Lionheart Share Discussion Threads

[cg1953] 15/7/2002 14:22

skyship.
absolutely right.there are no suitable acquistions.this is a vicious bear market.and cash really is king.
as [ahg]and hopefully[fthm]

[skyship] 12/7/2002 08:35

LNT has to be one of very few stocks that haven't fallen in the past few weeks. Might it be logical to assume that the flatter the market the more likely it is that we will get our payout this time next year - possibly even sooner if the Board decide to give up on the "suitable acquisition" idea!

[cyberspaced] 08/7/2002 18:20

I remember making 100% on these a few years ago, all in the space of a few hours.
Those were the days ;-)

CB

[skyship] 08/7/2002 18:13

50,000 bought @ 130p - that certainly shows intent. David Taglight topping up would be my call, but if not declared - then someone else convinced of the value.

[skyship] 27/6/2002 09:57

CWA1 - Yes, that worried me at the time as well. I challenged Pollock on that particular point so that he doesn't spend an inordinate length of time deliberating on such a simple issue.

He wouldn't be tied down on this aspect, giving the rather nebulous reason of not wishing to have his hands tied should at that time he be negotiating on an acquisition!

My view remains that cash-back is the overwhelmingly more likely scenario, in view of the fact that almost any acquisition will destroy rather than add value. I would expect a few weak holders to exit, but most now to hang on in there with the prospect of a very attractive gain this time next year.

[rangers99] 26/6/2002 01:26

IMO these cash shells dont look as attractive now. Youd be better investing the cash yourself.

An example is Avingtrans. They were capped at around 3M all cash. So what did they do? They bought a compnay with 3M in "assets" (dont know what these are) and its loss-making. Most loss making compnaies are valued well below assets just now, so in that respect, and with hindsight, there was no advantage in holding AvingTrans

Similarly BidTimes. The share price has collapsed recently after the acquisition.

[rainmaker] 25/6/2002 10:02

MG-What's the definition of a long term trade?Why a short term trade gone wrong of course!

Regards

[mg] 25/6/2002 06:25

Don't forget that the 3 amigos made a small profit from reversing into these - but also failed to find a reasonable target. All in all, at least LNT hasn't been losing money like almost every other stock in the market.

PS - chart suggests resistance at 135 - if it breaks clear of that level I would suspect there is 'behind the scenes' activity.

Long term holder who thought this was a short term punt 2.5 years ago !!!

[cwa1] 24/6/2002 16:31

Skyship

Thanks for your comments on the AGM,they are appreciated.

Don't worry about harping on a bit to these guys,sometimes that is what it takes to get them to shift a little :-)

One thing that worries me is:how long beyond a year could they take to finally wind it up,after they decide that that is the path they decide to take?They could easily spin this out for a good bit longer.Don't suppose you have got an impression on that from the meeting?

Thanks again.

[rainmaker] 24/6/2002 13:42

Skyship-Many thanks.I agree with everything you say!Overwhelming feeling that it should not be too difficult to find a suitable acquisition.

Regards

[skyship] 24/6/2002 12:18

Rainmaker -

1. Don't know what the liquidation costs would be (is there an accountant in the house?) however £100,000 would certainly more than cover it; and in our case that is only 1.5p / share.

2. No, PP's full-time job is as CEO of LPA (a listed company with a rather poor recent record!!) from which he draws £107,000 + benefits. The Board confirmed that they meet 8 times a year, which, along with reading profiles on possible acquisitions, does explain why the two other non-execs @ £20/- apiece are not over-remunerated for men of their experience.

3. Yes, I would still prefer the "middle way" solution - but it looks like a deal or a wind-up. Certainly one stock in the portfolio which won't be heading south for the summer!

[rainmaker] 22/6/2002 18:15

Attention Starship-Not a bad idea to repay the vast majority of shareholder Funds and keep the listing.What are the liquidation costs if any?Is Peter Pollock working at Lionheart on a full time basis?

Regards

[skyship] 22/6/2002 12:16

LIONHEART AGM – 20th June 2002

Herewith an expurgated version of my AGM report posted on the Mike Walters BB soon after the AGM on the 20th:

"All in all an interesting event ; and though not resulting in immediate joy, nevertheless a reasonably positive outcome, which to be fair, the Board was already decided upon – SEE the Official AGM Statement:

The meeting was quite well attended with c. 30 shareholders / advisors . I don’t know who was who, but I was disappointed that only 4 of us spoke, with possibly 75% of the attack coming from yours truly. I did try to keep my calm, so I don’t think I was outright rude, though someone else may challenge me on that!!

We dealt with Director’s Emoluments (an assessment of performance should be assessed on RESULTS not ACTIVITY);

We dealt with the lack of a dividend (no distributable reserves – deficit on the P&L – costly procedures to change the Balance Sheet.) NB- On this aspect, perhaps someone in the know could comments as to the cost of implementing an EGM to approve and enact capitalising Share Premium Account, or whatever would be required to allow the Company to pay future dividends.

