

I posted not long ago that some one last yr posted that NB was selling well if he as been selling for the last 12 months no wonder the share price as kept falling, and if this is true it goes to show how the management cause rumours instead of clarity.

[phillis] 22/10/2012 16:54

at 1.8p?
absurd

[grbaker] 22/10/2012 16:52

Perhaps the shares were placed in the market over time and there might not even be a single buyer..?

[chestnuts] 22/10/2012 16:18

.Yet again we are left to guess, who as bought, maybe its Doff< or Almost, or even Infernoe

[giant steps] 22/10/2012 15:47

Very interesting, sale completed at 1.8p

RNS 22nd October 2012

[phillis] 22/10/2012 15:45

not necessarily
if the buyer is not particularly fussed by regulatory issues ( i.e. they are based in some far off republic) then they will probably not notify HMB

[chrisdgb] 22/10/2012 15:42

so shares sold..........now we await, with interest, who the buyer is..??