We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Type | Share ISIN | Share Description |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mercantile Ports & Logistics Limited | LSE:MPL | London | Ordinary Share | GG00BKSH7R87 | ORD NPV |
Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0.00 | 0.00% | 1.80 | 1.70 | 1.90 | 1.90 | 1.80 | 1.80 | 10,261 | 08:00:17 |
Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
0 | 0 | N/A | 0 |
Date | Subject | Author | Discuss |
---|---|---|---|
06/7/2017 07:42 | Soon the Nomad's "plausible deniability" will look tenuous even for the city... | phowdo | |
06/7/2017 07:22 | Great letter MT. At some point they might actually take action. | waterloo01 | |
05/7/2017 22:18 | 'Where is deepvalueinvestor who was very bullish buying all the way down from 100p...insider maybe?...' No, he is a genuine investor who was sadly duped by the management of a company whose accounts appear to suggest, they may have burnt through £44m(think nearly two Brinks Matt heists)BEFORE, starting any on-site land reclamation or berth development. And who elect to stop all land reclamation during the 6 month monsoon season for the third year in row - while loan interest payments totalling £6m a year are currently running at Shareholders expense! Shareholders will recall, just 5 miles away at JNPT, ITD managed to reclaim 225 acres in 21 months which included two full monsoon seasons and tidal waters up to 21m deep! However, JNPT has professional management, who would have initiated crippling contractual financial penalties against ITD, if ITD failed to resource the Port Development project in line with, the two year construction timetable for the marine civil engineering elements of the build out. AIOHO/DYOR | mount teide | |
05/7/2017 21:44 | British Pensions Funds would have paid £110k at IPO for a shareholding the size of that 44k that went through earlier today. Its now worth £1.8k! Barely 2 days of management's average travelling expenses over the last seven years - which have totalled £2m since IPO; during which they have destroyed shareholder value on an almost unprecedented scale, reducing the share price from 250p to 4.25p. For which shareholders have not seen resignations but, Board promotions! The management were so embarrassed about shareholders publicising the scandal of their travelling and 5 star hotel expenses, they stopped reporting that information in the latest set of prelims, presumably because it has continued to rise and they want to keep the little perk of office and continue living in the lifestyle they have become accustomed to at shareholders expense. Some more details have emerged with respect to Sunny Varkey, the billionaire education entrepreneur and philanthropist, and Unesco Goodwill Ambassador serving writs on former Everonn Education directors Nikhil Gandhi and P Kishore(MD) in connection with allegedly carrying out fraudulent transactions and siphoning off huge sums of funds from Everonn, of as much as £12m: MPL Executive Chairman Gandhi's immediate family have been implicated in the alleged fraud and cases filed against them too. The matter is now being investigated by the Serious Crime Branch of the Special Fraud Office following a formal complaint from a livid Sunny. Following Sunny's takeover of Everonn Education, his accountants found the company's books to be a work of fiction and the accounts manipulated. Talking of works of fiction - despite TWO reminders to the NOMAD, we are still to see any developments with respect to the Shareholders Circular to raise £37m being in breach of the Port Operating Concession: Here is the latest reminder to the Head of Compliance at the Nomad Cenkos: Good afternoon Ms Wood, Thank you for the long overdue clarification by way of RNS, of the situation with respect to Mr N Gandhi’s subscription shares. Although, in view of Grant Thornton’s involvement as Mercantile’s auditors, it would have been a little more re-assuring if the RNS had also included confirmation that the funds had actually been received in the Guernsey bank account, as stated in the Jan 2017 RNS. You may recall Grant Thornton audited AIM fraud Globo's accounts. Shortly after Globo issued an audited financial statement cheerfully claiming the Company had circa £100m on deposit, it proved to be a total fabrication. In light of this, i recently wrote to Grant Thornton asking what methodology they use, to ensure cash funds claimed by the management of Companies like Mercantile, that they get paid extremely well to audit, are actually in the bank accounts. I received the following rather unhelpful reply: Thank you for your email enquiry. We owe a duty of confidentiality to our client and cannot discuss any details relating to the client about which you are seeking information. Your sincerely For and on behalf of Grant Thornton (UK) LLP You will recall i also sent you the following email message on 16 June 2017: 'There is an Risk Factor detailed in the IPO document, concerning a condition of the Karanja Port Operating Dead of Lease, which has been breached by the management when they elected to proceed with the £37m cash raise in October 2016. For which we are yet to find a Company statement confirming this matter has been satisfactorily dealt with, in order to protect shareholders interests.' 