Register for real-time alerts, custom portfolio, and market movers
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Type | Share ISIN | Share Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Healthcare Loc | LSE:HLO | London | Ordinary Share | GB00B0MD8242 | ORD 10P |
| Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.00% | 0.75 | 0.00 | 00:00:00 |
| Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| - |
| Last Trade Time | Trade Type | Trade Size | Trade Price | Currency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | O | 0 | 0.75 | GBX |
Healthcare Locums (HLO) Share Charts1 Year Healthcare Locums Chart |
|
1 Month Healthcare Locums Chart |
Intraday Healthcare Locums Chart |
| Date | Time | Title | Posts |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20/1/2018 | 15:36 | Healthcare locums - plugging specialist health staff shortages | 1,969 |
| 20/7/2010 | 15:54 | HEALTHCARE LOCUMS, The Market Needs You. | 667 |
| 31/1/2006 | 08:43 | Healthcare Locums | 1 |
| Trade Time | Trade Price | Trade Size | Trade Value | Trade Type |
|---|
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 09/4/2013 19:38 by jojo_jo Who cares? Nothing anyone posts here will make a blind bit of difference! They successfully locked the price at this level on Feb.6th. I agree everything has been kept very close to the insider 'community' chest. I guess only a couple of officers in each camp are privvy to the information, and the BOD is clearly very wary of any wrongdoing after the history here under KB. There would be little mileage in dragging it out longer, as any improvement at HLO could increase its value/price. There is considerable kudos in being stockmarket listed. That makes me wonder if they may have engineered a way of holding nearly all the shares (eg. 90%) and staying listed. I understand companies have until 2014 to conform to the 25% free-float threshold, so they could take 'virtually complete ownership' for about 12 months, in which time they could get it back on track. They could then sell some of this increased holding at a premium early next year, and still retain control with 75% (similar to now). The only other way they can recover their capital is by re-floating sometime in the future. They could recover it over time through retaining profits, but a flotation would give them both profits (via dividends) and capital (shareprice) gains. Accordingly they could pitch a cash offer acceptable to the vast majority with an option for bigger, seriously under water holders like CT and Jupiter to recover their losses too over time by staying invested. This or something similar is a possibility. Anything that avoided privatisation would be hugely share price positive, regardless. Just thinking aloud. Que sera sera. IMPO/DYOR/NAI Jo |
Posted at 21/3/2013 08:58 by dusseldorf Graham1TY - I would agree the situation is very bizarre. A major shareholders steps in and says they will bid 'at least' 0.54p and no movement what-so ever. Assets (albeit majority intangible) are 10x multiple of the current price and the company currently has twice as much cash as the market cap (though when trading is cash consuming this doesn't mean too much). I suspect a few of the speculators were burnt on short-term trades following the 2p>0.5p price collapse, expecting the cat bounce that never came and are perhaps wary. Sometimes it's simply a case of lack of visibility i.e. many are not aware of the situation - a flat price attracts very little speculative interest - if the price started creeping up, you'd probably have people scrambling to buy on pure momentum. I've been in multiple situations before where I couldn't believe the lack of interest, suddenly to be deluged with new posters and a rocketing price. Though as holders we are taking a risk the offer is lower than current share price (I'd find it very hard to believe), there is also plenty of reward to be had from these levels... |
Posted at 06/3/2013 15:56 by jojo_jo I wonder who the big seller was who collapsed the price with the c.40m share dump in early February. I thought it was Jupiter, but their holding hasn't changed according to HLO's website. I can't see it having been your typical short-seller at the prices sold, which have never been reached (and so currently out of the money), and who could lend them 40m shares anyway? Tosca&Co still have their holding intact it seems. Jupiter may have another day or two left to advise of their threshold crossing (below 5/4/3%), but if that isn't confirmed soon I couldn't say who the seller was, suffice to say it could only conceivably have been via a stock loan to a short-seller. We'll have to if Jupiter announce a holding change in the next day or two. Yesterday's RNS implies a firm offer (at least 0.54p) is in the pipeline, together with additional capital (probably as/if required over the next few quarters). It's worth remembering that HLO have c.