Seneca Growth Capital Vct Share Discussion Threads

[ukhawk] 07/9/2004 22:41

I'm not sure it signifys a "less than committed holder" but it does imply that this isn't close to a quick conclusion.

[edmondj] 07/9/2004 22:13

Reflecting on another RAB sale: I have no idea if this represents any attempt to limit the price rising, to facilitate a bid, but it appears to signal a less than committed holder.

[edmondj] 07/9/2004 19:51

barryrog,

Re. "I would hazard a guess..." this has pretty much been my line too. It is stimulus for a bidder but could stymy negotiations unless any bidder judges it best to make an offer irrespective of the directors' stance. The Johnson family + directors still own a good chunk of this company. I still think matters could drag on, even come to nothing, but I am more confident about earnings prospects than at interims.

[davidosh] 07/9/2004 19:42

Hi Barryrog

That is more or less how I see it with possibly a slightly lower figure than 20p one which the directors would feel they should put to all shareholders.....I am sure that RAB could be satisfied at the lower price .....a good turn as they say rather than long term business development

The previous offer for Swaylands .....Does anyone have concrete info on it as that player may have chosen a different tactic to lever the jewels out of the crown knowing RAB may play a role in driving the getaway car!!!??


David

[barryrog] 07/9/2004 17:51

Hawk,
in the talks with the potential bidders,almost certainly none.
that would be for the directors to discuss with their counterparts.
if you mean how much influence they have over the negotiations,then
almost certainly a very significant amount and HYG would have been made
well aware of what will be acceptable to RAB.
this could well be a sticking point.
i would hazard a guess that RAB would be very happy with a deal at say 15p as a 50% profit would probably be seen by them as good business.
on the other hand,the HYG directors are aware that the NAV is certainly in excess of 20p per share and would see a deal at 15p as considerably undervalueing the co.
in addition RABs involvement is only financial, whereas the HYG Directors are financially and emotionally involved, after all they are the guys that have been running the co. and made it a big part of their lives and their futures..

Edmund,
would appreciate your input on this.

[ukhawk] 07/9/2004 13:18

Well RAB have now sold another 200k @ 11p, no surprise there really. Would be interesting to know how much involvement, if any, they've had in the talks.

[barryrog] 07/9/2004 12:32

morning hawk,
christ, for a while i thought that everybody had died.
you're right about the RAB sales keeping the price down, a good thing in my opinion.
i'm not so sure about a quick conclusion now there are apparently 2 potential bidders in the frame.
mind you,this would now appear to put the co. in a stronger bargaining position rather than one suitor only and RAB breathing down their necks.

[ukhawk] 07/9/2004 10:06

RAB's share sales certainly have kept the lid on. All the small buys following Edmond's article have been soaked up. Actual spread 10.9/11.3 so all the buys are indicated as sells on ADVFN.

Barryrog, are you still expecting a quick outcome ?

[barryrog] 05/9/2004 22:35

evening edmond,
now you've got me confused.
i am not sure whether you want them to be taken over or not.
with regard to RAB's share sales, don't you think that is to keep the share price down so as to not jeapordise the discussions rather than petulance?

[edmondj] 05/9/2004 21:59

I've said they have received two approaches, I wouldn't go so far to say there are "bidders" (yet). But this was a management admission so they cannot dismiss it as media speculation!

[ukhawk] 05/9/2004 21:38

I've been out all day and only just had the chance to read Edmond J's article. Not altogether a surprise that he wrote about Honeygrove this week, but interesting that he states there are two bidders. I've been saying all week that once they were "in play" quite a few possible suitors would be running the rule over them. As EJ said in his article they are cheap and extremely vunerable. Interesting that now EJ has brought attention to the situation, one of the suitors may want a swift conclusion.

[dunnie] 05/9/2004 20:37

Strange no comment on EJ's article,i was very pleased to read the article.

[dunnie] 05/9/2004 07:51

Edmond Jackson's wrote a nice piece in todays Sunday Telegraph about Honeygrove, also pointing out RAB Capital's growing influence in the smaller companies sector. RAB holds just under 30m shares and another 30m 2yr warrants.EJ also reveals a second bidder is in the frame, now that would be great a bidding war.

[barryrog] 03/9/2004 19:46

hawk,
i would ignore the share price if i was you as it is being kept artificially low by drip feeding the 1.45m RAB sales throughout the day.
its not really a concern though, the only important issue is the outcome of the takeover discussions.
have a good weekend.

[ukhawk] 03/9/2004 17:09

Couple of large buys went through as sells, balanced the price up at the end of the day.

[dunnie] 03/9/2004 14:00

barryrog,
i'm glad you are quoting previous posts for it was after reading through yours i realised what a liar you are.
Regards

[barryrog] 03/9/2004 13:58

dunnIE,
i must have misinterpreted your post 225 in which i thought you said "lets stop interpersonal slanging".
as i am sure you realise the current share price is irrelevant and the only thing that matters to HYG shareholders is the outcome of the current bid discussions.

[dunnie] 03/9/2004 13:24

ukhawk,
if i could get a proper job i wouldn't be here,barryrog lambasted me the other day about my loss on RAB and boasted of his 20% profit on HYG so i am re-making the point,you don't make a profit till you sell, nor take a loss.
Regards

[ukhawk] 03/9/2004 13:19

dunnIE, good to see your school has a computer you can use in your lunch-break.

[barryrog] 03/9/2004 13:17

you may be right but 0.6p this year, maybe 1.0p next v's 5.0p per share,who knows.
i think my real concern is that the directors turn down an offer of say 15p per share saying that it undervalues the co.
now you and i know that on fundamentals and NAV,fair value is probably 20p plus.
but the sad fact is that sort of worth has never been reflected in the share price and probably won't be until such time as swaysland is developed and properties are being sold.another 18 months maybe.

[dunnie] 03/9/2004 13:14

Barryrog,
were has your 20% profit gone.
Regards

[edmondj] 03/9/2004 12:27

But some of the directors own very substantial shares and there is a commitment to resume dividends, they would be ceding a nice little (?!) earner if HYG is acquired.

Not to dispute you. I just figure matters are liable to get drawn out, but that could still be a good thing.

[barryrog] 03/9/2004 12:19

edmund'
i think its probably HYG that want to keep a lid on the price.
at the risk of sounding cynical,the directors will become very rich men if the co. is taken over and maybe one or two might get a position on the Board of the new co. with a 'shedload' of share options.
lets hope its sorted quickly,i want to top up my MPH before the interims in October.

[edmondj] 03/9/2004 10:57

charlie,

thanks for that!

barryrog,

Maybe RAB doesn't want the price to soar otherwise it jeopardises a deal? So keep MMs supplied with stock.

ukhawk,

"possibility" of more than one party?!

I would be content for the 'bid situation' to drag on for weeks if not months.

[ukhawk] 03/9/2004 10:48

Barryrog, agree, mm's happy to soak up stock. There's very little downside from here, and as you say a fair value is 20p, or more. Still think, in the current market they'll go for not a lot more than 15p though. Always the possibility that more than one party is interested and then you may well get your 20p !