London Asia Capital Share Discussion Threads

[unionhall] 12/1/2011 21:12

Voted against today.

Thanks for the direction here guys....

[loverat] 12/1/2011 20:13

I know you fell out with Littlewood in 2008.

But why the hell did you not deal with the problem when it presented itself in late 2006 as you claimed. And why the hell did you carry on ramping on here when you knew this?

And just months before LAC was suspended.

[dougcsv] 12/1/2011 11:28

terryh, I don't think you are correct at all except in that the board have done a great job so far. As far as Mr. Littlewoods freedom is concerned all the paperwork has already been passed to the authorities both in the UK and overseas so it's not down to the company any more. They may well catch up to him at some point - somewhere, but I won't hold my breath.

It's not over until the fat lady sings ......vote vote vote

[terryh] 12/1/2011 10:21

The Board will loose the vote. It was clear that Simon Littlewood was connected
to Richpoint, but your board arranged a sale of the large institutional shareholders to Richpoint. Simon now probably controls 45% of the voting rights
of the company. The Board have done a splendid job but Simon will walk free.

[loverat] 10/1/2011 18:19

Sorry folks - not meaning to say you are a bunch of John Major's. You know me - just stuff I say when I get a bit carried away.

All the best - anything I can do. You know where I am.

[stevenlondon3] 10/1/2011 09:34

Its also worth drawing your broker's attention to the various resulotions so that he can alert other holders who own shares through a nominee company. (My LA are in a SIPP that is held by Charles Stanley).

[topvest] 09/1/2011 09:12

It's worth someone talking to the FT on this to get some profile - maybe something for the board of directors to organise - it's certainly a gripping story of the dangers of AIM and China and so an interview should get published.

[loverat] 08/1/2011 21:59

You all have a choice.

Sit there in your conservative suits and quietly moan that you have been and will be ripped off. Or voice your concerns BEFORE the meeting and do not let these shysters rip you off.

[loverat] 08/1/2011 16:37

Yes - what is galling is that it seems Littlewood posted on these boards for years.

And then we have the revelations from Keith Negal about his conduct in running the company.

It is simply inconceivable that anyone would not support the present management.

Unless of course, greed and self interest are factors to consider.

[morro] 08/1/2011 15:55

It would be good to think that Littlewood might in 2011 get to spend time with a certain ex-MP who has just found his living arrangements altered!!!

[loverat] 08/1/2011 15:04

I think folks here need to be pro-active in whatever way they can be. Not wise just to sit back and possibly let these folks help themselves to your investment.

After all, it ain't their money!

[loverat] 08/1/2011 14:34

By the ways guys. Any of you folks have contacts in the press?

A few years ago there were a few news articles about London Asia and the goings on. This new situation might be of interest.

[loverat] 08/1/2011 14:29

Of course not.

I happen to know that many, many people read this thread and some instituitions too.

Keep the posts coming folks. It might not make much difference but people should be reminded of the difference between right and wrong.

[loverat] 08/1/2011 14:13

Now, faced with that assessment is any private investors or respectable instituition going to vote for anything else?

[loverat] 08/1/2011 14:12

Indeed. To be honest I am not clear on the likelyhood of success of these people but you would think it has to be closer than the last attempt.

Support the existing management. They have done an incredible job. What I like is that they communciation with shareholders in simple and plain language. (see below)

Vote down those that are into self interest and cosy deals.

Recommendation of your Board to Vote
AGAINST the Requisition

And so the saga of this troubled company continues. A book or even a film could be made of this story which quite clearly involves previous directors seeking personal self gain, Croatian mafia, missing Indians and now conflicted Chinese. It is more than possible that two of the aforementioned are working together to make further financial gain at your expense. At all times, your directors have sought to unravel this extraordinary web of intrigue and mistruths and have been resolute in their desire to return cash to our ever patient shareholders

[curt3] 08/1/2011 11:32

YES get behind the Board who have done a very good job under very difficult circumstances. Keith Nagel has performed valiantly and the current directors deserve their fees. The administrative costs inviolved in tracing the assets and legal expenses must be expected to be significant. If Richpoint get control I fear our shares will be worthless.

[tokyojohn] 08/1/2011 10:01

Finally received my letter, on the same day they put it on the website, I see. What a bunch of crooks this company has attracted over the years. I've faxed my form off, voting with the board of course. Fingers crossed we can keep the villains at bay again.

[blackmonday] 06/1/2011 22:37

I am not so sure the requisitioner will win this vote, after all isn't this the third time that various parties have tried to triumph over the silent majority? It probably depends upon how much support they have over 30%.

If we assume that 80% of the remaining shares are in the hands of 20% of shareholders and only those 20% will be sufficiently motivated to vote. And assuming that they all back the board then we can see the following possible outcomes:

If only 30% of shares back the requisitioner, then 80% of the 70% remaining = 56% will oppose.

If 40% back the rebels, then 80% of 60% = 48% will oppose.

If 44% back the rebels, then 80% of 56% = 44.8% will oppose.

So I guess they need about 45% of the total vote or another 15% to be confident of success. Although I have made some heroic assumptions.

This makes it a brave gamble for them as they could be thrown off the board if they lose and they will then only get the same information as the rest of us.

Perhaps this is their fall-back plan anyway to settle for the offer to buy out LAC's shares in Zhongying but they thought they would give this vote a shot first and see if there is sufficient apathy from the shareholder base.

Let's hope they are disappointed.

[irenekent] 04/1/2011 08:02

Unfortunately the requisitioner is relying on the fact that most PIs have their holdings in nominee accounts and will often be denied the right to vote. If that is any of you then get on to your nominees/brokers and demand that you want to make your vote count.

[nextlink] 01/1/2011 13:12

All we can do is vote for the current board, the best of a bad situation.
Fortunately for me, my wife's holding cost little, however on principle we'll do all we can to recover it.
Her holding is held in nominee with Jarvis.
Apart from asking Jarvis as Custodian's to register our vote, I've asked if they will inform any other LAC shareholders of the EGM etc.
There may well be shareholders who are unaware and I would urge shareholders with nominee holdings, other than Jarvis, to ask their broker to pass on the news.