Lms Capital Share Discussion Threads

[greasynut] 03/8/2016 11:40

Please note that the tender offers are being set at a 5% discount to NAV.
That 5% will accrue to remaining shareholders.
If they then set the reported NAV at the lower edge of the expected range, any undervaluation will accrue to remaining shareholders.

They have supposedly been realising the portfolio since 2011.
What paltry progress.
What shysters.

[pavey ark] 03/8/2016 10:22

Thanks ss1, I hadn't scrolled down far enough and it is certainly worth reading.
ST had said previously that some assets were difficult to value so there was plenty of margin to go lower and show an "unrealised loss".
There is also the point that the lower the asset value the more share that were bought for the £6m ( I leave it to individuals to assess the advantage/disadvantage of that.)

GHAM should improve the portfolio performance and they certainly have plenty to work with.

[rathair] 03/8/2016 10:16

Well it means they have been valued at rock bottom so that when GHE takes over the managing of them then they have lots of upside ahead and will look better?

[simonsaid1] 03/8/2016 10:08

Anyone know what 'kitchen sinked' means?

For any IC subscribers, the ST comment in question is at the bottom of his last article on LMS from last Thursday, not sure if I can copy/paste it here without violating IC's rules (considering I am a paid subscriber, not sure if author comments are protected in the same way the article content is).

[rathair] 03/8/2016 09:59

He said the results have been kitchen sinked ahead of the transfer to GHE.

[pavey ark] 03/8/2016 09:18

A long haul up Fleetwith Pike and over Haystacks yesterday coupled with a few glasses of wine made for a later start than usual this morning but I have spent some time looking over the figures in some detail.
I must state that I have no background here and I am only invested because of the figures before me.

With the tender offers as described a purchase at 60p would result in a profit of c. 12% .
If GHAM can reduce the discount to a still very high 25% then there should be a further 12% profit.

Obviously there are a number of factors to be considered but using the above does give quite a buffer.

I bought last month at 57p and was happy to top up at 60p.

[spob] 03/8/2016 07:42

"download vox markets"

is that for a pc, mac, tablet, iphone ?

[shaker44] 03/8/2016 07:02

Be interesting to read ST in Investors Chronicle as he tracks this too.

[le4r] 03/8/2016 06:59

Skyship - download Vox Markets. Was recommended to me when I missed some trading updates using ADVFN only. It alerts you when there's an RNS from your holding list.Additional benefit is that you don't have to stir from bed if there is no alert noise at 7 - rather than relying on the manual scan!

[strathroyal] 03/8/2016 06:45

Eeza - not sure why you find the NAV very disappointing as this was trailed in the recent circular. The big losers appear to be Brockton (-£4.9M) and NEP (-£2.8M despite it being a $ stock).

[skyship] 03/8/2016 06:41

Incidentally, well spotted eeza - Interims still not showing here on ADVFN...

[skyship] 03/8/2016 06:40

Brockton marked down to £7.38m...could be overdone and a chance for the new managers to look good. The BoD seem to have done absolutely nothing over the past few months, nothing other than plot how to feather their own nests of course - and all done on our money!

HeyHo...nothing new really. NAV u/c. Brockton down, currency change up.

Obviously with just £10.6m of cash a higher Tender than the proposed £6m not a realistic proposition.

With that Tender in the offing the current share price should pretty well be underwritten.

[eeza] 03/8/2016 06:28

Yes, could have been a bloodbath.

Another new buying opportunity looms.

[spectoacc] 03/8/2016 06:24

Seems the NAV was only saved by the £ collapse:

"The investment portfolio showed a net loss in the first half of GBP8.6 million (2015: net gain of GBP4.7 million) before unrealised net currency gains of GBP6.8 million"

[mad foetus] 03/8/2016 06:16

They are bloody incompetent aren't they? I think I've had enough, only had a small stake, not worth losing sleep over.

[skyship] 02/8/2016 15:19

They would need more than the £15m current cash balance...

[mad foetus] 02/8/2016 14:48

I don't see the point in having three small tenders: surely it is more efficient to have one and be done with it?

[skyship] 02/8/2016 14:45

eeza - They've recognised they have to part with some; I just feel they should be parting with more, especially since that £15m was already realised as part of the liquidation programme many months ago.

[eeza] 02/8/2016 14:10

Yes, but they don't want to part with THEIR money.

[skyship] 02/8/2016 13:53

Seems to me that the £6m first Tender versus cash balances of £15m, all raised specifically in liquidation mode for shareholders, does seem rather parsimonious.

That cash should be ours to nod through this package. Perhaps an agreement to a first Tender of £10m would satisfactorily sweeten this pill.

Anyone contacting the BoD or the Press might suggest this way forward.

[spectoacc] 02/8/2016 13:35

Ta; also:
"Support for proposals
The Company has received irrevocable undertakings from the Concert Party representing 34.04 per cent. of the ordinary shares to vote in favour of the resolutions to approve the change in investment policy and to approve the Tender Offer"

so that and the 19.58% make the 53%. But the question remains - does it require more than a simple majority? .

(Re "non-binding" - presumably if someone came up with a better idea, they'd switch sides, but are otherwise voting in favour).

[teleprompter] 02/8/2016 12:58

No.

You may be interpeting the statement:
“The Company has also received non-binding letters of support from shareholders representing approximately 19.58 per cent… confirming their intention to vote in favour of the resolutions to approve the change in investment policy, the Tender Offer and the Waiver.”

Ask yourself what is a “non-binding letter of support”? Is it worth anything?

[spectoacc] 02/8/2016 12:27

Haven't they already got 53% acceptances from major shareholders? Does it require more than a simple majority?

[elmfield] 02/8/2016 12:14

I am sorry to see how this has gone,
Would not have happened under the old guard,
as I stated when this all started and I sold out.