'IPO - Risk Factors Reliance on SKIL as the promoter of the Project: 'It is a condition of the Deed of Lease that SKIL, KIPL and their respective promoters and affiliates retain a minimum 26%, directly or indirectly, in the Project (the ‘‘Minimu 'The Board believes it is unlikely that the Minimum Threshold will be breached in the foreseeable future. In the event that a transaction was proposed in the future that would be likely to cause a breach of the Minimum Threshold, the Board would have to determine whether or not to proceed with such a transaction, taking into account all of the circumstances at that time. The Board believes that it may be possible to reach agreement with the MMB in the future with respect to reducing or eliminating the Minimum Threshold ONCE THE PROJECT HAS BEEN DEVELOPED AND IS OPERATIONAL,ALTHOUGH THERE CAN BE NO ASSURANCE THAT ANY SUCH AGREEMENT WILL BE REACHED.' Incredibly, the breach was news to the your account representative Stephen Keys when i first brought it to his attention many, many months ago. Yet, as detailed in the IPO documentation, despite the breach carrying the risk of loss of the Operating Concession and, the total loss of all shareholder value, it is simply extraordinary that some 8 months later, after completely overlooking its importance and significance in the production of the Shareholders Circular to raise £37m in October 2016, for which Cenkos were extremely well remunerated, shareholders are still yet to see an appropriate response from the Nomad/Company, in line with their duties and responsibilities with respect to the UK Corporate Governance Code and AIM Rules for Nominated Advisors. I would politely remind Cenkos that during this period, the market capitalisation of Mercantile Ports & Logistics has dropped by some 60% - do you think that shareholders might consider the lack of regulatory oversight from the Nomad in this connection, despite it being repeatedly brought to its attention, may have been a contributing factor in the appalling loss of shareholder value since October 2016 and indeed, at other times since IPO, where a lack of due diligence by the Nomad has resulted in RNS, Financial Statements and Shareholders Circulars being issued by Mercantile, that the late Alan Clarke MP might, with the benefit of hindsight, describe as being extremely ‘economical with the actualite’. Kind regards, AIOHO/DYOR | mount teide | |
04/7/2017 22:13 | Where is deepvalueinvestor who was very bullish buying all the way down from 100p...insider maybe?... | diku | |
04/7/2017 14:45 | Serious Fraud Office Tel: 020 7239 7000/7004/7011 Email: public.enquiries@sfo Aim Regulator Tel: 0207 797 4154 Complaints relating to an AIM company or a Nomad’s compliance with the AIM Rules, e-mail: aiminvestigations@ls | mount teide | |
03/7/2017 10:54 | Annual Report - confirmed a £55m cash burn in 2016. Comprised of circa £40m cash plus £15m bank loan drawdown Work Completed during 2016 65 acres of land reclaimed 80 shallow water jetty piles laid Some Channel Dredging in H1 (scope yet to be confirmed) Laughably, the market is told that little lot cost a totally implausible £55m of shareholders funds - just £2m less than ITD' successful tender offer to build a 200 acre terminal with 6 berths on a fixed quay wall, with the 3 mile Karanja Creek dredged to a minimum of -4.5m. Progress - June 2016 to Dec 2017 June 2016 - 75 acres Land and 58 Piles Oct 2016 Shareholders Circular - Nominated for AIM's Greatest Work of Fiction Stated a Jan 2017 target of: 140 acres and 2 berths complete - actual result ZERO additional acres and No berths Stated a June 2017 Target of: 200 acres and 6 berths(4 operational) - actual result 15 acres in a year(90 acres in total) and NO berths Prelims now state a totally pitiful Dec 2017 target of: 90 acres and 2 operational berths - however even this has the heavy caveat of (depending on the length of the monsoon and other factors beyond company control!) Prelims 'Conclusion' 'The Company has experienced the sort of minor interruptions to activity that often impact projects such as this in India.' Nonsense. The company knowingly with circa £4m/year of debt interest payment running, stopped all Land reclamation for 6 months (June-Dec 2016) - despite fraudulently telling the market otherwise while raising a further £37m - by claiming full time work on-site had continued without material interruption since Oct 2015, and to expect 65 additional acres of Land reclamation by Jan 2017. (A complete Fraud, since NO Land Reclamation work was taking place). 