We touched (on numerous occasions) on the possible acquisition of a Business. PP confirmed that vendors still had overhyped expectations as to the Value of their businesses. I concurred by saying that it would be practically impossible to find a business which would not instantly destroy shareholder value. The Board agreed. PP & DG confirmed that neither the Board nor the largest shareholder (the PRU – 29.8%) would be recommending a deal which would destroy shareholder value.

After a few heated exchanges with me repeating perhaps too often that shareholders must be given the option of having a vote on the return of their CASH, the Meeting came to a close with PP reading the pre-prepared statement. In essence, the Board has a further year to find a deal they and shareholders can support; if no deal – then “The Board will examine proposals to return cash to shareholders”. I wish he had read the darned statement at the start of the meeting rather than at the end!!

I tried to put PP on the spot for a timescale for those last deliberations, but PP continued to wriggle; still, a further 2-3 months at that stage wouldn’t worry me unduly; and quite clearly it would not be tenable for those final deliberations to last any longer than that.

On the whole & quite encouragingly I felt we are actually being well served by the two non-execs Grossart & Gawler; both quite impressive and Grossart in particular displayed a welcome realism and flair.

SUMMARY:

 Price Now 129p +3p on the announcement
 NAV now = c. 163p
 NAV this time next year = c. 168p
 Discount to projected NAV = 23%
 Effective Redemption Yield to, say, 1st Sept’03 = c. 30% (25% pa)

There is also the remote opportunity of upside from a deal, but that has to be considered remote. Still, with the upside shown above, the mms certainly aren’t getting any of my stock back; & I’ll buy more if they fall back to 120p. In these markets LNT remains a totally secure investment which won’t give sleepless nights, but will give a 30% profit over 15 months.

With this scenario, further talk of an Action Group may be premature; and this time next year it wouldn’t be possible to rat on the commitment made today."

[rainmaker] 21/6/2002 19:25

Leslas-I'm definitely holding and I would suggest you do the same.Running the numbers,as at 31 December 2001 the company had £11.604 mln in "Net Cash" or £1.61 a share, having added £348k or 3.09% in interest received after expenses.In a scenario that the Company goes into voluntary liquidation in a year's time,the Company will have £12.15mln or £1.68 a share.So at £1.32 a share that's a yield of 27.3% less liquidation expenses which should be absolutely minimal for obvious reasons.However if there is a reverse takeover or a suitable acquisition then expect considerably higher returns.


Regards

[leslas] 21/6/2002 07:25

any point in holding on anyone there with comments

[anresu] 20/6/2002 14:36

It's more a case of WHENEVER the eventual outcome.

Another year of nothing while Mr.Pollock and his buddies collect considerable sums of our money for - well, for what?

Only then will they start to consider ways of "returning cash to shareholders" and that can probably be spun out for a further year or two.

[rainmaker] 20/6/2002 13:55

Now where have I heard words to the effect that,"negiotations had reached an advanced stage before being terminated"?

Another year then.I can fully understand why some shareholders are disgruntled.However IMHO,still great value at current levels whatever the eventual outcome.

Regards

[rainmaker] 20/6/2002 13:52

asph-that's what I thought,despite being "politically incorrect"


Regards

[asph] 19/6/2002 19:14

activating of some kind is long long overdue,it would be nice to see the name "LIONHEART" emblazoned on a live business

[rainmaker] 19/6/2002 16:26

Leslas & Skyship-They could learn a thing or two from AHG!However I expect news of a winding-up tomorrow.

Regards

[skyship] 18/6/2002 09:11

I really do feel that Peter Pollock has his head in the sand; and is perhaps more concerned at his own £40,000 "retainer" than providing value for his shareholders. I suspect we will have to turn out attentions to the PRU who really control the situation with their 29%.

Still, all that is for another day. In the meantime let's hope to be pleasantly surprised by a breath of realism at the AGM this thursday - see you there.

[leslas] 18/6/2002 08:21

Anyone think they are going to tell us something at the AGM on Thursday

[leslas] 17/6/2002 15:36

they have moved up ????? 2.5p gosh

[cwa1] 10/6/2002 20:38

Skyship

Hi there

I too wrote to Mr Pollock some time ago,asking him what was happening,whether they would consider winding the company up,return cash,etc.

Sadly,I too got a patronising-can't say anything,you'll know when you know sort of response,along with a-there are no current plans to return cash to shareholders answer-it was curt and dismissive to say the least.You would think it was his personal money to do with as he pleases andhe seems quite happy to ride roughshod over the ordinary mugpunter shareholders.

I'm afraid I can't make the AGM due to time and distance problems but please feel free to give them Hell on my behalf-it is long overdue that somebody noised them up and woke them from their slumbers :-(

CWA1

[leslas] 09/6/2002 21:30

i agree good post