Tavistock Investments Share Discussion Threads

[russman] 25/3/2021 07:59

Hugh paid 1.5p per share for approx 5% stake.

[pipeline1] 24/3/2021 21:41

I reckon the payments in the FT Adviser article are legal fees to fight the case or payments to actual clients. The bit they've always disputed was they shouldn't have to compensate victims who were never taken on as clients (i.e. the ones who just paid cash direct to Bartlett thinking it was going through Tavi). The Express article seems to state Tavi will have to compensate those individuals too on the basis that Bartlett was one of its advisers. This was always where the greatest exposure was I think.

By the way, ABACUS ASSOCIATES FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED is now called TAVISTOCK PARTNERS (UK) LTD and is the group's main trading company. It has a provision in the accounts for Bartlett of £1.65m but it sounds like this might need to go up a lot higher.

[makeamillion3] 24/3/2021 21:30

hxxps://www.ftadviser.com/your-industry/2020/07/23/tavistock-pays-out-370k-on-playboy-adviser-claims/

[pipeline1] 24/3/2021 21:12

The Express article is clear - it says the FOS has provisionally found in favour of the victims meaning Tavistock has to pay up. Tavi will have some insurance cover but it's the sort of thing insurance companies could argue against meaning the cover could be void.

The article is from this month and I can't believe the weird bid approach happening at the same time is a co-incidence. Something really odd here.....

[makeamillion3] 24/3/2021 21:06

This has been ongoing for a while. The adviser was with Abacus which tavistock bought. Not entirely sure where liability would fall? This has been in and out the press for the last two years.
He sounds a real scumbag.

[pipeline1] 24/3/2021 20:49

Anyone know the WTF is going on? Tavistock is about to be hit with £ms in compensation - No-one in their right mind would put in a bid for this company?

[russman] 24/3/2021 20:13

Hamon were tempted.

[phillzy1] 24/3/2021 14:45

I concur, going ahead with the GM is not consistent with The Code. It should be cancelled. But then again, directors purchasing shares 10 days before a trading update and "allegedly" leaking the confidential approach on the 11th of March to the market are not exactly best practice either!

[graham1ty] 24/3/2021 13:32

Actually, thinking more, the potential bidder might even suggest that going ahead with the GM was illegal*: a move to thwart the bid. Companies cannot under The Code make themselves deliberately less attractive.......

*allegedly

[graham1ty] 24/3/2021 12:52

As they are now effectively in an offer period, presumably the General Meeting will be cancelled ?

Or not, and greed will prevail ?

[tomgold] 24/3/2021 12:17

Call me old fashion, but the price is the price.

One can argue all day long why Tavistock shares are trading down here. I suspect that it’s entirely due to rank poor management. To fix the company, they need to be replaced one way or another.

Congratulations to Team Plc for highlighting the attractiveness of the company. It’s simple, bin Raven and Cooke and the share price will begin to reflect fair value. The pair of them are not investable. They are TOXIC!

[origami74] 24/3/2021 11:54

To clarify my comment - I am not endorsing the offer from TEAM I think it is low ball and I agree with you Mandarin4 that the costs would be the same.

I really wanted to highlight the defence put up by TAVI which I do not think is good. Also why we are in the position where an offer can come in for 2.5p initially 2p this share has been languishing for years from a start up company. It says it all really...

The dilution was caused by overpaying for Price Bailey and no real long term value came from it.

[origami74] 24/3/2021 09:26

I'm sure you guys would be able to find it but for quick reference here is the TEAM website.

hxxps://www.teamassetmanagement.com/your-team

My humble responses to the comments coming out from TAVI today.

TEAM is a recently established public company that was admitted to trading on AIM less than one month ago, on 8 March 2021, with a negligible track record of successfully acquiring and integrating businesses to create a larger group.

The company TEAM has no track record but more importantly it is the individuals within the company which are important. I look at the CV's these guys have put up (you can find most of them on linked In) and Mark Clubb shows the skillset to be able to do this. More importantly they do not have a track record of failing to add value. Which would you have as a football manager? Someone who had won 15% of his games over 200 games or a 37 year old who has recently retired and played 800 games of which he was a team captain for 500 of them at different clubs with a bustling trophy cabinet.

The Proposed Offer continues to significantly undervalue the business that has been established by Tavistock. The Board believes that a sum of the parts valuation of the Tavistock businesses, based upon industry standard matrices, would demonstrate that the true value of the Company is several times higher than its current market capitalisation.

Yes - I feel it does but this discount is due to not offering full disclosure and a track history by management of failing to add value.

TEAM has approximately 16.56 million shares in issue, very few of which have been traded since it joined AIM. The shares can thus be considered illiquid.

This is self forfilling - If TAVI shareholders received TEAM shares this would widen the Shareholder base for TEAM and maybe attract other share holders to the diverse business. Additional placings will come at par if management is good.

[russman] 24/3/2021 08:59

The current Directors have failed to accrete value for all shareholders.
The Directors' greed has alienated the shareholder base.
Time for a change; but at a higher share price.

[mandarin4] 24/3/2021 08:48

Well QP, do you agree with makeamill?

You have the words, straight from the horses mouth,

the true value of the Company is several times higher than its current market capitalisation."

So if that’s the ‘true’ value of the company why why why would you agree to the management incentive?

Look forward to your thought, but doubt you will answer, because you can’t defend it.

[makeamillion3] 24/3/2021 08:31

QP.

I agree..... finally...


SEVERAL TIMES HIGHER THAN ITS CURRENT MARKET CAPITALISATION.

I believe it certainly is. My calculations are 45m. That’s 3 times higher. But still.

So I’m convinced you will also agree that the share price needs to get back to where it belongs without the need to ‘reward’ BOD’s for aligning the share price with the true value. So 3 times 2.5 is 7.5p.

So..... why the need for an incentive? The share price is clearly undervalued. So clearly no incentive is needed.

Maybe if the incentive is required it need to be ‘several’; times higher as opposed to my negative calculation of 3 times?

Perhaps the BOD’s should justify that statement declared with real intent and buy more shares at 2.5p and get their reward/incentive at a ‘several times higher price’.

Finally QP, you and I are on the same page!!

[doubledippers] 24/3/2021 08:24

"At present, shareholders are advised to take no action.”

Who are they trying to kid?

I didn’t think for a second that Raven and Crooke would grant access to the requested due diligence materials. That would have been the right decision for Tavistock shareholders.

It might even had led to an improved offer, so that was definitely not going to happen. Why? They can hide their foot prints in the publicly available audited accounts, but the monthly management accounts will not lie. The numbers simply don’t add up and the cash till is short.

Meaning, where has all the shareholder capital gone? They had over £5 million of unallocated expenses listed in the accounts ending in March 2020. This is ludicrous! Where is it all going? And no one is going to be fooled by the one off, COVID related interest rate holiday and payroll reduction benefits due to the furlough scheme.

Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum need to go and a new management team needs to be given a chance. Either the evil twins resign, face a vote of confidence or even worse, further regulatory scrutiny. The game is up and it’s time to start running!

[red army] 24/3/2021 08:19

Why wasn't the offer and rejection brought to the markets attention at the time around 11/12th March????

[mandarin4] 24/3/2021 07:41

Take more than 3.5p Chris. I think a minimum double of the current price may be needed. Unless they get the shareholders on board it can’t happen and 3.5p won’t cut it with the long term holders. We’ve seen their reaction to the management incentive at 7p after all.

[quepassa] 24/3/2021 07:23

Bravo to Tavistock.


Today's RNS:-

"Valuation
The Proposed Offer continues to significantly undervalue the business that has been established by Tavistock. The Board believes that a sum of the parts valuation of the Tavistock businesses, based upon industry standard matrices, would demonstrate that the true value of the Company is several times higher than its current market capitalisation."


SEVERAL TIMES HIGHER THAN ITS CURRENT MARKET CAPITALISATION.

Indeed. Indeed.

ALL IMO. DYOR.
QP

[chrisdgb] 24/3/2021 07:14

It will be interesting to see if it flushes out any interested parties, agree all share offer at that price is way too low but cash offer at 3.5p might be a different story....

[graham1ty] 24/3/2021 07:07

Well, lucky the new option Scheme was not voted through in November !!!

Or an enormous chunk of the Company would be about to vest on Raven and Cooke

[davydoo] 23/3/2021 20:43

Just knock out Raven and Cooke salaries and you're well away

[russman] 23/3/2021 20:38

Low ball. Lets see if anyone else bites.
Quite cheap valuation especially if you can knock out large percentage of fixed costs.