Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Lxb Retail Properties Plc LSE:LXB London Ordinary Share JE00B4MFKH73 ORD NPV
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  +0.00p +0.00% 1.54p 1.10p 1.98p - - - 0 01:00:00
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Real Estate Investment & Services 39.7 -11.7 -6.9 - 3

Lxb Retail Properties Share Discussion Threads

Showing 1776 to 1797 of 1800 messages
Chat Pages: 72  71  70  69  68  67  66  65  64  63  62  61  Older
DateSubjectAuthorDiscuss
26/6/2019
02:44
Nothing daft. You don't need to spend money to pursue via regulators. Or you can just give up without even rattling their cages. Just what they want... When they are on the regulators watch list, whatever they try next will be under scrutiny
shaker44
25/6/2019
20:29
Redress? Don't be daft good money after bad. I was a bit concerned the way this was set up as a split between management firm and fund. I was reassured that directors had good reputations and skin in the game by another investor. Like a mug I believed that. Not a big deal really but lesson learned avoid these types of structures like the plague.
loglorry1
25/6/2019
16:34
So the fund manager's members all did pretty well out of the fund. The fund manager received more than £32m of fund management fees during the life of the fund and members of the fund manager are also being paid to tie up the remaining issues for the fund. The land West of Rushden Lakes bought by Anonymous Ltd (Tim Walton, head of fund manager) will also make a lot of money of out of this site. Shareholders lost a lot of money but the members of the fund manager made sure they filled their boots. The Board was utterly useless in protecting shareholders' interests. The Board received £355k per annum for practically doing nothing. Everyone was just milking the fund and shareholders got shafted. My advice is to avoid these fxckers in the future. They probably won't have the brass neck to try and list another fund. Everyone should avoid them like the plague.
npt
25/6/2019
16:21
I doubt if anyone is still wondering. The question is about redress
shaker44
25/6/2019
16:14
If we are still wondering if we've been shafted at this point then we really are not very bright. Stitched up like kippers.
loglorry1
25/6/2019
14:52
If he effectively sold it to himself, definitely a conflict! Was he the vendor, valuer and purchaser?? What scrutiny of the price and by whom?? Another related party maybe. All very fishy
shaker44
25/6/2019
14:21
https://publicaccess.east-northamptonshire.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=PTCMD7GO0GP00 Ex owner of the fund manger submitted a planning application on the land next to Rushden Lakes, an asset which it managed in the LXB Retail Properties Plc portfolio. The land was bought while the fund manager still managed the fund. Conflict of interest?
npt
31/5/2019
13:16
Perhaps someone should start a message board of directors to avoid.
flyfisher
31/5/2019
12:52
I got my distribution today. 1.202572p a share. A terrible result from a terrible management team. Phil Wrigley Danny Kitchen Steve Webb Alastair Irvine George Baird Put these people on your black list folks.
tabhair
30/5/2019
10:45
Agree. Thanks. Not one of Simon Thompson's better tips!
shaker44
30/5/2019
09:46
I did receive a response justifying the actions/decisions by the Board has taken. There is nothing that can be done now. I just want my last dividend and I'll make sure to avoid any investment where any of the Board or Fund Manager has any involvement in. The Fund Manager actually did o.k. out managing the fund. The shareholders are the only ones who got slaughtered.
npt
30/5/2019
09:06
Npt, did you get a response from your message to chairman 4 weeks ago??
shaker44
30/5/2019
08:55
Has anyone received the last dividend today?
npt
03/5/2019
14:25
Well done Npt. Glad you are rattling his cage.
shaker44
03/5/2019
13:12
On 1 March 2019 the issued rns mentioned an expected final dividend of 2p, which equates to a £3,367,000 payment to shareholders. On 30 April 2019 the issued rns mentioned a revised final dividend of 1.2p which equates to £2,020,200, therefore there was a decrease of £1,346,800 in the final expected payment to shareholders. The £1,346,800 decrease does not even include the value realised for the Greggs and Blue Mountain Yard units. If £250,000 value for each unit was added by getting planning permission, that means that the value decrease between 1 March 2019 and 30 April 2019 is about £1,846,800. The Chairman mentioned that £400,000 related to Highways England and £700,000 to service charge caps for vacant units, but what caused the rest of the value loss? Assuming that the value uplift gained by receiving planning permission for the 2 units is correct, what caused the unaccounted £746,800 value loss? Did Blizzard Estates (owned by members of the fund manager) chip the price it was going to pay for Skew Bridge? I've asked the Chairman of the Board to clarify, but have not received a response.
