sharetrader
  1. #14971
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Auckland, , New Zealand.
    Posts
    34

    Default

    The interesting figure from the vote on the buy-back resolution was the very large ABSTAIN figure. The only reason a shareholder would bother going through the process of voting, and then register Abstain, must surely be to send the directors a message. Abstain votes represented 35% of votes cast, with votes against 17.16% of votes cast. Together these outweigh the votes in favour which are 48% of votes cast.

  2. #14972
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    456

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BWR View Post
    The interesting figure from the vote on the buy-back resolution was the very large ABSTAIN figure. The only reason a shareholder would bother going through the process of voting, and then register Abstain, must surely be to send the directors a message. Abstain votes represented 35% of votes cast, with votes against 17.16% of votes cast. Together these outweigh the votes in favour which are 48% of votes cast.
    I find it very odd that anyone would go to the trouble of voting and then abstain. It's the same thing as not bothering to vote at all - when it comes to getting a majority for the motion. The message the directors get is 'we got enough support to get it through'.

  3. #14973
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Ak
    Posts
    413

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by arjay View Post
    I find it very odd that anyone would go to the trouble of voting and then abstain. It's the same thing as not bothering to vote at all - when it comes to getting a majority for the motion. The message the directors get is 'we got enough support to get it through'.
    The shareholding figure seems to match the Zeta holding - they are not allowed to vote on this resolution so maybe this was their way of proving it?

    Maybe Notie can tell us more...

  4. #14974
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    197

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Crackity View Post
    The shareholding figure seems to match the Zeta holding - they are not allowed to vote on this resolution so maybe this was their way of proving it?

    Maybe Notie can tell us more...
    I can tell you one thing, NZOG is sleep walking into a take over and the shareholders will be royally screwed over by Zeta

  5. #14975
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Ak
    Posts
    413

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by notie View Post
    I can tell you one thing, NZOG is sleep walking into a take over and the shareholders will be royally screwed over by Zeta
    No argument here Notie - I agree

  6. #14976
    Advanced Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Posts
    1,981

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BWR View Post
    The interesting figure from the vote on the buy-back resolution was the very large ABSTAIN figure. The only reason a shareholder would bother going through the process of voting, and then register Abstain, must surely be to send the directors a message. Abstain votes represented 35% of votes cast, with votes against 17.16% of votes cast. Together these outweigh the votes in favour which are 48% of votes cast.
    What does the take over code say? To get past 20% is a requirement that a simple majority must agree,or is it in this case that more voted for it than against. Clearly ZETA did not get authority from 50% of the shareholders or even 50% of those that voted.
    Anyone know or prepared to find out?
    digger

  7. #14977
    Advanced Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Posts
    1,981

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BWR View Post
    The interesting figure from the vote on the buy-back resolution was the very large ABSTAIN figure. The only reason a shareholder would bother going through the process of voting, and then register Abstain, must surely be to send the directors a message. Abstain votes represented 35% of votes cast, with votes against 17.16% of votes cast. Together these outweigh the votes in favour which are 48% of votes cast.
    What does the take over code say? To get past 20% is a requirement that a simple majority must agree,or is it in this case that more voted for it than against. Clearly ZETA did not get authority from 50% of the shareholders or even 50% of those that voted.
    Anyone know or prepared to find out?
    digger

  8. #14978
    Legend Balance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    21,630

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by notie View Post
    I can tell you one thing, NZOG is sleep walking into a take over and the shareholders will be royally screwed over by Zeta
    Nothing has changed obviously at NZOG.

    I would say it is more like shareholders getting screwed while sleepwalking for years under the previous regime, and now waking up (too late) to be further screwed.

    Karma.

    Note : Pleased to be the one who posted and initiated page 1000.
    Last edited by Balance; 31-08-2015 at 08:46 PM.

  9. #14979
    Advanced Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Posts
    1,981

    Default

    I see PPP is following in NZO footsteps and having a buy back. Zeta has learned a small lesson from the NZO buyback and this time not asking the shareholders what they want. PPP [that is ZETA] at this stage will not say what they will do with the bought back shares.
    This will be used by ZETA to take over PPP when the time comes,then later on merge with NZO. That to me is obvious but are there any other outcomes anyone else see happening.???
    digger

  10. #14980
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    576

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by digger View Post
    I see PPP is following in NZO footsteps and having a buy back. Zeta has learned a small lesson from the NZO buyback and this time not asking the shareholders what they want. PPP [that is ZETA] at this stage will not say what they will do with the bought back shares.
    This will be used by ZETA to take over PPP when the time comes,then later on merge with NZO. That to me is obvious but are there any other outcomes anyone else see happening.???
    with nzo they required a special meeting to allow them to go over 20% yet with ppp there already at 46%....whats the difference.....not sure why nzo would sell their 15% ppp to Zeta then roll the whole lot under Zeta umbrella.....ppp have $20 mill cash so would have thought Zeta would offer 5 cents a share to get 54% of ppp they dont own with the cash component funding half the purchase

    Thanks to Balance pointing out the onset of an oil glut enabling me to see the bigger picture and exiting nzo at the right time and price.....

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
  •