Pcf Share Discussion Threads

[cc2014] 24/6/2021 11:43

5 weeks now. What sort of issue takes 5 weeks to sort out?

[dandigirl] 21/6/2021 14:58

I agree CC. 30/06 is a crunch date. But given this BoDs behaviour so far, an extension would not surprise me.

[seasidehippo] 21/6/2021 14:51

They are probably still working out something to tell us!! Anyway chin up no news is good news or so the saying goes and the Bank is still open.

[cc2014] 21/6/2021 10:12

I trust the Board have a very good reason for not updating investors. There surely must be one as for an experienced set of NED's this is not a usual strategy.


I suggest the lack of a Monday morning RNS means nothing now. The crunch point is 30th June. I sincerely hope the Board do not leave it to the last day.

[graham1ty] 21/6/2021 07:17

Oh dear, another Monday with no announcement..........

Nothing else to say.......

[carcosa] 17/6/2021 07:39

I would be very surprised if PCF gets delisted due to the 6 month rule. However if that nightmare scenario was to occur I would expect the company to list on the ISDX exchange; so you will be able to trade there.

[dandigirl] 16/6/2021 15:59

Nice post Milli. The 6 months period was news to me but agree with hippo, most unlikely especially given the value of the banking licence.

Of course it doesn’t change a thing whether we are positive or negative but I prefer being positive especially as the business continues to operate.

[seasidehippo] 16/6/2021 14:11

I think delisting is highly unlikely because what value would Somers include in their B/S for their investment in PCF? They have such a large holding.

[the millipede] 16/6/2021 13:47

At the end of the day there isn't much anyone can do now, so being positive or negative does not matter.

We will, I hope, find out more in due course and that is probably the time to learn lessons. If you invest more broadly on AIM I am not sure any of the flags were red, compared to flags hoisted by other AIM outfits.

However, I do not rule out this trundling on for months, with no news. After six months of suspension, under AIM rules, the listing will be cancelled.

Under that scenario we will still own shares (and I am assuming nominee accounts would be able to accommodate this, but I don't know for sure) but have no ability to trade them. The company will continue to operate. It is not clear the large shareholders need the ability to trade their shares.

Ho hum.

[geraldus] 16/6/2021 10:58

Thankyou for that.I can pass this snippet onto the vicar in our investor group who has invited me to supper.I am becoming worried over his recent behaviour.Very much out of character.Let's stay positive for a reasonable outcome.

[cjd190573] 16/6/2021 10:46

I got a response today, by post, personalised and hand signed by Garry Stran. Content standard, market regulations, etc. I too am getting an increasing sense of optimism by the fact that the bank remains open for business. If there was something that was even ever so slightly not in the public interest, the FCA and PRA would be all over this. I remain confident that the company is working en masse to deal with these so called yellow, amber and red flags. Many of which can be rectified with a dose of good management. Let’s hope so anyway?

[seasidehippo] 16/6/2021 07:40

Carcosa have you considered changing your name to Captain Hindsight?

[dandigirl] 15/6/2021 18:34

carcosa: You wrote: ""On the subject of the CEO resignation. I find it remarkable that investors can readily accept his departure without concern"".

Of course we are all concerned but what else can be done, given that he resigned after suspension, but accept, readily or not?

If it helps to say it: I am concerned at the resignation of the CEO. Now what can I do please such that you don't consider it remarkable?

[carcosa] 15/6/2021 17:06

dandigirl, I think I answered that in #3066; plus investors have an opportunity to make this a learning exercise particularly when some of the facts are entered into the public domain.

As I said in an earlier post "...regarding red flags there was, as usual, ample opportunity to get out of PCF prior to the suspension. But some lessons need to be re-learnt several times, it seems.

For those who continue to be all doe-eyed over the former CEO implies a continual lack of critical thinking which may be the reason some existing shareholders are in the current pickle. The best that such investors can hope for is to be somewhat more critical in the other companies they have shareholdings in; as eloquently outlined in CC2014's #3098 post

[dandigirl] 15/6/2021 16:48

carcosa: What would you have us do given that the CEO resigned after the suspension?

I have written to Franklin, twice, and the replies say nothing, as might be expected.

Until there is more info, I am of the view that Franklin forced him out on behalf of SOMERS, the transgression being significant enough to justify a call for his resignation.

SOMERS are flexing their muscles and will be putting their own people in place. The opportunity came out of the blue and it was taken. (Maybe Morgan will run the show for a while).

[rightnellie] 15/6/2021 14:59

Is the problem to do with gaining a banking licence. Has someone overstated figures for a couple of years to meet the requirements for their banking licence application? If so, is the banking licence in danger?

