We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register to chat with like-minded investors on our interactive forums.
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Type | Share ISIN | Share Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ransom(William) | LSE:RNSM | London | Ordinary Share | GB0007249682 | ORD 10P |
| Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.00% | 5.50 | 0.00 | 01:00:00 |
| Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| - |
| Last Trade Time | Trade Type | Trade Size | Trade Price | Currency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | O | 0 | 5.50 | GBX |
William Ransom (RNSM) Share Charts1 Year William Ransom Chart |
|
1 Month William Ransom Chart |
Intraday William Ransom Chart |
| Date | Time | Title | Posts |
|---|---|---|---|
| 22/6/2017 | 11:36 | William Ransom - Discussion following the Delisting | 248 |
| 15/2/2011 | 19:34 | William Ransom (4.375p) | 834 |
| 28/10/2010 | 09:44 | William Ransom - Natural Healthcare | 775 |
| 19/1/2006 | 15:04 | A King's ransom? | 17 |
| 30/6/2004 | 13:57 | Take her out. | 9 |
| Trade Time | Trade Price | Trade Size | Trade Value | Trade Type |
|---|
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 13/6/2016 11:34 by deswalker From the report, the cash balance on 12/4/16 was £1.117m which equates to 1.32p per share.Perhaps shareholders might now feel like calling KPMG to ask some searching questions ?? After all it is no longer "our" money we are attempting to save ... Indeed from the report the average hourly rate for correspondence with shareholders was £340, so a ten minute call will cost £57. Personally I would advocate as many shareholders call for an explanation as possible. The main guy to talk to is Paul Liversidge on 020 7694 3312. He is the one who has consistently put a positive spin on this for years only to do an about turn without any form of explanation. I do wonder what right of appeal or even legal action shareholders have at their disposal in such cases ? After all this is not a case decided upon by a judge, just the opinion of a single legal firm in a very complex situation. Shareholders have not even been afforded the protection of a second independent legal opinion in a case so complex that it has taken three years to decide on a resolution. Does liquidation law really run like this ? Law firms arbitrarily deciding who gets the money ? |
Posted at 27/5/2016 09:52 by playful Des, you are absolutely correct to vent your frustration and I have just spoken to Paul and told him it is bloody ridiculous and demanded a meeting be arranged for Ran & the chairman to explain to us what actually went on with the sale process and why Ran walked away with £200KI will need to muster a fair share holding of support for the meeting so might need you guys to contact Paul requesting the same, I will get in touch with Peter and ask for his support for the meeting so between us that's over 10% |
Posted at 29/4/2015 14:25 by deswalker As promised I spoke with KPMG today which was excellent timing as they had done some work on RNSM only this morning so I got bang up-to-date information.After meetings with and written depositions by our management we now firmly believe that the other side do not have a case and we are keen to meet face-to-face to explain why this is so and to make some progress. Such progress will not involve anything beyond a detailed explanation of our position and that will be that. There is absolutely no intention of negotiating any settlement as we believe the case to be without merit. Following such a face-to-face meeting and explanation the other side must then decide whether they want to take it to court with all the costs involved, including our costs if they lose. We will try to dissuade them from going down this route not just because it is obviously in our interests to do so but also because we believe that they would be throwing good money after bad which helps no one, and so it seems sensible to have one final meeting. It may sound like no progress has been made for years and it has been very slow, but we are now much surer of our position than before. We should get an annual report at some point and it is currently being prepared. I shall call again at the end of June for an update. Des |
Posted at 25/6/2013 14:35 by playful Talked with KPMG and was told HMRC have now given clearance on the final payment, but the landlord of the facility shown below has issued a claim to KPMG for outstanding rent, it seems the company that purchased the naturals business from RNSM has gone into liquidation and not paid the rent:They are meeting with the landlord in the coming weeks but KPMG do not feel we should be too concerned and expect to pay circa 0.0153 as final settlement within 6 weeks. Final payment is projected to be circa 0.0153 Already paid 0.028 Total payment = 0.0433 This is not exactly the 5p Sir Roger Jones seemed to think was a certainty. What I am concerned about is despite the fact Sir Roger Jones gave shareholders an assurance that Ran Oren would need to wait until shareholders were fully paid before he received his £200,000 commission for selling the business, it turns out he got the cash before KPMG were even appointed. |
Posted at 18/7/2012 22:48 by playful Interesting snippet on RNSM from Sharesoc:On William Ransom, covered in our last newsletter, we have finally received a response from Sir Roger Jones but it simply referred us to the liquidators. Our reply was that liquidators only have to respond to creditors and shareholders are not technically creditors. So in reality liquidators are unlikely to respond and in practice rarely do so to shareholder questions, even if they have access to the information requested (which in this case they may not).We suggested that his response smacked of evasion. You can see their original article |
Posted at 14/7/2012 10:33 by playful I notice Fred has doubled the price of top selling Optima products sold via T.W on Amazon recently. This just shows the change in policy once the pennies are going directly into our Fred's pocket and he doesn't need to share anything with anyone else.Fred is Perhaps the most ruthless entrepreneur I have come across, so he should win a prize! |
Posted at 13/7/2012 15:08 by thehangman Whilst visiting Stroud yesterday my wife and I visited their shopping mall, Merrywalks.In the window of one of these cheap stores (Home Bargains ,who are National) they had a pile of Ransoms ALoe Vera gel 200mls. I went in the store and they had 1000s priced 200mls 0.99p!!!! Take off the vat 82p, id imagine the store paid max 35p for it. Holland and Barrett curently selling 200mls Aloe Vera £5.99 Clearing their warehouse? To sell Aloe Vera gel at such a crazy price beggars belief in that it cheapens the product, brand and company. |
Posted at 30/6/2012 12:22 by deswalker Cheque for 2.8p per share received this morning. Accompanying letter says that ..."one final distribution will be made in due course once all remaining matters in respect of the liquidation of the Company are complete. I anticipate that the final distribution will also be within the range included in the circular to shareholders." Rather vague so I don't hold too much stall by it, but taken at face value it doesn't lead one to believe that we'll see any more than at best 4.5p in total. |
Posted at 12/4/2012 20:15 by kramch An unsatisfactory end to the sorry saga of Wm Ransom.A small cabal of shareholders gathered at Olswangs to see the sale of Optima back to the original directors and the wind-up of William Ransom voted through on a poll. There was some angry questioning about the lack of accounts; apparently as a re-incarnate corporate entity it can extend its first year-end, and the directors conveniently took the opportunity to do so. There was a question about the FD's remuneration, which we were told was in line with the de-listing information given a year ago. However it seems that a bonus based on the disposal will fall outside this definition. I suspect that the directors have done quite a good job in saving costs in the wind-up, but with no figures we cannot tell. And the exact price paid for Optima is unclear. Certainly many shareholders were expecting more from a winding-up than than the 2.8 to 4.5p per share now indicated. I am sure it is has all been done within the letter of the law, but with the promise of regular shareholder updates proving hollow and no figures to explain the proposed liquidation it is a very unsatisfactory end for the independent shareholders and not a shining example of corporate governance of what is still a public company. K. |
Posted at 22/3/2012 22:37 by deswalker The 9 January news release informing us of the sale of Ransom Naturals says that the holding company would receive £3.6m in cash which would be used to repay holding company net-borrowings of £1.35m. This leaves the holding company with a net-cash position of £2.25m. It appears from today's announcement that the Ransom Naturals sale comes with a warranty but no terms have been disclosed. Today we are told that the Optima subsidiary is to be sold for £3m and that this sale also comes with a warranty once again without any specific terms. At least part of the consideration is received by the holding company not in new cash but in tearing up money owed by the holding company to the Optima subsidiary but this is just accounting. As far as I can see the net effect of all this has to be the holding company containing £2.25m + £3m = £5.25m plus two warranties against poor performance at Ransom Naturals and Optima (neither of which have been disclosed so we don't know how long they last or how likely they are to be called upon). A clean £5.25m equates to just over 6.2p per share and a return in line with many shareholder expectations. But part of this £5.25m will be swallowed up by various fees to liquidators and the like. Also part will need to be retained until after the two warranty periods have expired. BUT the range of expected payouts is between 2.8p (£2.36m in total) and 4.5p (£3.8m in total). Presumably the range (£1.44m) is linked to the warranties and represent a very generous and yet completely undisclosed contingent liability which may take years to roll off but we just don't know. BUT even if these liabilities are not called in so that shareholders receive the highest per share figure of 4.5p (£3.8m in total) we are still left wondering where £1.45m has gone. Are we expected to believe that this sum will go to pay the liquidators and other fees ? If so then they are very very expensive and much more expensive than those of a similar situation I'm currently involved with. Of course the more synister alternative is that the holding company will not end up with £5.25m following the sale of Optima but will end up with rather less. If so one is left wondering where the shortfall has gone and whether any is actually being included inside the Optima subsidiary !? If so then we are faced with not just selling Optima for an Enterprise Value of 2 times current EBITDA (approx £1.5m per annum) but quite possibly only 1 times EBITDA if the "missing" £1.5m has somehow found its way into Optima. In short, it is all very unclear and needs clarifying before shareholders can be expected to decide on this deal. I urge all shareholders to press the company for clarification of these issues. Contact details for the FD and Chairman can be supplied upon request. I also wish to make shareholders aware that various enquiries suggest that the claimed 51% irrevocable undertakings are anything but. Consequently this vote is far from certain to pass and hence I urge shareholders with shares in nominee accounts to speak to their brokers immediately to ensure that they can vote them as they wish. If their broker does not offer such flexibility then please consider getting them out in certificated form asap. |
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
Hot Features
Premium
