sharetrader
  1. #16271
    Advanced Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    , , .
    Posts
    1,894

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mistaTea View Post
    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/...ectid=12269453

    Brian Gaynor using the NZOG SoA as an example, questioning why so many Kiwi Directors are gutless.
    Gutless is assuming the NZO Independent directors have our best interests at heart.They would know the NZX announcement 13/9/19 was misleading and actually false.
    My personal opinion is that Rod Ritchie,with his extensive experience in the petroleum Industry and diverse interests(including OMV -Austrian petrochemical group I think) would certainly Know the Northbridge report was false

  2. #16272
    Guru
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    3,808

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fish View Post
    Gutless is assuming the NZO Independent directors have our best interests at heart.They would know the NZX announcement 13/9/19 was misleading and actually false.
    My personal opinion is that Rod Ritchie,with his extensive experience in the petroleum Industry and diverse interests(including OMV -Austrian petrochemical group I think) would certainly Know the Northbridge report was false
    Old Roddie boy hasn’t had ahelluva lot to say at all during this whole scam.

    It’s been left up to the academic to convince us.

    She probably subscribes to the whole ‘Modern Portfolio Theory’ and therefore a 25% premium on SP is a damn good deal. Look no further!
    Last edited by mistaTea; 21-09-2019 at 09:30 AM.

  3. #16273
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mistaTea View Post
    Old Roddie boy hasn’t had ahelluva lot to say at all during this whole scam.

    It’s been left up to the academic to convince us.

    She probably subscribes to the whole ‘Modern Portfolio Theory’ and therefore a 25% premium on SP is a damn good deal. Look no further!
    Well it,s like this, average S/H should not been surprised it has come to this offer.
    When the CO. bought out a percentage of shares at what under 75 cents, to get their holding to 70%
    Then let the S/Price drift until all the Ducks lined up and then make this ridiculous offer.
    All the while repeating the Mantra, managements aim is to create value to S/Hs

    Hinted at that in several posts last 2 years.

  4. #16274
    Guru
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    3,808

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fabs37 View Post
    Well it,s like this, average S/H should not been surprised it has come to this offer.
    When the CO. bought out a percentage of shares at what under 75 cents, to get their holding to 70%
    Then let the S/Price drift until all the Ducks lined up and then make this ridiculous offer.
    All the while repeating the Mantra, managements aim is to create value to S/Hs

    Hinted at that in several posts last 2 years.
    Yes, and it does occur to me too that the whole process they did to ‘clean up’ the shareholder base by purchasing back any holdings under 500 was all part of this ultimate aim.

    Those shareholders were almost certainly not going to bother voting, so a quick ‘tidy up’ would benefit OGOG when it was time to kick the remaining minority holders in the guts with a low ball SOA.

  5. #16275
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    30

    Default

    All part of the ploi.
    Strategy and Focus, they play for keeps.
    Time will tell.

  6. #16276
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Christchurch , New Zealand.
    Posts
    421

    Default

    Very interesting times, here and now. I wonder if the "independent' directors and whole board are getting anxious about the legality of their report of 13/9.

    I wish I could have seen Brian Gaynor's piece in the Herald, but it's behind their paywall. He's always been honest and perceptive, IMO.
    Last edited by Lion; 22-09-2019 at 10:59 AM.

  7. #16277
    Advanced Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    , , .
    Posts
    1,894

    Default

    Brian Gaynor asks the question
    Wheres the fight in Kiwi Company Directors?
    He asks why are they not fighting such a low ball offer?
    He states NZOG endorsed the 78 cent per share partial offer because the singaporean company had global expertise that would benefit the NZX listed company.
    Apart from that he covers the history of the company which you ,like many of us ,have been part off.
    He has not mentioned Ironbark and this could be for many reasons eg ignorance(which I doubt) or because of legal advice about defamation ( court cases can cost millions even if you win).
    Stating as fact something that is untrue about a person and publishing it can be very expensive-and that could apply to posts on sharetrader.
    Last edited by fish; 22-09-2019 at 05:10 AM.

  8. #16278
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Christchurch , New Zealand.
    Posts
    421

    Default

    Thanks for that fish.

    Your post made more sense this morning, Fabs37. Maybe I'd had a bit of wine last night!

  9. #16279
    Advanced Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    , , .
    Posts
    1,894

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lion View Post
    Very interesting times, here and now. I wonder if the "independent' directors and whole board are getting anxious about the legality of their report of 13/9.

    I wish I could have seen Brian Gaynor's piece in the Herald, but it's behind their paywall. He's always been honest and perceptive, IMO.
    Absolutely.He asks the important question as to why Independent directors would recommend such a low ball offer
    Its a pity he didnt comment on the 13/9/19 report but maybe he is awaiting to hear from the takeovers panel/nzx.
    I do not think we will long to hear as a misleading announcement such as this could lead to unfair acceptance of the offer and people are voting now
    Last edited by fish; 22-09-2019 at 11:58 AM.

  10. #16280
    Guru
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    3,808

    Default

    I just had a look at the NZO trade volumes since the SoA was announced on 10 July.

    Shares have been trading pretty close to the 62c offer price the whole time.

    Approx 3.5 million shares have been purchased at these prices (roughly 7% of the target shares). If everyone is behaving rationally, it would be fair to expect the majority of these shares to vote AGAINST?

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
  •