£9m cash, so they don't need any immediate money. Accordingly should things improve, as expected, and no further cash injection is required down the road, they could offer £8.5m for the company, pay £2.3m for the minority shareholders shares, get the company for free and have a cash surplus on the books of £6.2m following completion. That, or something similar, could well be the game plan. By a strange coincidence 848m shares x 1p = £8.48m, so is 1p the price they have in mind I wonder? It certainly fits... gets them a company with £8.5m cash in the bank for an outlay of £2.3m! Now that's a good day's work! They will probably offer to pay down the bank a bit quicker with their two companies/funds underwriting any security shortfall, or underwrite it in return for releasing any charge/security/debe Looks feasible. IMPO/DYOR/NAI Jo |
Posted at 05/3/2013 15:33 by jojo_jo As I understand it Tosca&Co need 90% to go 'unconditional'. Craig Tibbles has implied he'll reject a low-ball offer as the net asset value is over £50m. Not sure if another RIVAL bidder entering AFTER Tosca&Co would have to just get a majority of the minority (27%) shareholder vote, as the other major shareholders may be excluded as they are bidders. I'm not sure of all the take-over rules, so perhaps someone could clarify. I imagine anyone holding over 70% can block a rival bid, but they would at least have to come close to matching it. The BOD could not recommend a bid which was lower than a rival bid and seriously undervalued the company. Remember they only need to buy c.27% of the shares so a bid of £10m (approx. 1.15p) would only cost Tosca&Co c.£2.7m. Even £10m is a real 'steal' for a company Craig Tibbles believes to be worth over £50m net. If I was Tosca&Co, I'd bid tomorrow because a confirmed Framework Suppliers listing could double HLO's value, and being on the list is pretty much a formality in view of their accreditation and high level of existing embedding. I think the bid will be advised tomorrow, and the BOD have a duty to advise all minority shareholders asap. It may therefore be announced after the close, but watch out for an intra-day RNS. It may be announced at 7pm on Thursday. I think they will want to get this through without a fight with minority shareholders and all its negative implications (god knows this company's had enough negative boardroom publicity). Like I said, a £10m bid will only cost them c.1.15p/share approx. and I suspect the bid will be around the 1p - 1.2p mark. That may still not be enough for 90% of the votes, as long-termers who bought in above 2p won't accept it. They could represent more than 10% of the vote. As stated earlier, I'm not sure if a rival bidder ('white knight') could then emerge in the knowledge they need only secure 90% of the minority shareholder vote. Either way Tosca&Co need about 65% of the minority shareholders' votes to get this through ('go unconditional'). They're not going to get that without a fair offer. No small shareholder could reasonably argue that an offer around 2p is unreasonable, as the share price was around 2p a year ago. I think they'd get their 90% if they came in at 2p. That will still only cost them about £4.6m in real terms. For that they get a company which is realistically worth ieo £70m. A 2p bid would probably be a 'knockout' number attracting less than 5% resistance. It would certainly be recommended by the BOD (some of whom have small holdings, which they would not want to see hit too hard). I would vote yes to a 2p bid, but have to think about anything less. IMPO/DYOR/NAI Jo PS. Also overlooked is the recent 'bet' by Fidelity. They (FIL) certainly expect to make a handsome short-term gain on their recent 'investment'. |
Posted at 01/3/2013 09:27 by bill182 Graham!TY - I certainly concur with your thoughts on the lack of news flow and the decision by the Board to remain quiet on the indicative minimum offer.If the shareholder who sold their large stake which drove the share price down had not done so and the recent positive news had been released via an RNS, I am sure the share price would be above the 2.00p price level today. Let's see what the company has to say when Tosca issue their next statement next Wednesday. |
