SKT Sky Network Television Limited.

[mistaTea]

This has to be the absolute worst board on the NZX, certainly of any "large cap". The value destruction they have inflicted on shareholders while showing them zero respect is unbelievable. From the highly dilutionary cap raise because they were caught with their pants down, to this latest move (what an absolute joke, really), it's beyond belief. They should all be blacklisted.

Before this lot took over, John Fellet and Peter Macourt halved the dividend so that there would be plenty of cash to pay back the bonds.

Sky was paying ~$100M in divvys at the time I think, so they halved it to $50M.

The operating cashflow between when the divvy was cut and when the bonds were due should have been more than enough to pay the bonds. Even if they did chase some other initiatives that required CAPEX, they should have still had plenty of dosh to at least pay the majority of the bonds and then just refinance a small amount if need be.

But instead they signed off on things like buying RugbyPass which has not worked out as an investment.

This decision left them exposed to the bonds, Bowman then hit the nuclear option with the crazy cap raise right at the worst possible time as all stocks crashed in price due to the looming pandemic.

But don't worry, he will be more focussed than ever on Sky New Zealand from the UK!

Can you imagine? If another takeover attempt is made, or some kind of merger deal is offered...is Bowman really going to get up at 2am to attend important meetings?

Even if he did, is he going to be the best version of himself to lead the negotiations of a deal that is favourable to shareholders?

I think not.

[Alpha]

Maybe they don't care because the takeover is happening

[mistaTea]

I just can't get my head around how the Chairman of a Board can abscond and they don't seem to think there is anything wrong with that, or that they needed to inform the owners of the business of this development.

Can you imagine if you owned a private business...and you hired a guy to oversee it...and then one day he just moves to the UK and doesn't even tell you? But don't worry, he will still oversee the business for you...

You would be outraged! You would sack him on the spot.

[Balance]

I just can't get my head around how the Chairman of a Board can abscond and they don't seem to think there is anything wrong with that, or that they needed to inform the owners of the business of this development.

Can you imagine if you owned a private business...and you hired a guy to oversee it...and then one day he just moves to the UK and doesn't even tell you? But don't worry, he will still oversee the business for you...

You would be outraged! You would sack him on the spot.

I hope you have written to the company and require of them an explanation.

[Balance]

This has been my feeling ever since investor day.

The last few months it seems like the wheels have fallen off.

Like the time in between selling your house and settlement day.

Been your story now for how long?

[LoungeLizzard]

Hard to know what the hell is going on behind the scenes at Board level, but it sure isn't helping the image of the company and for that reason alone - apart from showing some respect to shareholders - there should be some sort of announcement regarding Bowman. It just looks bad that for whatever reason, the Chairman of the Board is no longer at the helm. It beggars belief that a public company could stay silent on so many issues - property sale, takeover, Board makeup - for so long, and they wouldn't think that this would have a negative effect shareholder's perception of the company, and ultimately the share price.

[mistaTea]

This has been my feeling ever since investor day.

The last few months it seems like the wheels have fallen off.

Like the time in between selling your house and settlement day.

Still waiting for news on the property sale.

Let’s see if they can manage to sell that first before we speculate on selling the business.

[mikelee]

Hard to know what the hell is going on behind the scenes at Board level, but it sure isn't helping the image of the company and for that reason alone - apart from showing some respect to shareholders - there should be some sort of announcement regarding Bowman. It just looks bad that for whatever reason, the Chairman of the Board is no longer at the helm. It beggars belief that a public company could stay silent on so many issues - property sale, takeover, Board makeup - for so long, and they wouldn't think that this would have a negative effect shareholder's perception of the company, and ultimately the share price.

I haven't been around that long...so why did shareholders let Booman stayed on when his term was up earlier? Surely with the recent share consolidation those that paid more than $1 prior will not likely recover their loss, unless they've a lot of $ to keep averaging down.

[LaserEyeKiwi]

I haven't been around that long...so why did shareholders let Booman stayed on when his term was up earlier? Surely with the recent share consolidation those that paid more than $1 prior will not likely recover their loss, unless they've a lot of $ to keep averaging down.

Because shareholder votes are essentially decided by institutional investors - and Pooman does a great job of sending fees to those same institutions via value destroying capital raises and for consulting advice on takeover offers he has no intention of even contemplating or telling shareholders about.

[mikelee]

Oh I see, thanks for the background buddy.