Lighthouse Share Discussion Threads

[graham1ty] 11/7/2012 09:43

It would be criminal to announce this then mop up shares at below 3p. the correct and honourable thing would have been to announce a tender by the company at ( or even at a slight premium) to the pre announcement share price. let those who do not want a private investment get out with no loss.

they have the cash to do that. they chose not to.

[bisiboy] 11/7/2012 09:34

if the shares are so undervalued perhaps the best use of cash
would be for the company to be buying shares at this level.
rather than to consider another acqusition.
or is there something wrong we dont know about maybe a trading update would have been of use.

[pwhite73] 11/7/2012 08:54

An announcement of an intention to delists is the first salvo fired for it immediately sends small investors for the exit. The company and its advisers pick up these shares at greatly depressed prices and use them to vote through the cancellation.

But as stated in the above post this is not a company on its death bed. They are awash with cash and should consider compensation for just destroying 50% of share holder value. Over £1.2 million was wiped off the value of the stock in one day to save £300k over the course of the year.

[graham1ty] 11/7/2012 08:38

The more I look at this the more cross I am.

If the Board really believed this would be more valuable ( why else do it ?) as an unlisted company, then they would try to persuade shareholders that was the case. Some would still sell, but others would see the opportunity and, seeing greater profitability and flexibility as a private company would actually be buyers of that stock. large holders, who had been talked through the merits, and saw the logic, would more than comensate for small sellers.

If it really was in shareholders best interests, the share price would actually RISE. now i am not so niaive as to think tha ever happens, but at leaset there would not be great price movement. What has happened here: "the market", buyers and sellers are saying this wasa worth £6-7m as a quoted company, but only £2-3m as a private company..........did the Board ask themselves what the share price would do ? Had they lined up supporters/buyers ? Did they think of employee shareholders and optionholders who have had the value of their stake in the company destroyed ( and that includes all those acquisitions and the vendors who sold to LGT and took shares ( ie Rosengren).

Next point, we are not dealing with some dodgy retalier, or manufacturer, we are talking about an IFA business. If a shareholder asks its IFA ( er Lighthouse) what they think of this, as aadvisers to small punters, investors etc etc, are the lighthouse IFAs, out on their high St saying "yes we think this is good for shareholders ??" As an IFA group are they not the very kind of group that should be campaigning with Sharesoc and others to stop this very type of delisting ? We are talking market professionals ( who presumably during their current new exams know something of what is good for their clients ??).

so did they know nothing, or care nothing, for best practice ? did they contemplate a tender offer to take out those who do not or cannot hold unquoteds ? LGT has the cash, oodles of cash. An ask around their exisitng holders would have given a straw poll idea of how many would sell out......and if they had offered 5-6p, I suspect 50% might have sold out.......indicating that they do not want to hold an unquoted.

one last point, the document says that the shareprice sets a marker, an indicative value for the Company, and that recently the share price has been so low that the indicative value ( for a potential bidding company) is set really low. Well, the value at delisting, the value that gets in the press, the value of record, the value used for any matched bargains in the near future, is going to be 2p. Anyone looking in the future will see "Lighthouse delists at a value of £2.5m" and that, dear fellow shareholders, is the indicitave value the Board has set for us in undertaking the delisting.

damn them

[trader2] 10/7/2012 18:19

What's best for Rosengren's personal investment may be down to the capital gains he has made elsewhere - and if he pays a lower CGT bill having factored in a LGT loss?? But.. profit less tax is still preferable to a loss!

[bisiboy] 10/7/2012 17:52

i now have a further 100k
could be a takeover target down here but liabilities could be a problem

[sailing john] 10/7/2012 16:44

Ex Director - Allan Rosengren holds 14.73%

I think he will have the final say and I have no idea which way he will jump - i.e. what is best for his personal investment

But I like the fact that there are some significant players outside of the Board if we go private.

SJ

[trader2] 10/7/2012 16:36

Thanks for clarifying the shares-in-issue guys. Key point is though "what are the holders going to do"? Will the big guys, who hold 60-70% ish, vote in favour of a de-listing? I topped up on a few this afternoon too.

[gengulphus] 10/7/2012 16:18

Trader2,

To confirm ADVFN have it wrong and the real figure is 127.7m shares in issue, check out note 20 in last year's report, which you can download from .

Gengulphus

[sailing john] 10/7/2012 16:04

T2 ADVFN is wrong there are approx 127m in issue - and most options out of the money so that's it
Edit Actual is 127.7m in issue and 0.3m in the money 1p options - others at 19p or above
Total diluted 128m

BTW I have been a buyer this afternoon at 2.15p

So I will have a slightly bigger say in the vote

GL SJ

[cwa1] 10/7/2012 15:58

Hi David

Just back from holiday to find my second potential "shafting" at the hands of Shore Capital after Lees :-((

Glad to hear that sharesoc are looking in to this one and would be very nice to get one back on Shore, etc.