Posted at 21/2/2013 13:27 by bill182 Just received the attached from the 'notoHCLoffer' campaign. I assume the distribution is with the agreement of Craig Tibbles:Letter from Craig Tibbles Thursday, 21 February 2013 Further to the article in Recruiter magazine and the subsequent speculation, I write to make my position clear. The article is correct in stating that I have not made any decision. This is because there is no formal offer. The Recruiter article also quotes me correctly in stating "There has been far too much sabre rattling regarding HCL". This is also correct. My reference is to idle speculation and wild accusations and claims surrounding HCL since the removal of the previous Board of Directors. In the interests of clarity, I wish to make my position clear regarding the indicative offer referred to in the announcement of the 6th February by the Board of Directors of HCL; The indicative offer is in line with the depressed share price following the trading update issued on the 23rd January 2013. This update highlights concerns regarding 'continuing' legal action regarding US based proceedings against the company and the former Executive Vice Chairman Kate Bleasdale. In both cases, the Board of HCL have made their position clear. The "Update on the US proceedings commenced against HCL" of the 14th August 2012 the Board stated; "Accordingly, our legal advisors have today written to the Plaintiffs' US counsel confirming that the Company does not propose to respond to the US proceedings and informing them that, if they wish to pursue a claim, they should do so in the proper forum, namely, the English High Court of Justice. The Plaintiffs' US counsel have also been informed that the Board consider the underlying claim to be wholly without merit and that if proceedings are commenced in the proper forum they will be strenuously defended". No further action, or filing in the English Courts has been notified as far as I am aware. The update also states; "Since the Interims there have been no further material developments with respect to this litigation other than the initial rejection of Ms Bleasdale's application for an appeal. As allowed in such an instance, Ms Bleasdale has requested a hearing in front of a Judge to challenge this decision. The Board remains confident of its defence in both claims and will strenuously defend its position". The update of the 23rd highlights concerns regarding the possibility of HCL not meeting its covenants with the banks in March and June 2013. There is also the reference to the possibility of a requirement for further capital funding in the next 12 months. There have been several significant, and positive, developments in HCL's trading. The update of the 23rd makes no reference to any of these developments. Furthermore, many, if not all, of the issues that have delayed HCL in achieving its financial objectives have either been addressed or will be addressed in the next few weeks. In my opinion, the content of the update of the 23rd January appears to be unduly negative in its overall message. The absence of almost any reference to positive (and significant) developments, many of which have been reported in the press or within internal news updates, presents an unbalanced and unduly negative picture. The result of the announcement was clear in the dramatic fall in the share price. The absence of any positive elements could, and probably would, lead any investor, potential investor or other interested party to lose interest. My own assessment of the value of HCL and its subsidiaries is very different from the 'Market Cap'. The current share value is, in my opinion and the opinion of many others, grossly below the true realisable value of the company. In my opinion, the realisable value, after repayment of bank debt, is closer to £60 million plus cash in bank, not the sub £5 million reflected in the current share price. Although I am, formally, undecided with regard to any possible and (as yet unforthcoming) offer, I would anticipate that this letter would enable any informed party to ascertain my current view. Kind regards Craig Tibbles |
Posted at 06/2/2013 09:52 by jojo_jo bozzy, I'm not in the slightest bit embarrassed today! Why should I be? I suggested Tosca&Co could consider a bid for the remainder of HLO, which has come to pass now. Whilst I would like to have seen (and fully expected) the share price recover in due course on improving newsflow, or more substantially on a disposal, I'm perfectly happy with the safety net the Tosca&Co offer provides. It certainly allows time for things to improve and other parties to come forward. As far as I'm aware the bidding shareholders can't vote, so a large majority of the remaining shareholders (mostly PIs I guess) would have to accept for the offer to go unconditional. This could just be a tactic to put a firm support line under the share price. Obviously if trading improves substantially, the PIs will reject the offer and the share price should re-rate to reflect the improvement in trading. I have no time for short-sellers, regardless of whether they're in collusion with anyone or not. They destroy businesses, jobs and lives. IMPO/DYOR/NAI Jo |
Posted at 30/1/2013 20:09 by jojo_jo Well put John (once a broker), I agree with you almost entirely. You clearly have knowledge/background in such things. The Bank will be placated and reset covenants on the 'fair value or better' sale of assets, and the ideal assets are the Aussie ones. The company which bought the Homecare Division (Kincare) may be interested in the remainder, or parts of it. The bank would I'm sure be content to see their debt paid down by £5m - £10m in the medium term, however if they can make a major disposal (HCA) at cost or above, they could repay over 66% of the bank debt and still have a very big cash cushion. They may even be able to do a deal, whereby the buyer assumes the attached bank debt, or pays half now and half in a year. I imagine such talk is going on behind the scenes now. The Chairman, as a former Standard Chartered exec, will know exactly what will satisfy the bank. One has to remember that the share price has over-reacted (been forced down by a vexatious seller impo), and they have £10 million in cash now, which could well see them through until July if trading remains as before. However it could last indefinitely if trading improves, and continues, as seems likely over the coming year. In the unlikely event they can't attract interest in H.C.Australia by the end of June, the main stakeholders may have to replace some (perhaps 10%) of the bank finance with their own bond (although I don't believe it will be necessary when the time comes). The matter will be resolved one way or the other. I personally believe the marketing of a business asset will do wonders for market sentiment, and the eventual sale of said asset will see the share price jump to new 12 month highs. Thankyou onceabroker John for putting your money where your mouth is. I think you have got it near enough spot on. The potential reward vs risk ratio is very high, perhaps 3:1 or more. This ship will right itself quicker than many think... and the share-price revival will precede it. IMPO/DYOR Jo |
Posted at 30/1/2013 14:26 by jojo_jo Driving all morning. Disappointed to see the share price collapsed by just 500,000 shares sold early on. A similarly small number should bring it back up, and we're at 0.475p mid now with a confident 2m+ buy at 0.5p... perhaps somebody knows something we don't. There's always someone ahead of the game! The fact is the recent share price fall doesn't reflect the situation. They have £10m in hand to see them through, until July, possibly much longer. Locum placements have probably rocketed through the recent spell of bad weather so a trading update for January will likely be quite positive. Whilst the directors are negotiating things such as the sale of assets (price sensitive stuff) they can't buy shares, for obvious reasons. One bounce, another today off a similar low gives us a double (intraday) bottom. I'll put money (already have and still doing so) on them negotiating the sale of an asset or two as we speak. They'll get enough to reduce substantially or eliminate the bank debt (net debt only c.£30 - hardly a Yell or Punch which had billions of debt, a stupid, scaremongering comment). I'm not too concerned, and look forward to a full share price recovery and subsequent jump. We'll know soon, come the beginning of February. Somebody certainly appears to know something we don't. IMPO/DYOR Jo |
Posted at 29/1/2013 12:03 by jojo_jo They're not immediate forced sellers at all. They PASSED the recent covenant test, and have c.£3om of net debt, and £10 million in cash, so hardly desperate. They may need a few quid come April or July, but have time to get assets marketed or sold. They only need to PUT ONE OR TWO ON THE MARKET to put a rocket under the share price! Once the share price recovers the situation will ease substantially and they will have time to do a deal. They don't have to sell immediately, just put them up for sale. They only need to raise £10m - £20m from a sale (or a sale of a stake) to resolve the immediate issue... so hardly a challenge. I think you'll find the next announcement will confirm their intention to dispose of a business or two. That will see the share price double/triple overnight with short-sellers being squeezed to death! Happy to be long. The problem is greatly exaggerated and easily solved as described above! IMPO/DYOR Jo PS. I'm very happy to keep adding at this low price, and am. |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions
Hot Features
Premium
