Thalassa Share Discussion Threads

[kooba] 22/10/2014 10:31

We're not a cheap loan company either...but that hasn't stopped their largesse to the trust for incentivising staff.Crickey shiny new campus in a listed building large share incentives all round these staff are spoilt!! déjà vue of the dotcom era .. But this is oil services ...there must be staff shortages in the oil services business at the moment to be that worried about losing them!

[kooba] 22/10/2014 09:32

So the incentive shares are now an incentive for staff to strive to get the price above 145p ...were they not incentivised to keep the price from collapsing since the incentive was put in place.Think the more conventional share options although dilutive are probably a less risky (to shareholders) incentive to staff and don't tie up 10% of the company's balance sheet for a 3% return!As for DS he has made some of his money from being an activist shareholder criticising other managements and demanding better treatment for shareholders often delisting the companies so he can run them away from the restrictions of a listing...he seems to have done well..not sure about other holders!See Baltimore Renewable power and lightAlso involved in css stellar..none seem to have a happy ending!

[cockerhoop] 22/10/2014 09:22

I read the RNS too......

Agree ECL are initially getting approx 7% from letting approx 75% of the property but are obviously able to let the remaining 25% to THAL or another party pushing up the potential yield to well over 9%.
ECL also obtained substantial land which perhaps could be re-developed for significant further gain in time.

[stemis] 22/10/2014 09:11

Cocherhoop,

From the announcement

"....making the aggregate up front and renovation costs £1,719,500 and giving ECL a theoretical yield of 6.98% before taking into account the additional costs of maintenance, service and operation of the Property, all of which are ECL's responsibility."

[stemis] 22/10/2014 09:09

The Trust bought the shares from Soukup as a means of incentivising management and staff. That's important in a growing company like Thalassa. Unlikely they could have got such volume through the market. The alternative, of course, was to issue dilutive options. Soukup sold his shares at 270p. Anyone else could have sold in the market if they wanted. Indeed they could have sold at 310p. Maybe there's some on here think management shouldn't be incentivised to get the price back above 145p (the average price of shares held by the Trust)?

[kooba] 22/10/2014 09:09

RCTurner2 so where does he get the money from ...from farting about for a few extra quid !!Yes DS didn't get to where he is today ...millionaire tax avoider in Monaco doing charity work but if he wants to run it as a private company mixing his personal dealings with that of the company then he shouldn't have it listed!

[cockerhoop] 22/10/2014 08:59

Stemis,

Surely the yield is higher than 7% as THAL are only renting approx 75% of the building (10,000 sq ft of 13,000) whilst costs are being quoted for the full 13,000 sq ft.

[rcturner2] 22/10/2014 08:58

Stemis's post is the correct one.

So many people on here are armchair CEOs and yet they couldn't run a bath.

You know the guy is properly minted from a career in finance? He set up THAL with loose change. You think he is farting about like this to get a few extra quid?

[kooba] 22/10/2014 08:54

The company can use £3m of shareholder funds to buy shares from the chairman and get a 3% interest rate on it so the chairman can go and buy a vacant property for £1.2m and commit the company to pay a 7% yield to rent it off him therefore increasing the value of the property enormously.Buy shares in DS not Thalassa!

[varies] 22/10/2014 08:47

Unlike many here, I am satisfied by Mr Soukup's explanation.
Being partly Cornish, although I have never lived there, I accept that it must be a particularly inconvenient place to conduct an international business from. It obviously makes more sense to have a base within easy reach of London and international airports.
THAL has never presented itself as a property company and I would rather see its resources concentrated on the business.
We are, however, all agreed that the announcement of some firm orders would be welcome.

[kooba] 22/10/2014 08:43

Thanks for that Duncan!

[stemis] 22/10/2014 08:40

Good to see the company responding to shareholder concerns. So rather than being a 10% yield this property has a yield of under 7% and possibly as low as 6% (if you take unquantified maintenance, servicing and operating costs into account). Should the company have spent £1.72m to save less than £120k pa? That's like buying a business with no growth prospects for a P/E of 20! I wonder how the naysayers would react if the company announced something like that. In 10 years time they might need something bigger. That's why companies lease property not buy it. Would they have got better terms on the property if the freeholder had been independent? I doubt it.

It is important for the company to have a decent base where it can relocate, attract and retain staff and where customers will see that the company is a reputable partner. They are dealing with large, multi-national oil companies. It might appease some on here if they all worked from a lock up shed in Slough but it really wouldn't help the business.

Not sure why they announced the accommodation option other than just to be seen not to be hiding anything. It's relatively immaterial but generally positive. Better that customers or other partners have a decent place to stay nearby, at a reasonable cost, than some anonymous hotel.

All in all it reflect a company making plans to be a sustainable, credible player in its markets. It also reflects a company which does care what it's shareholders think (personally I've found them quite willing to answer reasonable questions). Soukup holds 3.1m shares so the £1 the share price has lost since the interims is rather more important to him than any benefit from the property deal that might accrue.

[pj 1] 22/10/2014 08:01

'transparence'--- pmsl !!

[cestnous] 22/10/2014 07:46

The nomads didn't initiate this deal. The board did.
You are correct that the nomad should have warned them. Perhaps they did.

[kooba] 22/10/2014 07:43

In reality a bunch of yes men who will agree to anything as long as their fees are paid ...by the directors they are meant to monitor and advise...no conflict there then!

[kooba] 22/10/2014 07:41

I blame the nomads...they are there as first line of defence to prevent such situations of conflict

[itchycrack] 22/10/2014 07:39

Another managerial reputation lies in tatters - what a bunch of muppets!!!
Do they really think in this age they can get away without scrutiny? Unbelieveble!

[kooba] 22/10/2014 07:33

Gingerplant..thanks I thought that was some time ago..thought there might have been something new.Anyway it's certainly settled shareholder nerves over the transaction..eerrmmm.Probably best not commenting any further DS seems that shareholders are not impressed with your nest feathering however you try to explain it!

[gingerplant] 22/10/2014 07:29

kooba - I think it was Simon Thompson's comment in the IC. He didn't like the deal obviously.

"although the directors feel the related party transaction is fair, the fact that Thalassa has a cash rich balance sheet, and undoubtedly access to mortgage finance, raises questions about this transaction even if the property is the ideal place to base Thalassa's operations.

I am not comfortable about this at all,"

That was at 114p of course - a return to which would be a nice 44% return from here.

[kooba] 22/10/2014 07:15

I wasn't aware of any" recent inaccurate press coverage " anyone know what it refers to? Again great that they have drawn attention to something that seems to have been missed by most shareholders...will now have to find it!

[kooba] 22/10/2014 07:06

If you want to divert shareholders attention from this dubious deal Mr Soakup (sic) then getting some lumpy contracts in and filling the order book is probably your best chance rather than trying to justify what is obviously a rather cosy deal in great detail.Tick tick tick

[kooba] 22/10/2014 07:01

Marked down on the clarification that all is above board...sums up the lack of understanding of the issues involved here by the senior management.