Ienergizer Share Discussion Threads

[rcturner2] 24/4/2023 07:12

Although this isn't going to be of comfort to anyone, I looked at this share a few weeks ago as it came up in a screen I run. I decided against on the basis that I do not touch AIM stocks that are basically foreign companies with no UK connection. However I did talk to a mate of mine in IT who did some research into the company for me. He came back and said short it. Now I have to be careful how I phrase this but his view is that the company is not real and the reported numbers for revenue and profit are probably fake. Basically this is a Globo type situation where the company is inflating its numbers through false accounting. I did debate posting this at the time, tbh I'm sorry I didn't.

[lw425] 23/4/2023 22:24

So what if they are and do?

Will it get investors money back or change the delisting?

No it won't!

Why should I care what the opinion is from ' institutions ' who have made the initial investing error in the first instance? I'm hardly going to waste my precious time listening to what those same ' investors ' have to say now !

Abandon Ship.

[davidosh] 23/4/2023 20:40

Chelverton may be on the show on Monday evening and Downing certainly will be....fund managers feel they need to air their views on this situation

[dr biotech] 22/4/2023 18:23

Have found out I own about £400 of these via my holding in Chelverton's dividend trust. Not much I can do about that. I'll ask them for their opinion.

[dr biotech] 22/4/2023 18:18

tizo10022 Apr '23 - 18:00 - 740 of 740

I did raise a few red flags last year just before I sold out.


Really? not on here you didn't?



tizo100 - 11 Feb 2022 - 09:38:38 - 338 of 741 Ienergizer - IBPO
Sold at a nice profit
Will look to re enter when the tensions in Ukraine sorts itself out.


tizo100 - 26 Jan 2022 - 15:48:40 - 337 of 741 Ienergizer - IBPO
"Why Ienergizer (LON:IBPO) Could Be A Stock To Watch"



tizo100 - 23 Dec 2021 - 16:11:45 - 328 of 741 Ienergizer - IBPO
Patience is a virtue

tizo100 - 22 Dec 2021 - 14:33:20 - 324 of 741 Ienergizer - IBPO
Mine was paid and reinvested with Iweb on Monday

tizo100 - 15 Dec 2021 - 16:33:20 - 318 of 741 Ienergizer - IBPO
Dividend payment coming on 20th December will reinvest it into more shares

tizo100 - 07 Dec 2021 - 15:40:04 - 317 of 741 Ienergizer - IBPO
Well undervalued

tizo100 - 12 Nov 2021 - 05:50:51 - 292 of 741 Ienergizer - IBPO
Sharecast

iEnergizer posts record set of interim results
Thu, 11th Nov 2021 12:31
(Sharecast News) - Digital media technology company iEnergizer reported a record set of interim results on Thursday, with revenue rising 35.1% to $121.9m, and service revenue up 36.8%.

[tizo100] 22/4/2023 18:00

I did raise a few red flags last year just before I sold out.

[bensdad2] 22/4/2023 16:00

One detail of interest is the Relationship Agreement, referred to in the RNS. This is found in the original 2010 admission document:
Relationship Agreement:

A relationship agreement dated 27 August 2010 between (1) the Company, (2) Arden Partners, (3)EICR, (4) Geophysical Sub-strata Limited and (5) Anil Aggarwal regulating the arrangements between EICR and the Company following Admission (the “Relationship Agreement”). The Relationship Agreement applies for as long as EICR directly or indirectly holds in excess of thirty per cent. of the issued share capital of the Company and the Company’s shares remain admitted to trading on AIM. The Relationship Agreement includes provisions to ensure that, in the event of a conflict of interest (or a risk of a conflict of interest) arises between EICR and the Board:
(a) the Board and its committees are able to carry on their business independently of the individual interests of EICR;
(b) the constitutional documents of the Company are not changed in such a way which would be inconsistent with the Relationship Agreement;
(c) all transactions between the Group and EICR (or its affiliates) are on a normal commercial basis and concluded at arm’s length;
(d) EICR shall not:
(i) exercise the voting rights attaching to its Ordinary Shares; or
(ii) procure that the voting rights attaching to its Ordinary Shares be exercised,
so as (a) to appoint any person who is connected to EICR to the Board if, as a direct consequence of such appointment, the number of persons connected to EICR appointed to the Board would exceed the number of independent Directors appointed to the Board, unless such appointment(s) has been previously approved by the nomination committee of the Board constituted by a majority of independent Directors; or (b) to remove any independent Director from the Board unless such removal has previously been recommended by a majority of the independent Directors, excluding the independent Director in question; or (c) to cancel the Admission unless the cancellation has previously been recommended by a majority of the independent Directors; and
(e) certain restrictions are put in place to prevent interference by the Shareholder with the business of the Company.
For the purposes of this paragraph 10.4, an independent Director is one who is independent of EICR and free from any business or other relationship which could materially interfere with the exercise of his independent judgment.

