FBU - Fletcher Building

[winner69]

Yup.

Meanwhile, SMH which 'broke' the Wesfarmers story still cite 'sources' that Wesfarmers still has FBU in its radar!

https://www.smh.com.au/business/comp...17-p4za30.html

FBU, Underwriters and whoever planted that story thank SMH for its service to FBU!

I see on NBR that NZX and FMA have got their wet bus tickets ready to unleash on whoever was responsible!

Australian press calling for ASIC to investigate these rumours.

Are Macquaries in charge of the capital raise?

[minimoke]

A little off tangent but I see some secret letter has appeared in front of an MBIE enquiry into Statistics House partial collapse after the North Canterbury earth quake

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/103...atistics-house

Fletcher were the construction co.

There is still considerable anger than no one has been held to account for the Christchuch CTV building collapse.

[peat]

Note that the institutions get the first bite of the $4.80 shares so the successful ones will have a chance to crsytallize any premium above $4.80 from Friday.

Retail investors/shareholders will not have their spanking new shares until mid May!

Why such a distinction between these two groups of shareholders. They are all shareholders of the same shares, there is no A or B type shares.
It doesn't smell right to me.

[macduffy]

Why such a distinction between these two groups of shareholders. They are all shareholders of the same shares, there is no A or B type shares.
It doesn't smell right to me.

No, it's not "right", but that's the usual way that these accelerated capital raisings seem to work these days. An institutional "book-build", followed by either an SPP or a rights issue. I think that companies and underwriters justify these by claiming that the amount of capital required is beyond the capacity of shareholders via a full rights issue. Maybe.

[peat]

No, it's not "right", but that's the usual way that these accelerated capital raisings seem to work these days. An institutional "book-build", followed by either an SPP or a rights issue. I think that companies and underwriters justify these by claiming that the amount of capital required is beyond the capacity of shareholders via a full rights issue. Maybe.

To me, 'beyond the capacity' is not defensible. Surely they do it the old fashioned way, by having a cash issue with renounceable rights, and if people without a current holding want to get on board they buy the rights. Is that so hard?

[macduffy]

To me, 'beyond the capacity' is not defensible. Surely they do it the old fashioned way, by having a cash issue with renounceable rights, and if people without a current holding want to get on board they buy the rights. Is that so hard?

I fully agree.

[jimmybuffett]

Just noted this from behind paywall, re the comments that Fletchers had booked no profits on the NX2 Puhoi job:
"Somehave taken comments about the infrastructure unit of the construction divisionas signalling that the rot has spread.
Fletcher probably caused this incorrectinterpretation by noting in its presentation on Tuesday that “at this point,Fletcher Building is reporting a nil margin” for the project.
But as chief executive Ross Taylorexplained to analysts, Fletcher’s practice is not to book any profits on suchprojects until they’re at least 20% complete so the nil margin is what it wouldhave reported for this year, even if the project was going swimmingly, becausethe project is only 8% complete and has another four years to go."

[Balance]

To me, 'beyond the capacity' is not defensible. Surely they do it the old fashioned way, by having a cash issue with renounceable rights, and if people without a current holding want to get on board they buy the rights. Is that so hard?

https://www.nzx.com/announcements/316915

So 98% of eligible institutions took up their entitlements, $500m, leaving $10m shortfall for the 'auction' which took place today.

Strong support, says FBU. As if any institution would not participate in a 22% plus ($1.56) discounted share issue!

So retail shareholders represent $250m of the capital raising - and yes, they are treated indeed as second class shareholders!

[Balance]

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/103...by-nzx-and-fma

So NZX and FMA are investigating.

"The Sydney Morning Herald reported on Friday that Wesfarmers had built a stake of between 3 per cent and 4 per cent in Fletcher Building, citing sources close to Wesfarmers."

Sources close to Wesfarmers? Could not be further from the truth so one guesses that NZX and FMA have ordered another batch of bus tickets, ready to soak in rainwater for the spanking to be administered?

[Kay]

https://www.nzx.com/announcements/316915

So 98% of eligible institutions took up their entitlements, $500m, leaving $10m shortfall for the 'auction' which took place today.

Strong support, says FBU. As if any institution would not participate in a 22% plus ($1.56) discounted share issue!

So retail shareholders represent $250m of the capital raising - and yes, they are treated indeed as second class shareholders!

What percentage of fbu shareholders are retail investors though (i dont know tge answer) ... And I imagine not all will take the offer up.