Sofia Prop Share Discussion Threads

[the troll] 09/5/2014 18:20

if they dared to sue me ( for libel ), I'd counter-claim for deception ( a criminal offence under Guernsey, as per UK, law surely ? ) viz;

I have an e-mail from Mark Anderson, dated 6th September, 2013 ( before he stopped responding to them ), inferring a deal was likely within the month & further, the Chairman's letter, attached to the 2013 AGM notice, referring to a 'strong possibility....of a SIGNIFICANT corporate transaction ....in the REASONABLY near future..' is total public knowledge. since ( absolutely ) nothing's happened since, I can only assume they were lying, ergo; deception. just try it chairman.

they've got 'till 30th June.

tick tock

[tomboyb] 08/5/2014 22:03

Nav was over 20p and we delisted at 1p.

I find it very difficult to see why there is no response. I sent an email a while ago and no response at all.

[bozzy_s] 08/5/2014 21:15

Agree totally with you TT. Mustn't be left with the feeling we could have done more. With this in mind I'll try to contact shareholders with >3% including Rathbone Brothers plc (holding c.15% of SPFL, and themselves valued at just under £1bn).

It's up to every individual shareholder to kick up the biggest possible fuss, even if the end result is just to make life a little harder for whoever walks away with our assets.

I remember Langbar very well. Actually traded shares in Crown Corporation as it was, shortly after one of their lying RNSs. Very luckily sold before they collapsed.

SPFL is clearly dodgy. Something very questionable has gone on. And if anyone at the company takes offence or wants to sue for libel, I would counter that any decent company, struggling financially or not, would at the very least publish their annual accounts. They'd also keep shareholders updated more frequently than nothing for 17 months!

Can anyone suggest what I should ask major holders, and the best way of approaching them?

[the troll] 08/5/2014 18:32

oh & let's not forget; the auditors ( BDO Guernsey ) signed-off those '20 pps' accounts WITHOUT qualification, something else to investigate.....

[the troll] 08/5/2014 18:20

something's smelling really nasty here,

if there's in reality 20 pps of assets ( as per last accounts ) a 'vulture fund' would have snapped this up for 5 pps months ago.

they've got 'till 30th June ( or if the websites taken down ) & I'm calling the Guernsey police.

yes it sounds a bit drastic, but I remember Langbar ( probably the worst shareholder rip-off AIM ever saw ) & would want to feel I'd tried to do something, everything else having failed ( they don't respond to e-mails & you can't anyway e-mail the directors ).

[bozzy_s] 08/5/2014 11:47

Forever I guess. With no shareholder activists the board can and probably will do what they want, pinching any residual assets for themselves. Shame we had no-one on our side with a big enough holding to keep an eye on the company.

[chinahere] 08/5/2014 09:42

How long can this remain silent?!

[the troll] 25/2/2014 18:28

why now ? you had the opportunity to raise these questions in person, vote against the resolution to extend ( the fund's life ) & re-appoint the Chairman, all at December's AGM.

I'm aware some PI's voted against ( by proxy ) but BOD had sufficient institutional support to see them off & I suspect they'll have again for any EGM that might be called.

we have to find another way ( something connected to a breach of fiduciary duty, the failure to file accounts perhaps - there's got to be some kind of [ ultimate ] time limit for this ?? )

you can't e-mail the directors Still Waiting only the 'managers' Mark Anderson & some woman whose name I forget & even they didn't respond to my last.

[still waiting] 22/2/2014 15:27

Anyone emailed directors recently

[chinahere] 22/2/2014 13:50

Something needs doing. I'll put my holding behind an egm. Perhaps we should workout our combined holding and write to the major shareholders asking if they would similarly support it?

[bozzy_s] 22/2/2014 11:03

Been thinking about these recently. Still nothing at all on the website. No results published since June 2011 !!!!!

We can call an EGM with 5% of the share capital. That means 3,353,726 shares. Between us we hold 2,943,000 (as per list in header). So just need to find another ~410,000 shares.

If we manage that, we can ask the directors what the hell they're doing. Why no results for over 2 1/2 years? What do we own now, and what is it worth?

We could perhaps contact some of these major holders and see if they'd support a vote of no confidence in the board? Can we throw the board out and seize control of our company?


Significant Shareholders / Ordinary Shares / Percentage of Issued Share Capital



Rathbone Brothers PLC / 10,069,910 / 15.0%

Vidacos Nominees Limited DMG7 / 7,956,004 / 11.9%

Goldman Sachs International CREPTEMP / 4,275,000 / 6.4%

BNY (OCS) Nominees Limited / 3,800,000 / 5.7%

Baraclayshares Nominees Limited / 3,721,167 / 5.6%

Roy Nominees Limited 101604 / 3,311,250 / 4.9%

Chase Nominees Limited / 3,204,408 / 4.8%

Goldman Sachs Securities (Nominees) Limited ILSEG / 2,986,500 / 4.5%

Securities Services Nominees Limited 2078200 / 2,818,544 / 4.2%

The Bank of New York (Nominees) Limited IMAF / 2,815,000 / 4.2%

[bozzy_s] 20/12/2013 16:10

Same to you TT. What chances we get some of our investment back next year? I'd guess slim. Most likely outcome is no contact for 11 months, then notice of AGM and request to extend the fund's life by another year.

Without any published accounts we can't see how much the Directors are paying themselves!

[the troll] 20/12/2013 14:58

wishing happy Xmas & PROFITABLE New-Year to everyone.

we'll, hopefully, have something positive to discuss in c. 11 months time, yeah ? ( ie, when they call the 2014 AGM; doubt anything will happen before then !! ).

PS; it's interesting they didn't disclose the votes against the resolution to continue ( too embarrassing for them ?? )

[bozzy_s] 17/12/2013 15:53

SOFIA PROPERTY FUND LIMITED
(the "Company")
Company Number: 43191 
 
 
ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING 
The Directors of the Company wish to announce that at the Company's Annual General Meeting held on 13 December 2013, all resolutions put to the meeting were passed.

[bozzy_s] 25/11/2013 22:17

Was there any return for shareholders of OCH? I never held shares there, but do remember some wild swings in the share price towards the end.

[the troll] 25/11/2013 18:00

it makes you laugh;

almost 18 months ago they'd supposedly progressed a deal to heads of terms ( ie almost concluded ) & now ...... 'a suitable opportunity has been identified'...... this CANNOT be the original deal, or CAN it ?

remember, the II's effectively forced OCH into liquidation; management would be unwise to assume they'll nod the extension through.

plenty more to follow.

[bozzy_s] 25/11/2013 16:18

For anyone who hasn't seen it, here is the announcement on their website:




No real details given, but this provides a glimmer of hope: "The board is of the view that a suitable opportunity has now been identified, and that there is a strong possibility that we will be able to place a proposal for a significant corporate transaction before shareholders for their approval in the reasonably near future"

[chinahere] 25/11/2013 16:07

Thanks for that bozzy_s - most hidden but it worked !

I guess the bigger institutional shareholders will be the ones that count in the end. Having said that they can't be particularly happy about the way things have ended can they.

[bozzy_s] 25/11/2013 15:40

I found the corporate action icon missing when looking at my overall portfolio (nothing next to SPFL).

Under the 'eServices' heading you will find 'voting & information'. Click the 'vote' tab on left side of SPFL where you can vote on the 4 proposals.

[chinahere] 25/11/2013 13:45

I still can't see the corporate action listed at TDW. Has anyone else go it?

[bozzy_s] 25/11/2013 13:28

Hi Troll, Tomboy and everyone. I also got the TD Waterhouse email last week. Very good admin work by them I have to say, considering it's a free execution-only account.

I'll be voting against proposed restructuring and against Burton's re-election as chairman - because they have failed to give us any reason to vote in favour of either! If they told us they planned to catch up with late accounts, relist on the stock market - perhaps as a merger with someone else (reducing our % ownership), and had a proper plan going forwards I'd vote for.

From a shareholder's point of view, I think our best action is to vote against proposals and hope that enforced liquidation provides some answers and maybe some money back on our investments.

At the very least it should show how grossly over-valued the assets were on balance sheet, and hopefully lead to action against whoever made such a huge "mistake". Remember the assets should be valued at lower of cost and net realisable value, i.e worst case scenario.

[tomboyb] 24/11/2013 18:32

Think of it this way troll - when companies restructure their share capital - It is normally due to the fact funds are very limited ( or there are none) and new investors what a huge chunk of the equity i.e. 90% for example.

The difference here is that there are assets and we suspended at 3% of listed nav. I think it is horrific! And that was allowed by the brokers who want their fees so they do not answer questions!!