The provision at d)ii)(c) is the relevant one.
If the directors could be persuaded to change their minds, then the delisting should not be able to go ahead.
If only one of the big instis who are invested could lean on them or even threaten legal action (unfair prejudice petition or similar), that might work.

[ak62] 22/4/2023 12:11

Over £1 next week

[lw425] 22/4/2023 10:37

the Relationship Agreement between the Company, EICR (Cyprus)
Limited, Anil Aggarwal, Geophysical Substrata Ltd and
Strand Hanson Limited (as novated) dated 27 August 2016
shall terminate on Cancellation, with the effect that,
inter alia, there shall be no ongoing contractual obligation
upon EICR (Cyprus) Limited and Geophysical Substrata Ltd.,
which are private companies both controlled by Anil Aggarwal
(the "Controlling Shareholder") to ensure that the Company
carries on its business independently of the Controlling
Shareholder or that transactions and relationships between
Controlling Shareholder and the Company are at arm's length
and on normal commercial terms

[johndoe23] 22/4/2023 10:16

Not going to happen, they have already shown their complete and utter contempt for the minority shareholder here

[lw425] 22/4/2023 08:13

Another huge Red Flag here is that the company, as stated in the last interims has Non-current liabilities of over 157 Milllion and Current liabilities of over 57 Million.

Delisting shortly with a majority shareholder supporting the Delisting.

There was a couple of big sellers in the market yesterday and the volume wasn't anywhere near enough to clear it.

[mally6] 22/4/2023 00:40

So the 82% holder votes in favour of delisting must know its better to delist so not worried about their holding.i think it's a positive and this will be back up next week

[davidosh] 21/4/2023 22:49

LW425....You know that assertion is mostly incorrect. All AIM shares in this situation do NOT end up sub 1p.

I know lots that have delivered very significant returns after delisting.

Check the Touchstone TSE board as a good example...It delivered amazing dividends off the AIM market and has recently bought back shares at nearly ten times the level it left the market at. It left at about 29p which is certainly not sub 1p

There are many more and most investors will know of them.

It is wrong that the board di not insist on a sensible price being offered for those who could not hold the shares after delisting and the Aim market needs to look carefully at how these protections can be provided in the future. The institutions have an interesting reflection on what has happened which will be revealed in the session on Monday evening.

If any of you want a half price ticket then use this code MMTADVFN50

[lw425] 21/4/2023 20:24

Unfortunately the market cap is still a massive 129 million which is far too high for company which is GUARANTEED to DELIST from AIM in a few weeks time because the majority shareholder has already informed the company that he will vote YES to the delisting.

All AIM shares in this situation end up sub 1p. Yes that correct. Sub 1p.

That's means even todays buyers will lose the lot.

[spwh100] 21/4/2023 19:05

Con-artists

[dodger58] 21/4/2023 18:19

This company has a shareholder owning 82% thus the delisting can't be stopped as they want to benefit from the delisting

