Buy
Sell
Name Symbol Market Type
Raven Prop P LSE:RAVP London Preference Share
  Price Change % Change Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Traded Last Trade
  -0.50 -0.43% 116.50 115.00 118.00 118.00 116.50 117.50 164,501 14:00:25

Raven Prop P Discussion Threads

Showing 1176 to 1199 of 1425 messages
Chat Pages: 57  56  55  54  53  52  51  50  49  48  47  46  Older
DateSubjectAuthorDiscuss
02/2/2021
11:00
Reason I assume was they really wanted out, as it was a Woodford investment so tainted. And the other institutions knew this so waited until Invesco really had to get rid to pick them up on the cheap.
igbertsponk
02/2/2021
10:57
Probably had to many shares to shift and would have driven prices down either further if they sold massive chunks
irish_neris
02/2/2021
10:51
Was there a reason why Invesco didnt keep selling in the market, rather than get 90.8p
hindsight
02/2/2021
10:51
Was there a reason why Invesco didnt keep selling in the market, rather than get 90.8p
hindsight
02/2/2021
10:15
I don't know how in less then year a management team can destroy the value of a business thats operating during covid19
irish_neris
02/2/2021
10:12
disgusting
yieldsearch
02/2/2021
09:55
So would we at those prices!
spectoacc
02/2/2021
09:43
Directors (Anton epecially) put their hands in their pockets to the tune of over £5m Director No. of preference Total no. of preference shares acquired shares held following completion of the Placing Anton Bilton 5,000,000 11,162,188 ------------------ ---------------------------------- Glyn Hirsch* 522,026 4,201,856 ------------------ ---------------------------------- Russell Field 250,000 250,000 ------------------ ---------------------------------- Sir Richard Jewson 189,600 265,060 ------------------ ---------------------------------- Mark Sinclair 165,000 1,456,305 ------------------ ---------------------------------- Colin Smith 75,000 979,198 ------------------ ----------------------------------
igbertsponk
02/2/2021
09:17
Directors buying loads of shares at knockdown prices. 5m RAVP shares at 90.8p for one director. And that`s in addition to their high remuneration. Small investors screwed once again.
tyranosaurus
28/1/2021
12:01
Yes, witness the high vote against the directors remuneration report at the last AGM.
flyfisher
28/1/2021
10:59
I think a delisting of RAVP pushed through by a cabal of the major fund managers is unlikely. With the experience of Woodford and all his unquoted holdings, fund managers are probably fairly adverse to holding anything that is unquoted, let alone voting to have their holding become unquoted. Also bear in mind that it was fund managers who requested Article 2.6.11 be inserted. I agree that the joint venture is skewed in favour of the directors who are and always have been extremely greedy.
kenny
28/1/2021
09:42
Thanks for the clarification and clear explanation Kenny.
renewed1
28/1/2021
07:00
I can see several reasons for the directors of the j/v to be keen on the idea but none for the company, therefore i see it as only being in the interest of the directors and question whether they are appropriate directors for RAV. The 100m ord that the j/v are purchasing could easily be bought by RAV itself, which would improve NAV for all holders. It will be interesting to compare the income of the j/v to the income that RAV derives from it. In order to study any cash drain. I have been looking at RAV for a while, but this is a red flag. It will be interesting to see the result of the ravp rump placing.
flyfisher
28/1/2021
01:50
The only loophole there is if a cabal got together enough RAVP to vote through a delisting. Unlikely but, given the large holdings which exist, not completely impossible. It's nice to think the institutions will defend us, but ultimately that's not their role. I particularly don't like this new joint venture which doesn't just allow the directors to benefit disproportionately from the Invesco purchase, but raises questions such as - what is the purpose of the JV? - what is it going to do once it's got its hands on all these cheap shares?
