We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Type | Share ISIN | Share Description |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
The Local Shopping Reit Plc | LSE:LSR | London | Ordinary Share | GB00B1VS7G47 | ORD 1P |
Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0.00 | 0.00% | 20.30 | 20.20 | 21.00 | - | 0.00 | 00:00:00 |
Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
0 | 0 | N/A | 0 |
Date | Subject | Author | Discuss |
---|---|---|---|
11/2/2019 11:40 | From the above comments it seems that a cash bid of somewhere between 26 and 30 p would be preferable to the current bid by Thalassa . In which case why doesn't Thal bid say 28 p in cash with a share alternative for any that want it ? | gfrae | |
11/2/2019 08:46 | Realistically no other bidder is going to come in with THAL holding >25%, just to bail other shareholders out for a penny or two per share. | stemis | |
10/2/2019 11:27 | Can't see any reason that they can't continue the property sales as they have shareholder approval to do so. The very fact that DS has tabled his approach after a continous sales programmes show his offer is a pure cash grab and no benefit whatsoever to shareholders with some THAL paper I suspect the BODS bundling a package as a wrap up to an investor to get them out of the door knock the company on the head and draw to a close expensive management This certainly knocks THALs comment in their offer on the head ".... in large part due to a cost structure which is clearly excessive in comparison to an ever-diminishing revenue stream that has existed within LSR during the past five years. In the Thalassa Board's opinion, this has only benefitted the various layers of advisers to LSR and achieved little other than the destruction of value for LSR Shareholder" | hillofwad | |
10/2/2019 10:44 | HoW - they only had ~£4m left to sell on Dec 14th. Downside therefore limited in terms of NAV. I, too, would like an explanation as to why Hastings and the other was pulled - they could have received legal advice saying that it was prudent to do so in the circumstances, although why was Glastonbury sold? Or maybe they've decided to maintain a few properties to meet ongoing costs, although I would hope that they're getting a 1% yield on the cash pile - with overheads of maybe £500k/yr (prior to legal...) so cash burn not too badIt's a mystery really. | frazboy | |
10/2/2019 09:37 | What is to stop the BODS shuffling the remaining assets out of the door Should imagine now the properties have been looked at by all and sundry. Plenty of buyers who can exchange contracts immediately if the price is right Capital values are still deteriorating | hillofwad | |
09/2/2019 19:09 | If company B acquires 75% of company A it can reregister it as a private company and follow the 'cleansing' provisions of the Companies Act to secure the acquisition borrowings on the assets of company A. In general PE deals are implemented by schemes of arrangement which have a 75% condition. | nicholasblake | |
09/2/2019 18:18 | Nicholas, Apologies for putting the ‘clever’ word into your message. I agree it’s interesting. On the second point, if company B should choose to buy company A then the law states that company B needs to have 75% of the cash to buy company A and can only borrow 25%. So, how does private equity work? Or are we misunderstanding one another? | frazboy | |
09/2/2019 18:06 | "Plus plus... it’s all very well those accepting the offer for cash but I was under the impression that those accepting would be pared back by future acceptors plumping for 100% cash - all shareholders have to be treated fairly and equally, I believe. So, unless I’m missing something, it’s not so clever" Very INTERESTING because it creates a dilemma. It is illegal for UK LIMITED companies to finance the purchase of their own shares by a third party ('unlawful financial assistance'). To 'cleanse' requires 75% ownership. | nicholasblake | |
09/2/2019 17:49 | Plus plus... it’s all very well those accepting the offer for cash but I was under the impression that those accepting would be pared back by future acceptors plumping for 100% cash - all shareholders have to be treated fairly and equally, I believe. So, unless I’m missing something, it’s not so clever | frazboy | |
09/2/2019 17:43 | ‘SKYSHIP I'm afraid that THAL's 25% means any bidder would NOT be able to access LSR's assets or cash to refinance any bid borrowings. That rules out many possible bidders and substantially reduces the likelihood of such a bid occurring.’ Surely any bidder bridge finances the transaction, then takes the cash from the balance sheet to finance the bridge loan. They would be out of pocket for no more than a week for the bulk of the funds. Plus, it would be a friendly takeover. They would approach the board to seek their approval | frazboy | |
09/2/2019 17:22 | SKYSHIP I'm afraid that THAL's 25% means any bidder would NOT be able to access LSR's assets or cash to refinance any bid borrowings. That rules out many possible bidders and substantially reduces the likelihood of such a bid occurring. | nicholasblake | |
09/2/2019 17:18 | Very interesting play by DS. If one assumes the Mix and Match will be struck on the 'market value' of the offer, being 32.8p/LSR share, THAL can purchase 33.26% for CASH only. So, in theory those accepting 32.8p in cash could take THAL over the 50% mark. At that point the offer has to (i) get to full unconditionality, at which point it must be extended for (ii) a minimum extra 14 days. If declared fully unconditional then REMAINING holders have a two week choice of (a) staying as minorities in a DS controlled vehicle or (b) accepting and having a reduced DS equity investment, albeit in THAL. If there were a deluge of acceptors at that juncture the 'original' 32.6% acceptors would rapidly have their cash component scaled back to as little as 14.6p/LSR share. Best case is that holders ignore THAL offer, once posted, for 60 days, at which time it would be precluded from bidding for a year. | nicholasblake | |
09/2/2019 15:15 | i doubt it would be that expensive in this case Skyship, perhaps 50% of that number - perhaps more a case of living in hope though. having said that, the final sales performance has hardly been brilliant, so let's assume a distribution nearer to 32p, allow 1p for bid costs, 1p for profit for the bidder, and 1p for risk - then I would agree with you, 29p+ would probably win the day. | frazboy | |
09/2/2019 14:00 | The problem is that a public offer document these days needs so much legalese that it ends up costing £1m - c1.2p/share! | skyship | |
09/2/2019 11:47 | I also noticed that the board *strongly* recommended not taking any action until after the posting of offer documents. I'm going to have a little faith in this statement and take them at their word | frazboy | |
09/2/2019 11:43 | The way out of this predicament is DS's offer will be rejected (I'm increasingly sure this will happen), meanwhile the board continue to sell the properties (I'm unsure why the two were pulled from the last auction) leaving us with a more final cash distribution number. I expect someone will come in and make a cash offer for the cash, pocketing approximately a million for v little work. But at least it won't be Duncan | frazboy | |
09/2/2019 10:48 | Being as only Thal 25% voted against the lsr liquidation, where is the 25% coming from to give 50% needed to accept this offer ? the offer is 27.5p if put thal at 50p (realistic price when we all press the sell button) vs liquidation at about 33p | hindsight | |
09/2/2019 10:31 | Unfortunately, I think Soukup will succeed. | topvest | |
09/2/2019 08:44 | Skyship - They would only need 50% for the bid to go unconditional | frazboy | |
09/2/2019 07:24 | As we stand at the moment a cash offer of 30 to 31p would probably win the day. This would give the bidder a decent profit margin and allow for the risk of selling the remaining properties at a reasonable price and wind up costs. So why doesn’t someone do it? I’m thinking about doing it. It would be financed off the LSR balance sheet. This would also get round the blocking share holding. To be clear I would much prefer the company was liquidated. | frazboy | |
08/2/2019 22:57 | I just hope the board have got a plan, otherwise there will be a stampede for the exit if Dunc takes control. Hope he has got some firepower to support the price. | tiltonboy | |
08/2/2019 18:38 | and to depress us further, I still have no feel for what the board could do to stop this. the logic must be, that DS would never of gone to such trouble (issue of PS, switching to the main market due to the lack of TO of Thalassa, to bypass the AIM rule on voting that the PS was designed to overcome), if he didn't believe he would succeed. anyone else got any thoughts? | frazboy | |
08/2/2019 16:16 | THAL resuming buy-backs from today. I'm sure he will try and support the price at these levels. Explains the 25k on the bid at 68p then, so ignoring that looks like its 63p and for 50k.......I best not depress us all | hindsight | |
08/2/2019 16:12 | hills, The Glastonbury property was sold for £205k, and on a 7.17% yield. Shaw and Hastings were withdrawn. | tiltonboy |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions