Henderson Pr Share Discussion Threads

[ianbrewster] 16/11/2011 14:38

Looks like iDealing are quite happy for me to tender as many as I want.


'All tenders for up to 17.5% of your shares are expected to be accepted in full.
Excess applications can be made but may be subject to scaling back.'

[ianbrewster] 16/11/2011 11:01

Mine are in a nominee account with iDealing, but haven't heard anything from them yet - will let you know

[alanji] 16/11/2011 08:56

Tender offer in Tiger was not restricted so how did they manage that? Unlike HPEQ there was a lot at stake in the TIR offer and shareholders would have been severely disadvantaged had they been restricted to the maximum.
I too have emailed Sippdeal.
It would be very useful to know what other nominee companies said?

[badtime] 15/11/2011 18:56

I am with sippdeal and want to go for the 100% ..havent contacted them yet but will do tomorrow..obviously i will get the same reply...but will do as u have done sky and pursue the matter...updates on here would continue to be welcomed

[hoveite] 15/11/2011 18:20

Skyship - well done on that email. I hope they see sense.

This restriction has the potential to cost us a lot of money.

[skyship] 15/11/2011 18:06

Rec'd this reply from Sippdeal:
==============================================
Thank you for your email.

In regards to your enquiry I can confirm that we will only tender up to 17.5% of your shares. If you request to tender more than this we will amend your amount to the maximum (17.5%).

If you have any further queries please do not hesitate to contact us.

Yours sincerely

James White
==================================

I have replied:

too darned right I have a query!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I gather you will only tender at the 17.5% rate due to some difficulty over administration of the collective nominee account.

May I respectfully suggest you put your collective heads together and sort out a way so that we individuals can express our individual requirements.

In these tender offer situations there will always be some parties for whatever reason tendering less than their maximum.

Ergo, there will be an excess figure available to those tendering for more than the "Invitation to Treat" level of 17.5%.

I and two other Sippdeal members I am aware of, wish to tender at a higher level. 100% in my case and most likely the same 100% for the other two.
=====================================

[alanji] 15/11/2011 17:02

Cannot recall this before in Sippdeal but I can see the logic in it unless the company (HPEQ) accept multiple applications under the same nominee name - surely not difficult to arrange.
I will be interested to see what other nominees are doing and the reply from Sippdeal.

[jaws6] 15/11/2011 15:30

That is not fair, I remember last time I did more in same thing to get filled more .

[spectoacc] 15/11/2011 15:29

Sorry to hear @hoveite, that seems particularly shoddy: what they're effectively saying is "We don't want you to be treated more favourably, therefore we'll guarantee you'll be treated less favourably by not allowing you a single share of the over-allotment".

[skyship] 15/11/2011 15:22

hmm - not happy with that at all. Haven't heard back from Sippdeal yet; but assuming that to be the case then I shall certainly be tackling them on the subject.

[hoveite] 15/11/2011 15:03

I'm also with Sippdeal and queried this with them.

We could tender an excess if we held the shares in our own name, but as we hold them in a pooled nominee account Sippdeal won't let us. This is because doing so could result in a situation where we are treated more favourably than if we elected on this event individually - if another Sippdeal client doesn't tender their shares for example - and Sippdeal say they are not allowed to do this.

I feel quite angry about this. Why should small shareholders who are likely to hold their shares in nominee accounts be treated less favourably than large shareholders who are able to tender an excess?

I wonder whether other brokers who use nominee accounts are applying the same rule.

[skyship] 15/11/2011 14:07

Received a note from Sippdeal today, incorporating this para:

"Shareholders wishing to Tender must make their election below, ensuring that their election does not exceed the maximum of 17.5 percent of their holding. Elections in excess of this will be amended or rejected without warning."

These are the words in the Tender Circular:

================================================

● the Initial Tender Offer is for up to 17.5 per cent. of the Company's issued Shares as at the Record Date which will enable Shareholders to tender 7 Shares for every 40 Shares owned;
● Shareholders (other than Restricted Shareholders) on the Register on the Record Date will be able to tender none, some or all of their Shares within the overall limit of the Initial Tender Offer.
Tenders in excess of a Shareholder's Basic Entitlement will only be accepted to the extent that other Shareholders tender less than their Basic Entitlement or do not tender any Shares and will be satisfied on a pro rata basis;
● the Tender Price in pence per Share (which will be calculated to four decimal places) will be an amount equal to 95 per cent. of the latest published unaudited NAV per Share as at close of business on 30 November 2011 (or such later date as the Directors, in their discretion, shall determine) as calculated by the Company. The Company's NAV per Share as at 30 November 2011 will be announced during the week commencing 5 December 2011;
==========================================================


Q.: Can one tender more than the 17.5%; or can one tender 100% so as to possibly tender 17.5% PLUS a share of any shares left untendered. Seems confusing...

[skyship] 15/11/2011 10:23

The following extracts from today's IMS suggest they could have done a larger return, as the cost = c.£11.75m + limited exps. Still, it perhaps implies there could be another return quite soon:

=========================================================

"Good progress was maintained with the Company's asset realisation strategy during the period with the sale of four more investments. Two of these were limited partnership holdings, being Lyceum Capital Fund II A and Palatine Private Equity Fund. The Company also sold its interests in its only direct investment, The Logic Group Holdings Limited and, at the end of the period, disposed of its listed holding in Graphite Enterprise Trust plc. Total cash proceeds from these four asset sales were GBP9.7 million. Further asset sales are currently under consideration.
............

Financial Position

During the current financial year, the combination of asset sale proceeds, the release from financial commitments to limited partnership fund investments which have been sold and distributions from the Company's remaining limited partnership fund investments has transformed the Company's liquidity position. As a result, it was possible for the Company to cancel its entire GBP30.0 million
committed banking facility during the period, thereby generating considerable savings in bank charges. Furthermore, by 31 October the Company had accumulated GBP17.4 million in cash and cash equivalents."

[jaws6] 15/11/2011 09:27

277 plus 26 % discount is 72p so 277+72=349 p value

[spectoacc] 15/11/2011 09:24

IMS is out, should answer most questions. Eg:

"During the current financial year, the combination of asset sale proceeds, the
release from financial commitments to limited partnership fund investments
which have been sold and distributions from the Company's remaining limited
partnership fund investments has transformed the Company's liquidity position.
As a result, it was possible for the Company to cancel its entire GBP30.0 million
committed banking facility during the period, thereby generating considerable
savings in bank charges. Furthermore, by 31 October the Company had accumulated GBP17.4 million in cash and cash equivalents. "


I understand the NAV the 95% will be based on will be the actual NAV, rather than the adjusted, but what that NAV is we shan't know until shortly after 30th Nov calculation date.

[badtime] 14/11/2011 19:52

sky..so right ..i didn't c the time of the rns ..tut

thanks praps....it did seem a bit of a no brainer as far as they go

[praipus] 14/11/2011 18:19

Not again ....Weiss sells I follow and the stock shoots the lights out!!!

Well done Skyship and Badtime for stoicism under selling pressure.

[skyship] 14/11/2011 11:37

Badtime - On the contrary - that was someone buying immediately after the announcement; and the same person likely the seller of 5k @ 303.15p. A quick £1000 turn at the expense of the Marketmaker.

Could still be bought of course.

This method of capital repayment is used by some. TIR did such an offer last month. Other companies issue B shares which they immediately redeem. There are different ways of achieving the same objective - cash returned to shareholders as capital rather than income.

I will of course be tendering 100% and expect to be scaled down to something in the region of 17.5%-20.0%.

[badtime] 14/11/2011 10:49

who ever sold 5k early doors won't b happy....as its those on register at 30/11 isn't there an argument for buying a few more

[zangdook] 14/11/2011 10:21

I wonder how the spreadbetters will deal with it. When MERE did a forcible repurchase IG paid out on time but it took them a week or so before they realised they were supposed to reduce positions. This one being voluntary is even more complex.

[jaws6] 14/11/2011 10:16

SpectoAcc
please do let me know when you get answer on this re post 147.
I agree with your numbers up to 356 so still another 10 to 15 % to add ?

[spectoacc] 14/11/2011 09:50

Tender offer details out, 17.5% of holdings at 95% of NAV, mid-Dec, based on 30th Nov NAV.

Would have prefered a straightforward cash return - wonder why they've done it as a tender? Unless it's because they know some large shareholders are happy to stay in perhaps?

95% of NAV depends on what that NAV is - still the 375p-ish? That's be about £3.56/share at 95%, for 17.5% (or potentially more pro-rata) of holdings tendered.

Also, is it the Nov NAV as estimated (ie with deductions), or the full NAV? It should be the full NAV, considering the 95%. Again - would have prefered cash return, but at least HPEQ sticking to their timetable.

Need to have a chat with the co again; I'm inclined to tender for 17.5% at £3.56 since it's only a 5% discount but need to work out what holdings remain, what NAV fig it'll be done from, and remind myself when the remaining value will be returned. I can see some logic in tenders insofar as the remaining NAV is proportionally larger by buying out 17.5% of shareholders at 95% of it, but I wouldn't want to be left with 100% of an unrealisable, unlisted p/e holding at the end.

A nice reminder that, even applying a 5% discount, it's still c.60p undervalued.

[badtime] 09/11/2011 10:03

Ah...as it didn't hav a thread i had wondered if u had quote the wrong epic...cheers

[skyship] 09/11/2011 07:31

STANDARD LIFE EUROPEAN PRIVATE EQUITY TRUST PLC

30th Jun'11 NAV = 242.5p versus the current share price of 124p. Likely to be nearer 210p than 240p now; but still SEP looks oversold IMO.

There is no B/b thread, so I may well start one. Here are the links to the Quote page and to the most recent trading statement: