Raven Prop P Discussion Threads

[cc2014] 26/1/2021 10:29

Details of placing out in additional RNS a few minutes ago.

[zangdook] 26/1/2021 10:29

Shares "conditionally placed with investors" doesn't sound to me like something the likes of us will get a taste of, so I made do with 101.98.

[stemis] 26/1/2021 10:28

You can't take part in the placing

[spectoacc] 26/1/2021 10:28

@Gary1966 - nope. Is dictated by whether you're in the club or not. Placing will be mostly done already, quids in for the insts.

[gary1966] 26/1/2021 10:24

Maybe the amount you can buy at 90.8p is dictated by the amount you already own hence the need to increase current holding?

[my retirement fund] 26/1/2021 10:20

Why add at 102 when you can add in the placing at 92p ? ...or are people expecting they won't be able to partake.

[spectoacc] 26/1/2021 10:19

Be nicer to add at 90.8p tho.

[igbertsponk] 26/1/2021 09:35

Directors going all in at this price. Invesco desperate to get out. And the more Prefs the Board have, the less likely they'll be to even think about tinkering with the 12%.
My view is that they'll run the company for a few more years then look to flog to a sovereign wealth fund. Enjoy the 12% whilst you can!

[riskvsreward] 26/1/2021 09:31

Surely this is a much better deal than the previous one when the company agreed to purchase ord. share at 36 p from Invesco. Looking at the positive side. Plus it says the business is doing well even in current times!

[eeza] 26/1/2021 09:29

Buyers are satisfying the sellers, so demand still there.

[igbertsponk] 26/1/2021 09:24

LOL - not the best arbitrage opportunity!

[zangdook] 26/1/2021 09:23

No, I'm doing dummy trades. Now I can buy at 101.98 and sell at 102.

[igbertsponk] 26/1/2021 09:22

Will all be buys. I added a few more at 101.98

[zangdook] 26/1/2021 09:20

buys and sells both at 102. bit odd, can't they co-ordinate?

[igbertsponk] 26/1/2021 09:19

Just had a nibble at 102. Rude not to.

[montyhedge] 26/1/2021 09:19

Has long has we keep getting our 12p a year, don't care.

[bisiboy] 26/1/2021 09:11

this doesn't feel clean to me but will wait to see further detail.
one thing does strike me though that i seriously question whether this is in the best interests of invesco unit holders.

[montyhedge] 26/1/2021 08:55

Wow sellers at 102.

[zangdook] 26/1/2021 08:44

If the directors were willing to pay for their large piece of pie, that would tell us something about their confidence. But then why set up this jv? If it's virtually a freebie, that tells us little more than that their understanding of their responsibilities may not entirely align them with our interests.

[flyfisher] 26/1/2021 08:22

I note 26% against the directors remuneration at the last AGM.

I would guess the directors will appoint themselves as directors of the j/v with commensurate salaries.

[gary1966] 26/1/2021 08:17

The other way of looking at it is if the directors want such a large piece of the pie that they must be confident about the prospects for the company. It also greatly increases their alignment with the shareholders. Assuming that the shares being offered to private shareholders are on the same terms, then we get our chance to get our snouts in the trough as well.

[flyfisher] 26/1/2021 08:05

So that the directors can get a large piece of the pie for a little cost.

[zangdook] 26/1/2021 08:01

So let the company do it on its own. Why the jv?