So you lot say that Byrnes it a dope and his DPC personal buys are clueless ?
Hmmmm....
My only problem is with Byrnes buying , is that unless he is breaking the insider trading laws he is actually confirming to the market that nothing is going on at DPC. Buying could be seen as a criticism of DPC's management and his own Board
Does that mean that they:
Don't have a buyer for Equity
Don't have alternative funding
Can't complete the St Laurence deal (remember they had some option to buy another 25%)
No business strategy
I'm with Dsurf the current management is nothing short of an expensive receiver
He is criticising the board I am
Brynes being buying at 80cents and the price is now 47 cents. mmmmmmmmmmmmm.
He may have been better buying NZO or taking out a DPC unsecured convertible note.
If something is happening behind the scenes I'm with mskv.
Let's review what happened.
BK sold his shareholding to Bridgecorp in a deal which was censured by the NZX.
BK started buying back into DPC at over $2.00, trying to regain control.
BK could not regain control, start criticising the company whilst he sold out of his shareholding at ever lower prices.
We are missing something here, geniuses?
I think that line 3 is incorrect.
I see no evidence of BK buying more at $2.
His remaining shares were tipped into Viking.
They have been selling.
They are also carrying a massive book loss on their holding.
So I can understand why BK is grumpy.
If Byrnes hadn't been buying I wonder what the share price would be?
It appears to me that Byrnes is only delaying the inevitable, Zero.
DPC have no business strategy, inept management, and I only own a few shares of DPC so i can attend their AGM. Its amongst some of the best comedy you can get and the clowns are up centre and in front on what they call the Board Table. Thoroughly recommend it to you all, my only issue is that they only serve tea at the end not Martini's (shaken not stirred).:p
Lets really review what has happened to DPC.
Yes BK did sell to Bridgecorp (in hindsight a great deal wish I was part of) in 2004
He resigned from DPC when price was $2.50
His shares were tipped into Vik
DPC appoints CEO with no industry or CEO experience
No finance sector experience on the Board or management at a time when the well predicted demise of the sector was under way.
Vik buy shares hoping to put a Director with finance exp
25% of St Laurence purchased for $30m!!! with option in a years time. Podmore added to board
Media criticisms from both DPC and BK (who starts it is debatable)
Did not manage their cash (requiring a urgent top up loan from shareholders) after spending $20m in cash to buy St Laurence and 45m in two loans(done with in six months of the loan from shareholder)
Criticisms of the performance of the company have born true as the company has failed to generate operating profits, lacks strategy for future.
Current Board's best approach is to put it into volantary receivership and hand back the Net asset backing of $1.70 to shareholders
Money to be made in this stock in the wind up!!
Balance, please be rational, how can you condem BK who sold 19.9% of DPC at 3.70 and know they are worth 47 cents.
BK sounds like a bloody genius!!!
Yes, he made have bought more at around $2.00 but it was peanuts in comparision to what he used to own, Play Money, Bloody Play Money.
BK is the guy who got out of the finance company sector at its top, told everyone it would turn nasty and nobody listened. Many would have now wished they had!
If i was the owner of DPC i would get BK on the phone and ask him to come and sort out this mess. Cause you can bet you last dollar on the fact that the current management only have on solution. Sell all assets before they go to ZERO!!!!
BK is a genius?
This is a guy who seems to have seen the credit crunch coming - note his comments of a few years ago about profiting from a time when asset prices start to fall via VIK.
But, what is he in? Penny dreadful BIO and DPC, held through penny dreadful "investment" company VIK!
I see little sign of BK profiting from a period when assets are being repriced due to risk being repriced.
What he has said doesn't count : what counts is what he has done. As the old saying goes, predicting rain doesn't count, building an ark counts.
Regarding the new CEO - and comments that he is effectively a highly paid liquidator - I think there is actually an element of truth in this, but, the negative inference is completely wrong. Highly paid? He doesn't set his pay level. Liquidator? Well....
You guys appear to be saying that the company sucks, the sector sucks, the board sucks etc.
You then bash the CEO for implementing a strategy that involves preserving cash, collecting loans in, not making many new loans etc. In other words, winding back / winding down the business, or at least the size of it.
If we accept that "everything sucks" is the correct analysis, then I see the actions of the CEO as rational.
The CEO deserves criticism for:
Acting to slowly when the finance company fallout was well predicted
Having no strategy
Not being focused (& telling everyone)
Not having a direction (&telling everyone)
Selling Equity at the worse time possible
Destroying the share price via imcomprehensible public fighting with BK
Destroying share holder loyalty
Destroying a potential funding base from those shareholders
The lack of operating profit
The hopeless board that has not changed
Being the top guy who has the responsibility
Starnger Danger -What does he deserve praise for?