'The cumulative effect of these minor and unforeseen interruptions is that management no longer expect the facility to be completed by the end of the year.' Nonsense. The cumulative effect of the Board misleading the market by fraudulently claiming land reclamation work and berth piling was continuing apace from June to Jan 2017, when it had actually been shut down, means that the Company only completed 10% of the June 2017 land reclamation work target, and just 20% of the berth piling and construction target, despite having a cash burn many, many multiples of that reasonably expected for achieving so little. And now, with all Land Reclamation shut down in H2/2017 means, since June 2016, MPL will have achieved just 10% of the stated June 2017 land reclamation target by Jan 2018! Fraud by False Misrepresentation on a truly industrial scale. 'However, depending on the length of the monsoon and other factors beyond its control, management is confident that two berths will be operational and the facility will be generating revenue by the end of the year.' By Dec 2017, management will have completed a totally unacceptable 15 acres of land reclamation since June 2016, despite claiming in the Shareholders Circular to raise £37m that they expected to achieve an additional 125 acres by June 2017 and have 6 berths complete with 4 operational). The sorry tale of SPL/MPL is one of industrial scale Board incompetence that clueless II's should have dealt with in no uncertain terms long ago, and fraud by false representation to raise a further £37m from the market. A crude and unsophisticated fraud that could and, should have been stopped in its tracks by the Nomad, who failed to carry out even the most basic due diligence to confirm the accuracy of the contents of the Shareholders Circular, thereby aiding and abetting the Company to engage in conduct brazenly crafted to mislead. The Nomad, after failing to carry out the necessary due diligence to protect shareholders and prospective shareholders interests, compounded this failure by missing a second opportunity to prevent the fraud by false misrepresentation via the Interims. Where, a statement unwittingly went out, indicating that NO Land Reclamation had been carried in the there months since late June 2016, despite the Interims claiming full time work on site resumed in 'late October 2015, and has continued uninterrupted since'. Why has ITD been able to reclaim 225 acres in 21 months(which included 2 full monsoon seasons) at JNPT in tidal waters up to 21m deep. Yet at Karanja has not carried out any land reclamation at Karanja in tidal waters up to 5m deep, during most of the last three Monsoon seasons, despite MPL fraudulently claiming otherwise in the Shareholders Circular to raise an additional £37m? As we correctly predicted at the time, anyone relying on the accuracy of the contents of the Shareholders Circular is going to be massively disappointed, since it is a work of fiction, that is likely to result in shareholders getting 20% of the progress management claim at best, should shareholders fully support the £37m cash rise. Sadly for shareholders how right we were, although, even we were shocked to see that much less than even our dire and totally unacceptable progress prediction had actually been achieved, principally due as it subsequently came to light, by the Company fraudulently claiming to have been carrying out land reclamation work for a 6 month period at at rate far in advance of anything previously achieved, when IT WAS IN FACT KNOWINGLY CARRYING OUT NO LAND RECLAMATION WORK WHATSOEVER. Those who relied on the Shareholders Circular to raise £37m being an accurate document, and have since found themselves 60% down, on top of the 95% fall in the value of their IPO investment during a period when other false statements were made(easily verifiable with the passage of time from Google Earth historic images, photographs on the MPL website and obtained by shareholders via a hired light aircraft repeatedly flown over the site), clearly have suffered a material loss for which the Company and its representatives should be held to account. Like us, MPL shareholders and anyone else concerned with the behaviour, integrity and probity of the Company and its representatives, should make their concerns known to the AIM REGULATOR and SFO by way of a call, letter or email. AIOHO/DYOR | mount teide | |
01/7/2017 21:35 | What was the main reason for name change?....and was that the hint all is not well... | diku | |
01/7/2017 21:03 | The Brits did more good than bad in India so I don't know where that comes from. The world's biggest railway network was constructed under British rule. We also gave them the English language. India would be at the same level as Indonesia now if it wasn't for the Brits. | kev0856153 | |
