sharetrader
Page 262 of 1418 FirstFirst ... 1622122522582592602612622632642652662723123627621262 ... LastLast
Results 2,611 to 2,620 of 14173
  1. #2611
    Guru
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    3,885

    Default

    COVID Level 1 from midnight tonight.

    Should see live crowds in the new Super Rugby competition this weekend...

  2. #2612
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    348

    Default

    Pretty dodgy how the management joined in now from virtually no shares before. Guess it means that there is only one way up for this stock.

  3. #2613
    Guru
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    3,885

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Quantitative Easing View Post
    Pretty dodgy how the management joined in now from virtually no shares before. Guess it means that there is only one way up for this stock.
    Disgusting that the likes of Blair (who owned 0 shares beforehand) is allowed to come in and buy @12c.

    There was no need for it.

  4. #2614
    Guru
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Wellington, New Zealand
    Posts
    4,881

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mistaTea View Post
    Disgusting that the likes of Blair (who owned 0 shares beforehand) is allowed to come in and buy @12c.

    There was no need for it.
    Yep, disgusting is a pretty apt description. Would have been more equitable had existing shareholders been offered these.

    I will be raising this issue with the NZSA and hopefully they will say something about it.
    Last edited by blackcap; 08-06-2020 at 04:06 PM.

  5. #2615
    Guru
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    3,885

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blackcap View Post
    Yep, disgusting is a pretty apt description. Would have been more equitable had existing shareholders been offered these.
    Yeah and I am not pissed off with Blair or any of the others who buy in @12c per share as part of the placement when they had no skin in the game before.

    They have been presented with a ‘sweet deal’ and naturally they will take advantage of the opportunity.

    It is the Board of Directors who signed this off that need a slapping. How on earth did they think that existing shareholders would look at this with anything other than disgust?

  6. #2616
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    348

    Default

    I hope that as directors and senior managers they realise that their number one goal is to maximise shareholder wealth. Not to sell the shareholders down the river.

  7. #2617
    Guru
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Wellington, New Zealand
    Posts
    4,881

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Quantitative Easing View Post
    I hope that as directors and senior managers they realise that their number one goal is to maximise shareholder wealth. Not to sell the shareholders down the river.
    Hi QE, the problem is under the Companies Act in NZ that is not their number one goal. Number one duty of care is to the Company itself. Directors duties towards shareholders are actually very minimal.

  8. #2618
    Guru
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    3,885

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Quantitative Easing View Post
    I hope that as directors and senior managers they realise that their number one goal is to maximise shareholder wealth. Not to sell the shareholders down the river.
    I guarantee you John Fellet would have never done something like this.

    People like to point to the mistakes made under his stewardship, but the man definitely had his shareholders front of mind.

  9. #2619
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    348

    Default

    I always wonder where the share price would be today if John Fellet was in charge at the helm. Sky didn't have a vision beyond satellite TV under him, so it would definitely be lower than what it was when he retired. But he was your classic frugal businessman that tried to bean count and maximise profits. I'm sure dividends would still be paid out under him and he would never have done a rights issue when the share price was so low to begin with.

  10. #2620
    Guru
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,983

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Quantitative Easing View Post
    I always wonder where the share price would be today if John Fellet was in charge at the helm. Sky didn't have a vision beyond satellite TV under him, so it would definitely be lower than what it was when he retired. But he was your classic frugal businessman that tried to bean count and maximise profits. I'm sure dividends would still be paid out under him and he would never have done a rights issue when the share price was so low to begin with.
    You can't be sure about that at all.

    Mr Fellet's stewardship over huge shareholder wealth destruction stands. When Sky's answer to thinking about forward tech was bringing Derek Handley onto the Board I lost all confidence in him. Sadly Handley still haunts the Board.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •