Thalassa Share Discussion Threads

[greenroom78] 08/2/2017 14:22

I think it depends on supply and demand at the time. You could buy well between the spread a day or two back, looks like supply has dried up a little. Spread certainly does make it hard to trade this one.

[basem1] 08/2/2017 13:55

No I've tried everything from 5000 to 20000. Buying and selling. Those are the offered qoutes.

[frazboy] 08/2/2017 13:53

If you trade normal market size it should be a big tighter than that basem

[basem1] 08/2/2017 13:36

If they'd narrow the spread I'd take a few more 63-66.65 no good for us momentum traders.

[jmf69] 08/2/2017 10:04

Not much resistance all the way to 175

[rcturner2] 08/2/2017 09:37

I hope so basem!

[basem1] 08/2/2017 09:27

Start of the run to £1 here, I don't believe there's any resistance on the chart.

[jmf69] 02/2/2017 08:20

If they think that the shares are cheap and the company performance is improving then it makes sense to buyback the shares. I believe that the average buyback price is mid 40s so that would already be a 50% increase.

[frazboy] 01/2/2017 23:36

So in theory the shares which the company is buying back and is putting in treasury (and into trust at a later date...?), as opposed to cancelling, could be given to the employees (and directors) at some point. I would much prefer the intention of the company be made clear, I recognise that they could also be reissued at a later date and this may be a cheaper/better way of raising capital, if so required, but why not just hold the cash?

As for the other recent activity/investments e.g. Papua mining - I really don't know what DS was thinking... As for LSR I'm less concerned - that looks like a sensible investment although I'm not sure that was what DS had in mind.

I can't help but think that were DS to walk away we might get a bit of a rerating

PS: another way of thinking about the 2014 purchase of shares by the trust (through money lent by the company) was that this was the company buying back its own shares to distribute to the staff/directors. The loan was around £3m (subsequently written of as noted above) which was less significant in the context of a £75m market cap at that time but was still generous - had the share price been maintained.

[greenroom78] 01/2/2017 21:17

Blimey, amazing how the memory distorts over time. Hope I'm never called to court to give evidence on anything. I remembered the bare bones but was way off with the details.

[cockerhoop] 01/2/2017 21:09

Not quite sure they were his motives Greenroom, Duncan sold over a million shares at £2.70 to the EBT using £3m of shareholders cash in the form of a loan (that's since been written down). Interestingly revisiting the RNS he also transferred a million shares from treasury to the EBT at the same time at 26.4p.

[greenroom78] 01/2/2017 17:36

When I first invested (at 50p before the big spike) Soukup had a huge stake. I seem to remember he sold a load into the company's share scheme to reduce his control so that might point to him being conscious of this? (I will have to jog my memory though so don't quote me!).

[greenroom78] 01/2/2017 11:55

Definitely happy to hold, just wondering if shares had to be cancelled or not to boost earnings 'per share'. Thanks for the comments.

[jmf69] 01/2/2017 09:44

Still happy to hold

[rcturner2] 01/2/2017 08:00

Buying the share back at any price below the NAV (which is at least 100p) will always be a good move as the NAV per share will increase.

[rivaldo] 01/2/2017 07:56

Exactly right - the buybacks will benefit EPS, but if the bought-in shares aren't cancelled then they'll be used to satisfy future employee share option exercises etc, which means shareholders benefit as additional shares won't have to be issued.

It's a good move, as long as the cash utilised can't be used in a more earnings-enhancing way and the buybacks have been made at a good price. Since THAL have been buying back shares since 43p they presumably still consider this to be a cheap price.

[jmf69] 01/2/2017 07:50

I've seen both. Not sure what the advantage of keeping them in treasury is apart from having the shares ready if they ever need them and not having to issue new ones?I'm not overly bothered either way.

[rcturner2] 01/2/2017 06:43

I think keeping them in treasury is actually more common.

[greenroom78] 31/1/2017 22:37

So they use the no of shares for votes to arrive at an EPS rather than the total no of shares in issue (including those in treasury)?

I thought standard practice of a buyback was to cancel shares? Unless they plan to use them for paper acquisitions?

[jmf69] 31/1/2017 18:24

The eps at the interims uses the weighted average number of shares in the calculation.So I am guessing the buyback will positively impact the eps.

[greenroom78] 31/1/2017 17:54

Best way IMO, especially if there is a seller about. Bung in an order and let the MMs fill it.

Any idea why they are being held in treasury and not being cancelled? Don't they have to cancel the shares to boost the EPS? And how does holding them in treasury effect the tax they pay on investments (assuming they increase in value) and will that too impact on profit after tax and EPS?

[jmf69] 31/1/2017 17:30

They always seem to pick them up at a discount imo

[jmf69] 31/1/2017 17:18

Another 100k today

[basem1] 31/1/2017 12:26

They will, probably today, if not tomorrow, they'll be glad to get them back at 65p. I was thinking about this and can they negotiate with the market makers or not ? Will there be any dialogue or do they just buy them in the open market like us pi's. ? Be interested in anyone's comments.

[frazboy] 31/1/2017 12:15

I wonder why they're not continuing with the share buyback. They bought at 71 and now the price is 65 ish they seem to have pressed the pause button.

Edit: the average buying price was 70p