Oak Holdings Share Discussion Threads

[the_beagle] 06/5/2011 14:00

However good the sarnies might be, I'm not going to London. Why are there never AGMs in the North West?

[gbb483] 06/5/2011 10:21

Garlick Hill, London

[the_beagle] 06/5/2011 08:28

Hi timely....My shares are with TDW so I won't get a hard copy. Will look on the company website though. Where is the AGM as a matter of interest?

[timely4] 05/5/2011 20:11

A massive investment of c£360 but as you say welcome indeed.
The annual report came in today's post. AGM 25th May so let's hope for some news around then.

[the_beagle] 05/5/2011 10:17

My goodness. Someone has actually bought a few! Welcome to the club. I hope you know some good news! We need it.

[timely4] 03/5/2011 18:25

It is interesting that the decks are now virtually cleared ready for a change of ownership. The piece in the jigsaw I am waiting for is to see whether the new investor will reverse a new business into Oak, or just look to make the existing business work.

[the_beagle] 03/5/2011 14:21

boadicea...All fair comments imo. I really feel for long term holders. I entered for a punt and have halved my investment so far, but I knew what I was doing, and can't complain.

The issue over the "ghost" shares is not something to worry about according to an accountant friend of mine. It could be sorted at a stroke I'm told, with no adverse affect on the company or the shareholders.

[boadicea] 03/5/2011 11:54

the_beagle - Actually I'm just a fed-up long time holder.
I have mentally written off the investment but continue to follow the rather occasional company announcement.

The original OAH property team were quite well connected and respected (I was told by someone in the industry) but with the financial collapse of credit conditions the 'YES' project was virtually faced with the impossible.

Wrt the ghost capital, the company implied it would be retired somehow in their letter explaining the capital reconstruction but that hasn't happened - I assume that's because they don't have the means to do it. As it accounts for a major part of the balance sheet it is the elephant in the room.

Unlike some other cases (notably AIS and TRX) I am not aware of anyone lining their pocket at our expense - actually rather the reverse as directors have been financially supportive - and I bear no ill-will.

Equally I have no illusions about prospects here.

[the_beagle] 03/5/2011 09:46

Another director leaves the ship; not many left now!

I would expect announcements any time soon regarding fund-raising, acquisitions and new Board appointments.

I hope they have some people with rather better track records than the recent lot coming on board.

It might just be worth my wait.

[boadicea] 29/4/2011 20:49

I appreciate what you say but it doesn't answer my question, and neither does the RNS of 30th March 2010, nor the RNS of 31 March 2011 (not sure which you meant).

The answer is contained here -


The missing £6.8M capital is represented by 136M+ deferred shares of 5p, which are in effect valueless ghost capital with no voting or distribution rights which the company claimed it was going to acquire but I find no record of it having done so. (No shares are held in treasury.) They are not quoted but were presumably 'owned' by the shareholders at the time of the 2009 capital reconstruction. They only seem to qualify for an unlikely return of any excess capital after the ordinaries have been redeemed.

I do not see how they can be removed from the accounts and apparently neither does the company.

So, in relation to a capital reorganisation to reduce the nominal value of the equity, you can see that we have been here before. In fact, John Cleese's dead parrot comes to mind.

[the_beagle] 29/4/2011 14:42

Look at the RNS of 30th March and do so homework. The issued share capital is irrelivant. The market cap is 55.5million x 1.625p = £900.000.

The only problem is that 5p nominal value means that the company can't issue more shares below 5p so will need to have a capital reorganisation before any rights issue or acquisition using shares.

[boadicea] 28/4/2011 21:56

The "third of a penny" in the title looks generous. They look more like under-water options to me!

The issued share capital is stated as £9.587M, in shares of 5p.
That would correspond to about 192M shares in issue.
ADVFN states 55.57M shares in issue (not always up-to-date) and the company quote an average for the reported year of 42.21M, as used in calculating loss/share, there having been an issue part way through the year.

Now, 55.57M shares @ 5p = £2.7785M capital.
Where/what are the other ca. 156M shares; or alternatively, how is the £6.8M balance of the equity issue accounted for?

Edit: Typo above - Should read 136M shares, i.e. £6.8M / 5p.

[the_beagle] 28/4/2011 17:05

I have a gut feeling that this will end up profitable for me. Hopefully for all on here, but as I'm the only person to have bought for months, I fear most are in need of rather bigger gains. In my case the share price only needs to double!!!

[timely3] 28/4/2011 15:13

I agree with your assessment. We are as a minimum left with some hope for the future!!

[the_beagle] 28/4/2011 14:58

Well they're still going, and I think we will have important good news within a few weeks. Glad I hung on now although on a fair percentage loss. All the best ghbg and any other investors.

[ghbg] 28/4/2011 09:28

He should be paying the company in my opinion. He was CEO so would have known about the termination clause.

[the_beagle] 28/4/2011 08:59

Just re-reading the RNS re the CEO leaving, it's interesting to see he has agreed to take £125.000 owed to him in shares. Must be a good point, which I'd forgotten about.

[the_beagle] 28/4/2011 08:21

MMs are bidding 2.1875p for shares, slightly over the advertised level. Maybe they're short and want to square their books before it's too late! Or possibly it's all coming rosy!

[the_beagle] 28/4/2011 08:09

If they leave it until after the close they will be hoping it get's buried. The company Nomad definitely said "results by the end of April", but maybe things have changed enough for Aim etc.to give them longer. Smelly.

[ghbg] 28/4/2011 07:30

No news at 7am........... I would have to say that I will not invest in any company again unless I am running it, i.e. my own business (which I do)

[ghbg] 27/4/2011 09:19

My view is that the hand is probably on the plug....but you never know; the board may have 28% and previous board members have holdings too but it doesn't count for too much.

[the_beagle] 27/4/2011 09:06

ghbg....I agree with you re the development contract. It was very stupid to get into such a deal with Rotherham, spend loads of time and money on planning permission, buy a hunk of maybe now valueless land, and then get dropped out of the equation. I was not around in those days and bought as a punt at around 2.2p average fairly recently in full knowledge of the cancelation of the YES project.

I thought there was little downside to the share price but am now on a 50% paper loss, assuming there is a buyer somewhere. I should never have got involved but Ringwood and the leisure park in Rotherham both look potentially profitable or saleable, and as I said the other day, the BOD have 28% of the company with quite a bit of that subscribed at 5p per share.

We will know more of the future prospects tomorrow unless the plug gets pulled completely.

[ghbg] 27/4/2011 07:18

What has never been said by the company is why with the YES project they allowed a cancellation clause within the development agreement with such apparent ease. I don't recall reading in any of the annual reports that a material fact was that there was a risk the project could be cancelled by the land owner. There was quite a bit last year that the project could be staged and that there would be a 250 year lease of the country park to coincide with the development. The Company acquired adjacent land on the basis that it forms access to the project land and now effectively owns what could be a worthless piece of land unless alternative use can be found. The property consultancy side of the business is effectively gone with the departure of the CEO. The Board members that sanctioned this should not be entitled to shares or to compensation.

Also what has happened to the Ringwood Town and Country Experience website www.rtce.co.uk. Seems to have gone.

[the_beagle] 26/4/2011 15:45

They only have to issue last year's figures. They can then say "update to follow in due course." There must be a lot going on but we may not get to know about it any time soon I'm afraid.

However we might just be in an absolute winner!