npt
01/5/2019
12:37
Impossible in a company of that size to be unaware.
shaker44
01/5/2019
11:20
I'm sure the final dividend won't be 1.2p. I'll be surprised if it is anywhere close. They will 'discover' more costs before the court dissolution hearing. They are totally unaware of all the cost exposures. The Board are caught totally by surprise every time new costs appear from out of the blue. Oops! We didn't anticipate another £1.1m in costs. Sorry! The previous end dividend guide of 2p was given by us, but unfortunately we are totally clueless and incompetent. How the Board and fund manager were both unaware of this cost exposure is totally beyond me. How can you not be aware of a £1.1m cost exposure. It's laughable.
npt
01/5/2019
10:33
Incompetent and/or dishonest. No other option
shaker44
01/5/2019
09:52
Unfortunately there is a contract between the fund manager and the fund in place where the fund has to pay 1.75& of the fund's NAV to the fund manager, irrespective of performance. Even if the fund manager absolutely failed to perform, which it has, the base income for them is still the 1.75% of NAV. The £32m is mostly from the 1.75% charge. Nice work if you can get it. Shareholders have been absolutely shafted. And the additional £1.1m costs at the 11th hour - ridiculous. Who is going to benefit from the portion of the £0.7m paid by current shareholders to cover service charges for the vacant units at Rushden Lakes unitl January 2020 if the units are let in the next few months? My guess is that Blizzard Estates (owned by members of the fund manager) will benefit. Why was the Board not aware of the cost exposure when they negotiated the transfer of Skew Bridge to Blizzard Estates? How did this cost just appear out of the blue? On the 1st of March they were unaware of the cost exposure. These fxckers are sleepwalking.
npt
01/5/2019
09:35
Npt: did Walton really take 32m under the guise of failed investment manager? If so the regulator should definitely investigate that aspect alone, and whether some of that 32m found it's way back to those who approved it.
shaker44
01/5/2019
09:10
The Board agreed to transfer Skew Bridge Ltd to Blizzard Estates for £1.1m. Skew Bridge Ltd owns the rights to let the 3 remaining units in Rushden Lakes phase 2. When the Board agreed the transfer and price, they and the fund manager must have been aware of the cost exposure relating to the service charges of the vacant units. Now, at the very last moment the fund has to stump up £0.7m to cover service charges on the vacant units to January 2020. I can only assume this amount will be left in Skew Bridge before transferring it to Blizzard Estates. So what happens if the 3 vacant units are let in the net month or two. The cinema will open soon and the likelihood of letting the units are very high. If the units are let, tenants will be responsible to pay the service charges. What will then happen to the £0.7m or part of it not used to cover the service charges? Is this just an extra bung for members of the fund manager? Why did the extra £.7m just come out at the very last minute? The fund manager and Board probably know that shareholders just want this to come to an end and aren't paying attention and they are filling their boots to the brim.
npt
30/4/2019
22:09
LXB had big losses during the past 3 years. The properties in the portfolio were massively overvalued and when they started selling assets the chickens came home to roost. The only winners in this are the fund manager and the Board. Shareholders, especially the ones who reinvested dividends or came late to the party, have been roasted. The fund manager earned more than £32m in management fees during the life of the fund and probably could not give a toss. The remaining members of the fund manager are taking on the remaining companies of the fund and are being paid handsomely for doing so. On the 1st of March a final dividend of 2p was guided. Today 1.2p. Extra costs of £1.1m just materialised out of nowhere. The Board, fund manager, accountants, tax and legal advisers all made a bundle. The real IRR after 9 years must be close to zero if not negative. If you came late to the party then you've absolutely lost a lot of money. These guys are charlatans and should be avoided if you don't want to lose your money. I thought I've seen it all, but the level of incompetence demonstrated by the Board and fund manager really shocked me.
npt
Chat Pages: 72  71  70  69  68  67  66  65  64  63  62  61  Older
Your Recent History
LSE
LXB
Lxb Retail..
Register now to watch these stocks streaming on the ADVFN Monitor.

Monitor lets you view up to 110 of your favourite stocks at once and is completely free to use.

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

P: V: D:20191020 01:12:30