[carcosa] 15/6/2021 14:42

CC2014 - #3098
Nice write-up. If I may, I think in some respects you are being too hard on yourself. I doubt there are any listed companies out there which do not give pause for thought for an investor; perhaps classified as your 'yellow' or 'orange' flags. The red flags on the other hand do warrant greater attention for anyone that was not as cautious as you when COVID hit. FWIW I also sold out believing the business downturn would be considerable. That was an easy decision for me as I had no great love for this share anyway.

On the subject of the CEO resignation. I find it remarkable that investors can readily accept his departure without concern. Any CEO resigning when the shares are suspended is not the hallmark of a good CEO given that he has the ultimate responsibility for this state of affairs. Furthermore, his departure was immediate. There is/was no proper replacement CEO lined up. CEO's do not depart for no good reason. The associated RNS was laughable wrt his 'contribution' and 'thanks' as some special code inferring all is well.

Hopefully next Monday PCF will get around to issuing a statement.

[dandigirl] 15/6/2021 10:56

Thank you, CC2014. Very interesting insight. I will look a little into UTL and UEM.

Think you may be onto something re: SOMERS being the problem. I did post early on that they would see this as an opportunity. How? remains to be seen. We could speculate more, but what's the point.

[cc2014] 15/6/2021 08:25

"4 weeks to do a review". Bearing in mind their accounts would have normally been signed off and the annual report printed with 2 months of the preliminary results - i.e. mid February.

This is no ordinary review. In a couple of days you could resolve points of principle with the auditors. In 1 week you can go through every large accrual. In 2 weeks you could interview every relevant member of staff. And whatever the problem is with the accounts it's been going for four months now.


On a different topic I perceive it's been Somers calling the shots all along. I think of it like Dragons Den where you've got a great product and if you kept 100% shares you could expand at 20% a year but by giving away some shares for some investment you can expand at 200% a year. You've got less of the pie, but the pie is so much bigger. So, Scott and the team decided to get a bigger pie and it worked out fine for the first few years. Only Somers controlled the voting rights and controlled the appointment of the NED's. If every single shareholder voted against the appointment of the whole board, Somers can outvote everyone.

It is my view (based on no evidence) that Scott moved on because he had run out of allies on the Board an the Board was taking a direction he was not happy about. The FD left last year, the MD he had worked with for 27 years left in March. I met Scott a number of times. Others on here know him better than me but I do not think Scott would have been comfortable with one month suspension with no communication.


I think perhaps we should look to Somers as part of the problem. I have belatedly come to realise that it was not just PCF were the share price was constantly lower than expected, but also UTL and UEM, where there are connected common shareholdings, investments and directors. The market does not like them.

What is also intersesting is that Somers own a Bank, Bermuda Commercial Bank, yet the Somers NED appears to have let this get away from him despite sitting on many committees. He's deputy chair of BCB and one of the four directors of Somers.

[dandigirl] 14/6/2021 17:43

… and still nothing in the press!

[dandigirl] 14/6/2021 17:41

I think PCF was in SM’s DNA. It was his baby and had been for many years. He had a significant shareholding. I, too, think he is straight up and it was quite wrong to besmirch him without any evidence.

We wait to hear.

However, the City is a brutal place. I think whatever it is it was sufficient to ask for his resignation as Franklin and the Board no longer had faith, etc.

SOMERS will be very unhappy. It is SOMERS who will be calling the shots now in consultation with their regulators.

It is the magnitude of the problem that is important. That could lead anywhere from a simple restatement of numbers and lifting of the suspension, to a possible rights issue, to being taken private by SOMERS, to a full or partial takeover by another party.

Can’t wait.

[seasidehippo] 14/6/2021 16:40

Could it be that SM resigned because he didn't like his role in a potential new Co?
He didn't come across to me as being someone who would desert a stricken ship but I could be wrong and I also discount him being involved in any wrong doing due to, as someone else has already posted, the wording of the resignation RNS but again I could be wrong. I got the impression he took great pride in PCF.
Given that these accounting and reporting processes are not exactly complicated (e.g. no stock or branches etc etc) and that they have undergone both continuous internal and recent external audits I find it impossible to believe that this is simply "a review...." as it is nearly 4 weeks since the shares were suspended.
Because of the above I am now thinking that this COULD potentially end up as being good news rather than bad and I remain both hopeful and positive. It must be a positive, and perhaps a bit of a clue, that after nearly 4 weeks the company is still taking retail term deposits.
GLA

[dandigirl] 14/6/2021 14:57

At every opportunity I will vote against re-election of this Chairman and the current board.

Unlikely to make a difference apart from making me feel better.

[123davidgwilym] 11/6/2021 21:39

SM’s integrity is undoubted.