[trader2] 10/7/2012 15:39

SJ - ADVFN Financial Page has got 44m Shares in Issue ??

So... with around 55% in the hands of Major Holders - we have around 45% in smaller (more liquid) holdings.

[sailing john] 10/7/2012 15:31

T2 - 127m shares MC at 2p circa £2.5m
SJ

[trader2] 10/7/2012 15:28

Market Cap now around £930K.

[harrogate] 10/7/2012 15:19

David. Hi. I am sure you know the Chairman here is the same guy who did this at Just Car Clinics last year!!

[davidosh] 10/7/2012 15:16

Last year they paid a dividend equal to the cost of the listing and now they are moaning about the cost and happy to completely shaft shareholders by removing the listing without providing a reasonable exit for those who cannot hold companies that are not listed in their funds or ISAs etc

ShareSoc are looking at this one and agree with Paul Mumford at Cavendish. There should be sufficient minority interest here to create a blocking stake. I do not currently hold any shares but will try to speak to management to establish why this action has been taken.

[toback] 10/7/2012 14:27

I have 85k and will vote against - those who are calling for small shareholders to be bought out are right.

The insurance companies listed need to look at themselves too - why would any small shareholder want to put money into them if they allow this shady business to continue.

[wotsadividend] 10/7/2012 14:04

I used to work for them back in 2003, surprised they are still around to be honest !!

[cwa1] 10/7/2012 13:31

Just a small proportion of the following list would scupper this plan. Anyone got any contacts at any of them that can check/arm twist what way they are going to vote?

Name of holder Number %
Mr. Allan Rosengren 18,807,234 14.73%
Liverpool Victoria Financial
Advice Services Limited 8,353,706 6.54%
Friends Provident Life and
Pensions Limited 7,497,466 5.87%
Southern Rock Insurance
Company, Mr. Arron Banks
and Mr. Paul Chase-Gardener 6,932,745 5.43%
Mr. Julian Telling 6,568,908 5.14%
Mr Arthur Lancaster & Boston
Trust Company Ltd 6,470,588 5.07%
Skandia Life Assurance
(Holdings) Limited 5,581,383 4.37%
Mr David Hickey* 5,161,772 4.04%
AEGON UK plc 4,487,689 3.51%

[cwa1] 10/7/2012 13:23

Interesting piece on Citywire:-



Directors at IFA network Lighthouse face a battle in their attempts to delist the company from the Alternative Investment Market (AIM) and have been criticised for the 'shoddy' nature of the move.

The directors have come under fire from Cavendish Asset Management's Paul Mumford who holds Lighthouse shares in his AIM fund, and has called on fellow shareholder to demand the management offers to buy them out at the share's price at the time the company announced plans to delist.

Does anyone know how many Cavendish Asset Management have?

Only need about 32 million shares to block it ;-)

Please post on here how many you have and if you plan to vote against.

Cheers

Between myself and a couple of others I know that don't post on here I can round up 350,000 to add to the against pile.

[bisiboy] 10/7/2012 13:20

they may do they are likely to be the victim of claims in this world where everyone wants someone else to blame.
the cash could disapear fast.

[graham1ty] 10/7/2012 12:51

Is very disappointing they've not used some of the £11m cash to offer some kind of exit to holders who want out ( as Parkwood did when they delisted). They say there is no value in the AIM quote, but they have managed to write off more than half the value in the last 48 hours.

I assume they have some of the institutions on side as 75% is a high hurdle. I will definitely vote my 200,000 against, but they would not have gone ahead with this if they did not have the votes in the bag. Only think might stop is a statement from Rosengren that he will vote against..... ( he has lost £750,000 of his paper worth in the last 48 hours).

Cynically, if I was a big holder and had been persuaded of the benefits, I would be buying all I could at 2-2.5p. I know they need cash reserves for regulatory reasons and to see them through the next few uncertain years, but there is still £11m in the balance sheet ( or 10p per share). They do not need all that buffer.

As always, appalling, nothing other than 3 weeks notice, so scramble for the exit and destruction of small shareholder value. No point selling now though. Hope they merge with someone who wants the cash, and in the meantime keep a decent divi................I will try to attend the EGM

[harrogate] 09/7/2012 22:02

That is spot on ..if you can put up with the lack of quote ( matched bargain is useless) you have to hang on for a deal.

[trader2] 09/7/2012 21:08

I've been through this recently with ITIS Holdings. Were down at 5p. Recovered to 8p. Delisted and were bought out 2 (ish) years later at 37.5p. Big premium over the AIM traded price shortly before delisting - but well below the 60p level that they traded at for over 2 years before AIM trashed them.

It only worked though with ITIS because they got bought out. The matched bargain facility was hopeless. Ok perpaps if you were looking to trade substancial amounts of the company - but no use at all to small holders.

[cwa1] 09/7/2012 20:21

Wonder how he(Allan Rosengren) will vote?



If against then not much more to get to a 25% blocking vote....