[dodger58] 21/4/2023 18:17

The spotlight has recently fallen on the ease with which some companies are able to de-list from AIM and leave their minority shareholders with no market for their shares.The general rule under the Takeover Code is that a shareholder who acquires 30% or more of the voting rights in a quoted company must make an offer to purchase all of the shares in that company. However, if that shareholder holds over 50% of the voting rights already, then he can increase his stake without restriction. A shareholder could own over 50% of the voting rights of a company because he owned that stake when it came to market or because he has increased his stake and obtained a waiver of the obligation under Rule 9 of the Takeover Code, allowing him to own shares equal to or in excess of 30% of the voting rights of the company without having to make a general offer for all of the shares in the company. Such a waiver may be given by the Panel in specific circumstances, for example where new shares in the company are issued as consideration for an acquisition or where an underwriter incurs an obligation to make a general offer as a result of underwriting an issue of shares.With a 75% vote being required to delist a company from AIM, it is possible for a company to delist and leave its minorities high and dry on the vote of just one major shareholder. Following such a delisting, shareholders may find themselves with no market for their shares, other than the possibility of a matched bargain service. An example is Metnor Group plc, which delisted earlier this year. Metnor’s controlling shareholders had enough votes amongst themselves and their families to carry the de-listing resolution. Minority shareholders were left with no market in their shares, with the exception of a matched bargain service and they could not have any influence on the vote.The whole Metnor saga highlights a major issue in relation to AIM companies seeking to de-list. It is not unusual for an AIM company to come to market with a single shareholder owning over 50% of its shares. From thereon, that shareholder is free to stake build. Alternatively, as was the case with Metnor, less than a year before its de-listing, the majority shareholders increased their stakes to over 50% following a Rule 9 waiver, which was given because the company wanted to undertake a buyback of its shares.There are various solutions that AIM could consider, including a requirement for a positive vote of 75% of all of a company’s shareholders, not only of those present and voting at a general meeting to de-list or, it could increase the voting threshold up to, say, 90%. Another possible solution would be for majority shareholders in companies coming to market to be required by their nominated advisor to enter into a relationship agreement with their companies, undertaking not to exercise their votes in respect of some or all of their shares on any future de-listing resolution. Such shareholders though in companies already on AIM are unlikely to agree to this.If AIM does not strengthen its regulation of de-listings, then minority power might be able to exert some pressure on AIM quoted companies; the recent example of GSH Group plc is a case in point. When GSH informed its shareholders that it was intending to delist from AIM, the minorities had no options - one shareholder controlled over 80% of GSH’s shares and he had requisitioned the AIM cancellation general meeting. The shareholder informed the GSH Board that he intended to vote against any proposal by the company to make a tender offer for its shares prior to the cancellation. Minorities were therefore left in a position where their shares would have no market and the option of tendering their shares to the company for cash had been barred. Although minority pressure won the day, “following consultation with the Board and stakeholders of the Company [GSH]”, the shareholder re-considered his position and indicated in writing to the Board his support of a tender offer prior to the delisting at a good price.There seems to be no satisfactory solution to the issues raised by Metnor. The example of GSH shows that dissatisfied minorities can sometimes force the hand of a majority shareholder but this will clearly not always be the case. The effect of all this may be that institutional investors stop investing in companies coming to or already on the market, which are in the grip of one large shareholder; short term at least, this cannot be good for AIM.Clive Garston is a corporate partner at Halliwells LLP and Melissa Needham is a solicitor in the corporate department.
More Markets articles
Perivan's IPO 2023 Outlook

LexisNexis: Market Tracker report - Trends in UK Equity Capital Markets
New Hardman & Co analysis on how transparency in forecasts has disappeared
Join Now
Gain access to investors
Benefit from our campaigns on key policy issues
Receive discounts on best practice guides
Connect with other members of the sector at our events
Stay ahead of the issues with up-to-date news and information


Join now

Events
QCA Roundtable with The Takeover Panel (Advisers)
Tuesday 25 April 2023
Meet a Market Maker (Spring)
Wednesday 10 May 2023
Fund Manager Lunch with Paul Marriage
Wednesday 17 May 2023
Guides


The QCA on Twitter


Contact Us
Site Map
Privacy Policy
Terms & Conditions

[lw425] 21/4/2023 17:42

post 720 is interesting.


IF the top two shareholders in that list are selling then the volume just isn't high enough to take them out. 17m shares drip fed into the market over next few weeks could create a massive overhang. another crash possible to low 20's to clear?

[bozzy_s] 21/4/2023 16:37

Shocking to see this. And worrying that some people believe the company will pay a dividend after it delists! Why on earth would they do that? They've already shown minority shareholders mean NOTHING to them.

My guess is the divi will be cancelled, and eventually a mandatory buyout of minority holders will be enacted, at an enormous discount to the delisting price.

It's legalized robbery. The thieves should be strung up. Name and shame and hound and protest outside the homes of the directors who are stealing from minority holders.

[ak62] 21/4/2023 15:10

64.98 to buy hmmm

[pauliewonder] 21/4/2023 15:04

Ok so 30p dividend last year and so currently 67p. That's nearly a 50% annual yield al being equal. Surely based on that alone, the remaining shares will be quickly purchased. Very good ongoing divi if you have the risk tolerance

[davidosh] 21/4/2023 13:21

I am tying to get one of the fund managers onto the show on Monday...Strand Hanson the nomad have declined to comment or accept the invitation.