01/7/2017 09:22 | OrinocorThe lead Indian bank in the loan will most probably be well briefed on this scam from the start. They know the connected parties will take over this fraud once the money runs out and repay them.I once worked with an Indian fella and we became quite close. Remember him fondly. Navin was his name. Anyway he explained that in middle and upper class Indian society, the British were considered fair game to cheat and defraud because they feel we raped the country in our colonial past and its akin to getting ones own back. In India, folk who successfully do this are seen and thought of as heroes. Contrast that to most other countries were they would be considered criminals.The fact of the matter is, once this scam has played out, they will be local heroes and higher positions in local and national government will await them.You can shout all you want to but India is a very long way away from the grubby functioning of London's AIM stock exchange. | my retirement fund | |
30/6/2017 22:01 | On his Linked In page Sutcliffe claims to be the CEO and founder of Port Evo hxxp://www.port-evo. | orinocor | |
30/6/2017 21:57 | I forgot James Sutcliffe is an industry expert. I know this because it says so on his Linkedin page. hxxps://uk.linkedin. James Sutcliffe is an entrepreneur and a business leader. He has a broad range of experience managing family and fully quoted London Stock Exchange listed companies. In view of his Public (Listed) Company experience James is available for Non Exec and Executive Board positions or working with companies on key assignments. Business experience: Roles include Chairman, CEO and Non-Exec Director of private and London Listed companies. Also Chairman of UKTI (ports sector) representing the UK maritime sector internationally. LOL LOL LOL | orinocor | |
30/6/2017 21:55 | I thought Lord Flight was a world expert on ports construction. That's why he was appointed. Then again he probably knows as much as the rest of them which is nothing. Nikhil Gandhi. I thought he was the industry expert? Will the Indian banks go after Gandhi when they don't get all their money back? | orinocor | |
30/6/2017 21:31 | LOL-strangely he also never replied to communications after declaring on appointment how impressed he was with works completed to date. Off course the real irony is that they haven't completed anything other than fund raises. | pj 1 | |
30/6/2017 20:44 | Another interesting comment from the Prelims is this: Statement of Directors’ Responsibilities 'The Directors are responsible for the maintenance and integrity of the corporate and financial information included on the Company’s website.' After launching the new website along with the Shareholders Circular back in Oct 2016 to raise £37m, with the following statement about the specification of the New Karanja Terminal: '1000m of Quay with Ship to Shore Cranes' The Directors last week decided to fess up and replace it with: '800m of Quay, utilising both sides of a 400m jetty, serviced with multipurpose cranes' So, 8 months later the Market is advised that the management have decided to change the BMW M5 specification to a 1 series Bread van and charge shareholders another £37m for the privilege! | mount teide | |
30/6/2017 20:41 | 31 October 2016 Shareholders Circular - possibly one on AIM's greatest works of Fiction You know - the fantasy world document to raise another £37m from the pension funds of British workers that fraudulently claimed: Work had continued on site without material interruption since October 2015, and that by Jan 2017 another 65 acres of land reclamation was expected - misrepresentation on an industrial scale, since the company carried out NO land reclamation work for the 4 months prior to the Shareholders Circular and during the two month period afterwards, resulting in ZERO acres of Land reclamation for ENTIRE period through to Jan 2017 - how the Nomad let them get away with that beggars belief. Or the claim that by the end of Q2, MPL would have completed the 200 acres of land reclamation and construction of 6 berths, of which 4 would be operational - misrepresentation on an industrial scale - MPL managed to add 15 acres to the 75 acres from a year ago and then promptly announced they were shutting down all Land reclamation for at least another 6 months(to avoid disappointment, shareholders would be very wise to accept this is all they will ever see!). So MPL told shareholders they expected to achieve 125 acres in 12 months - while actually delivering 15 acres in 18 months!) Shareholders will be aware ITD during a 21 month period that included 2 monsoon seasons, managed to reclaim 225 acres at JNPT in tidal waters up to 21m deep! It also contained the following statement: 'The Directors expect that the continued expansion of JNPT will present significant opportunities for the Company. In particular, the Directors believe that the Company will benefit from the Facility being able to offer: • mid-stream discharge and loading of cargo at anchorage whilst vessels wait to berth at JNPT.' Readers will be aware we told the Nomad this was nonsense and highly misleading