Rpc Share Discussion Threads

[cashcow5] 15/4/2019 23:24

This reminds me of the time Phillis was proved completely wrong about how ex-div dates work but still spent about three weeks arguing about it regardless.

Was quite funny 😂

[phillis] 15/4/2019 22:24

LOl Whizzer
Further evidence you are a total plonker
3459 relates to JPM s purchase RNS of 3 April

If you had read Jeffs link as posted you would see it relates to the sale by JPM (8.5 notice - dated 9 April) of a large chunk of stock of which the highest price received was 800p

So a sensible question was as to the identity of the purchaser who paid a price higher than the Berry offer(and why - as Jeff was postulating )

Are you a sixth former doing business studies perhaps? With that dodgy broker who had Berrys offer doc a week before it was issued?

PS your 3492 is absolute garbage

Enough!

[billywhizz1] 15/4/2019 20:47

All well and good, but your original post (3459) specifically refers to a buy and not a sell.
1. Jeffian then replies to you (3470) naturally assuming that you were referring
to Section 2b,this being the only viable perceived alternative at that time to
the £8 sell in Section 2a.
2. You then reply to Jeffian confirming the £8 large transaction, posing a
further assumptive rhetorical comment as being ‘someone’;s short closure’,
by inference indicating a reference to section 2b.
3. Budgiekevin then offers a post querying this apparent anomaly on the
same assumption that Jeffian made. Budgiekevin couldn’t understand
why,(according to your pronouncements)Berry would be stupid enough to
raise the share price price by buying above the final offer price declared,
because as we all know, they would then have to offer this same sp
to the shareholders.
4. You then pull the rabbit out of the hat, presumably in an attempt to rectify
your blunder, by stating that it was a sell and not a buy.
5. Budgiekevin then attempts to get some clarification on your position (3474)
6. You reply by referring him to ‘the relevant RNS’.
7. Jeffian then further pursues the issue, still assuming you are referring
to section 2b. and goes on to offer a perfectly logical analysis,
presumably still based on 2b.

Obviously, something was, and it would appear still, is amiss in your logic.
Then you default to your usual pattern of ridicule.

My own reasons for referring to 2b. were based on a possible misunderstanding, on your part, of your original posts, perhaps you had become confused ?

[phillis] 15/4/2019 15:06

whizzer
This applies to you to
Try reading Section A where it notes sale of 7047582 shares under "Purchases and sales"

( NB Not cash settled derivative transactions)

[billywhizz1] 15/4/2019 14:59

Can't see an answer offered to my post 3487, so I'll give one:

A Share-Swap is not a cash transaction, it is a synergy risk which in this instance is shared by Berry and RPC. The ratio difference between the Berry share price and the RPC share price is then applied to the share exchange between the two companies. The £8 sale referred to in P/N 3471 IMOP is a share exchange and not a cash sale.

[phillis] 15/4/2019 14:51

dear oh dear
try reading the RNS again (or perhaps for the first time?)

[phillis] 15/4/2019 13:39

and your 3480 was meant to be what
Too idle to look the facts up for your self

[billywhizz1] 15/4/2019 12:05

Anybody got the patience to explain to 'Nutjob' what a Share-Swap is ?

[phillis] 15/4/2019 11:56

"Events my dear boy - events"

Anyway am not sure what your real point is

[googly2] 15/4/2019 11:21

Is this the same Phillis who was so quick to dismiss any suggestion that the RPC BoD and their advisors were not in full control of the sales process to Apollo and you were so confident of the outcome that you predicted a sale price of £10! Can’t remember then just look back at your December posts.

[phillis] 15/4/2019 08:57

Jeff
Don't spoon feed these idiots
They don't seem to have much idea

[billywhizz1] 12/4/2019 13:55

Sorry Jeffian, missed 'Not an' at start of last sentence.

[billywhizz1] 12/4/2019 13:50

Thanks Jeffian, Saved me trawling through the deriv. settlements.
Insignificant share count.

[jeffian] 12/4/2019 13:22

Sale at £8

[budgiekevin] 12/4/2019 13:13

Billywhizz, no I didn’t - the post said a buy and his response says it was a sale, I am not wasting my time checking his post was right or wrong. I will just take it he got it wrong on the first post and didn’t want to say sorry for the incorrect post

[billywhizz1] 12/4/2019 13:00

Budgiekevin:
Been away for a couple of days and just checked the Forum.
Re. Nutjob’s posts 3471 and 3473
Did you check the 8 Quid Sale on RNS ?

[redartbmud] 12/4/2019 08:01

ROME UK BIDCO LIMITED (the "Bidder")

a company formed on behalf of funds managed by Apollo Management IX, L.P.

Lapse of the Offer
Following RPC's announcement on 8 March 2019 that RPC's board of directors had withdrawn its recommendation of the Bidder's final cash offer for RPC (the "Offer"), the Bidder today announces that it has, with the consent of the Panel, lapsed the Offer.

Academic.

[jeffian] 11/4/2019 09:41

I have never shorted in my life - I'm an investor not a gambler - but with a substantial long holding, I'm beginning to wonder whether there isn't a strong case here. The downside (of a short) is limited by the bid price and the upside could be substantial if the bid fails, which would be a win/win for existing holders, or am I missing something?

[jeffian] 11/4/2019 09:38

My point was, with both JPM and GS appearing to cover their long positions with shorts and the share price hovering somewhat below the bid price, maybe they're not so sure it's a 'done deal' after all?

[phillis] 11/4/2019 07:20

Yes I am sure
Look at the relevant RNS

[budgiekevin] 10/4/2019 22:09

Phillis, are you sure as your quote was buying not selling

[phillis] 10/4/2019 20:23

this was a sale not a purchase

[budgiekevin] 10/4/2019 20:22

Phillis neither GS nor JPM are allowed to buy in the market above the offer price. To do so would mean all shareholders have to be offered the same price. IMO