Thalassa Share Discussion Threads

[rbonnier] 14/1/2016 17:06

Time to sell and take the crumbs that are left which is better than nothing unless anyone else can offer any glimpses of hope for shareholders because I just don't see any the situation in this sector looks far worse than anyones worse nightmare and soukup wont liquidate thalassa.

[jamielein] 08/1/2016 21:25

It is in the best interests of shareholders that the company is liquidated if liquidation value is greater than the future expected returns.

If the shares are cancelled then they can't be reissued/sold to the market at a discount to liquidation value, which would reduce the liquidation value per share for existing shareholders, but would keep the company going to pay employees and directors.

However there would is an argument to be made that if the future is going to be very bright, but the company has short-term problems and needs cash, reducing the liquidation value short-term would benefit shareholders long-term.

[rbonnier] 08/1/2016 18:24

Can you explain why please

[spob] 08/1/2016 16:30

Trust me

For a company trading below liquidation value, it is in the best interests of shareholders that shares are both bought back cancelled.

[rbonnier] 08/1/2016 15:01

Many Thanks carcosa

[carcosa] 08/1/2016 13:43

It's bad in comparison to holding them in treasury. The distributable profits used to buy back shares are lost when the shares are cancelled. Purchases into treasury still count as a reduction in shareholders' funds but, on the sale of shares out of treasury, the sale price will replenish the distributable reserves up to the amount lost on their acquisition. Any profit made by the company on a sale of treasury shares must be credited to the share premium account. This ability to recreate distributable profits, not available on a share buyback and cancellation, means that it is likely that shares bought back in future will be held in treasury up to the 10% limit.

[kooba] 08/1/2016 13:09

But what about the comment on rffect of buying into treasury?

[spob] 08/1/2016 12:35

Double post

[spob] 08/1/2016 12:34

Nonsense to say cancelling shares is a bad thing

Absolute nonsense

[kooba] 08/1/2016 09:36

Thanks for that...live and learn!So should be NAV enhancing as share purchases at significant discount to book?

[carcosa] 08/1/2016 08:41

Company law changed a number of years ago such that holding share in treasury is effectively the same as cancelling them. The advantage is that 'new' shares can be issued a lot easier than actually creating brand new shares for things like employee share schemes.

Generally peaking cancelling shares nowadays is a bad thing.

[rbonnier] 07/1/2016 18:14

Have any shareholders contacted Mr Soukup to ask why they are being held in treasury rather than cancelled I'm pretty sure he would be happy to explain.Someone's buying the shares up btw as soon as the overhang clears this will move up.Wouldn't surprise me if today's 50k was Duncan again probably rns in the morning .

[kooba] 07/1/2016 15:36

True they are in treasury...Would be better to have them cancelled...will probably award them as bonus' when things pick up!!

[spob] 07/1/2016 15:26

3256

"they are enhancing the asset value to remaining shareholders"


I disagree. Only if the shares bought back are cancelled.

[kooba] 07/1/2016 14:27

Sack the lot of them...no one will ever want oil again....and if they do we will just go and get some more experienced experts on the Internet!! Easy!!By the way most super managed US companies are spending every last dime and borrowing huge to buy stock back ...go figure!

[bookbroker] 07/1/2016 09:37

Depends here on how good they are wasting cash, keeping people in jobs to continue wringing their hands, the US cos. have the right idea, as soon as you see an employee finding the time to sneeze he's out!

[kooba] 05/1/2016 11:30

Think it might just have to do with the sector?You can't stop people selling stock because they are taking a short term view of the sector and are dumping everything and imho are wrong to be selling at such distressed levels ...but there you go blame other investors selling for the share price the managements job is to run the business in the interests of shareholders but the share price to a large extent is obviously out of their hands.I agree that certain conflicts of interest with the chairman have been evident here but the chairman has recent purchased stock (back) and is a large personal holder so his interests hopefully are aligned with others that hold on.Before the end of this year I personally see a far more positive backdrop for the sector which hopefully will see service companies valuations better reflect long term value.Fingers crossed hey!