zangdook
27/1/2021
18:14
Just to expand on the answer above. On a takeover, a preference holder is entitled to ask the company to redeem their preference shares (Article 2.7). The company cannot force a holder to tender his shares for redemption and the wording makes that clear. It is clear from the fact the Articles state that a holder can only tender all of their holding and not part. Therefore, if a holder has to make a choice, it is clearly a right which is the holder’s option. There are also other indications of this. A holder has to, on a takeover, give notice of redemption within 14 days - there are no provisions to force a redemption for those who give no notice. This Article 2.7 has been in existence since the first issue of RAVP. Note that the par value of the preference shares is 1p. The above Article states that the redemption is to made at the “Fixed Amount” per share, which is defined as 100p. In 2020, Article 2.6.11 was added. This article basically states that the consent of preference holders is required to remove the preference shares from being listed on a recognised stock exchange. The effect is, that even if the company is taken private, or otherwise acquired, the company must maintain the stock exchange listing for RAVP. This was introduced at the request of RAVC holders who were being converted, mostly, into RAVP. I imagine this was because they were being switched from a preference share with a fixed redemption date, to one with no redemption date. At the time of the Aviva preference share debacle in 2018, the company introduced what is now Article 2.6.10. This basically states that any “capital reduction” scheme, as Aviva proposed, or any variation of rights of the preference shares requires a special resolution, importantly, passed by RAVP holders alone, voting as a separate class. ================================================================================== Because of the terms attaching, I believe RAVP can be regarded as a permanent preference issue and I hope the above information assists in reassuring other holders that the facts support that view.
kenny
27/1/2021
16:40
No the holder has to agree to selling, they cannot be forced. See the other thread for the actual wording of the articles.
gary1966
27/1/2021
16:35
Is it the case that if this company were subject to a successful takeover, then the prefs could be redeemed at par? Thanks.
flyfisher
27/1/2021
14:15
This stinks. Will be voting against if I still own any at that time. No chance of getting any at these placing prices. Seriously considering dumping the rest of my holding.
tyranosaurus
27/1/2021
11:48
The common view seems to be that all this spending/support by governments around the world will create inflation, which in turn will increase interest rates. The less common view is that inflation will not be created, a view I subscribe to. This article gives a good explanation of why inflation will not result – open the article – “Quarterly Review and Outlook - Fourth Quarter 2020” at: hTTps://hoisington.com/economic_overview.html I think the example quoted, from economic literature, of the brick thrown through the bakery window, precisely explains why no inflation is likely to arise from this particular governments expenditure.
kenny
27/1/2021
09:45
No bad forcing - on a takeover the holder, not the company, has the right to their £1 back. Plus any outstanding divis.
igbertsponk
27/1/2021
09:35
hxxps://www.theravenpropertygroup.com/media/1510/20200731-articles-of-incorporation.pdf 2.7 Redemption 2.7.1 In the event of a Potential Takeover: 2.7.1.1 the Company shall give the holders of Preference Shares a Takeover Notice no earlier than 40 business days before but not later than 20 business days before the expected date of it completing or becoming effective, which notice shall contain reasonable details of the Potential Takeover; 2.7.1.2 each holder of Preference Shares shall be entitled by no later than the 10th business day from the date the Takeover Notice is given to notify the Company that it requires all (but not part) of its Preference Shares to be redeemed on the Potential Takeover completing or becoming effective No suggestion of a forced redemption that I can see.
stemis
27/1/2021
01:36
Meanwhile......the total volume of lease and purchase transactions for high-quality warehouse space in the Moscow region reached a record high in the second half of 2020. Hopefully, this company got it's share of this increase in leasing activity albeit we will not get any indication of this until release of the annual results for 2020, now due to be published on 15 March.
kenny
26/1/2021
21:59
Yes, article 2.7. This still stands in the articles as published after the conversion of the RAVC convertibles into prefs and ords in July 2020, available on the company website.
2akop
26/1/2021
20:35
I think it was changed after the Aviva pref fiasco. Company did it to reassure holders of the prefs.
gary1966
Chat Pages: 57  56  55  54  53  52  51  50  49  48  47  46  Older
ADVFN Advertorial
Your Recent History
LSE
RAVP
Raven Prop..
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:20210517 16:57:21