for a number of reason: Nearly all the vessels trading to JNPT were gearless(no cranes) making it a physical impossibility. For the last 12 months very few vessels destined for JNPT have ever been forced to wait in the anchorage for a berth. An earlier investigation funded by the Indira Harbour terminals, established that stream container transhipment, from even very small container vessels equipped with onboard cranes, would still be very difficult to achieve even in calm sea and wind conditions. The JNPT terminals were doubling the terminal capacity over the next few years - to ensure all vessels immediate access to a berth, and spending hundreds of millions to improve the road access. This clearly went straight over the clueless Management's heads because they sent a rightfully concerned II, a couple of photos of small geared break bulk/container ships in an attempt to refute our claims, along with some telephone 'comfort' from a NED who shall remain nameless. Now roll forward to the Prelims - 'The addition of 3.0 million TEUs at JNPT will address congestion on the water side. However, the enhancement of the road side capacity is not in line with the sea side capacity and for incremental volumes, evacuation from JNPT by the short sea route (8-9 NM) to Karanja Facility seems to be the only alternate.' So, the clueless MPL management having been rumbled that their ridiculous claim in the Shareholders Circular was total nonsense, now seem to be back to making it up as they go along again, by laughably claiming that one of the top 20 container ports in the world, while expanding capacity to 10m teus, will be forced to "evacuate" cargo out of the terminal BY SEA. Shareholders will be aware that following the implementation of a number of new operational measures early last year, JNPT recently reported that the Port had not had a road congestion problem for more than 12 months and, is currently spending hundreds of £millions improving the Uran highway to ensure it is more than capable of handling the additional terminal capacity without congestion! The ridiculous MPL claims of stream transhipment of JNPT container cargo made the management look like desperate fools clutching at straws but, their 'evacuation' of cargo from JNPT claim is totally irrational and illogical. I spoke to a senior terminal manager at the DP World JNPT terminal today and, he laughed out loud, when i told him the MPL management were claiming in their Company Statement's, that following opening of T4, JNPT would likely be forced to 'evacuate' landed containers back over the quay to Kajanja, to avoid landside congestion as, that was the only alternative! Apart from the fact that NO major container terminal would ever do this from a credibility viewpoint, MPL's management are also seemingly oblivious to the fact that, if in the extremely unlikely event it ever did, the Indira Terminals would likely get the business since they were barely half the distance from JNPT by sea! AIOHO/DYOR | mount teide | |
29/6/2017 07:23 | How about a private investigator uncovering what is going on here... Complete lack of management integrity - Board promotions rather than resignations for a management team responsible for a drop in the share-price of 98% post IPO, from 250p to 4.25p! Management travelling expenses and hotels bills totalling circa £25k/month for most of the last 7years. | diku | |
28/6/2017 22:41 | MT, I think that is the nub of it. There is no value here given the debt to the banks and their lien over the asset. Indeed the value of the completed project is still less than the outstanding debt. | waterloo01 | |
28/6/2017 22:37 | I reported to the person in Cenkos responsible for regulatory compliance that the account manager responsible for handling their MPL account has consistently failed to provide answers to our queries over a considerable time. To us, he acted more like a defence counsel for MPL than a Nomad - a number of telephone conversations ended in shouting matches. These included queries over comments in RNS Statements and/or Financial Statements that were either deliberately misleading to make it difficult, if not impossible to ascertain the rate of progress with the berth piling for example, in order to be able to hold management to account. Or completely false statements, as in the outrageous claim made by the Executive Chairman, that Land reclamation work was ongoing and progressing in line with management expectation, during at least a 9 month period when the only means of access to the Port for commercial aggregate trucks required the suicidal action of a drive across a deep, 40m wide fast flowing tidal creek! Funnily enough, there was no enthusiasm among the drivers for an early grave and so, sensibly they waited a further 9 months until the creek had been bridged. AIMHO/DYOR | mount teide | |
28/6/2017 22:08 | Note- all from memory DYOR | pj 1 |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions