The transaction values the assets to be transferred to Polar Capital at around $60 million, however
with the purchaser assuming some debt and other liabilities, the net amount expected to be received
is $8 million.
Would this not equate to 15 cents per share? Roughly the amount they are/were trading at...
A guess.
Neal is buying assets and some debt.
Some lease liabilities will remain SCY's.
The transaction values the assets to be transferred to Polar Capital at around $60 million, however
with the purchaser assuming some debt and other liabilities, the net amount expected to be received
is $8 million.
Would this not equate to 15 cents per share? Roughly the amount they are/were trading at...
That would be soon gone getting out of the remaining leases, redundancies and paying the bills etc ...and Pwc Bill off course.
“ At the top of every bubble, everyone is convinced it's not yet a bubble.”
The announcement on the 6th May leading up to this should have been clearer that there was a material uncertainty of the value of the shares. It reads like they were baiting shareholders on false hopes of a good outcome.
Should a liquidation or receivership not have been disclosed to the market prior to directors negotiating a sale of the business or assets?
Does such a large sale of assets etc not require shareholder approval under the Companies Act/NZX requriements and all that? Or are we now living in lawless times? IF I were a shareholder (thankfully I got out at about 40 odd cents) I would rather liquidation and get say 10% of the 77 cents NTA than nothing....
Should a liquidation or receivership not have been disclosed to the market prior to directors negotiating a sale of the business or assets?
There is nothing registered with the Companies Office to suggest the appointment of either liquidators or receivers, although I assume there is a time period allowed to register.
Doesn’t liquidation generally require a shareholder special resolution? A receiver would be appointed by ASB or some other financier with the power to do so.
However, the sale looks like it was agreed to by the directors so assume they need to follow due process.
Today’s announcement is a big change from Monday’s announcement where directors expected the sale to Polar Capital to settle this Friday, 22 May. Assume if SCY shareholder approval is required that settlement won’t be happening for at least three weeks. The effective date (I.e. the benefit or detriment of trading) could still be an earlier date, subject to the sale being confirmed.
I’m assuming given major shareholders are unwilling to put in more cash, shareholder approval is a given.
Originally Posted by CD_CHCH
Reply With Quote
(thanks Percy )
Bookmarks