MET - Metlifecare - one for the fundies?

[Bjauck]

Hmm that exciting but is MET just being opportunistic or is there real grounds here? I'm no lawyer but looking forward to seeing how this opens, I imagine a lot of punters will be happy to take some profit and get out if it opens up significantly.

The MAC clause is quite broad with lots of scope for interpretation. At least QCs and lawyers will not be short of work during level 3 lockdown!

[bull....]

going to head to court for sure , met even admitting the mac clause criteria most likely be met as well soon. so yea plenty of money to be spent on bun fighting to come

[Balance]

Hmm that exciting but is MET just being opportunistic or is there real grounds here? I'm no lawyer but looking forward to seeing how this opens, I imagine a lot of punters will be happy to take some profit and get out if it opens up significantly.

Talked to one of my contacts in one of the PE funds in Oz.

He said a lot of negotiated deals have been pulled, all citing the pandemic and its flow on impact as MAC events - however tenous the contention.

He also said however that having done all the due diligence, the buyers (his fund included) are really positioning themselves to renegotiate the deals to obtain post pre-covid 19 prices. The PE funds exist to do deals - not scuttle deals. All a question of price when they have decided on an acquisition.

I think that's where this 'dispute' is heading as it's not in anybody's interest to go to court and spend a lot of money.

So let's say, APVG proposes $5.60 (20% discount to $7) as a starting point?

[peat]

yeh the statement today makes some good points . I tend to think it is very arguable either way

It is pretty hard to be categoric about whether the property portfolio has taken a hit large enough to trigger the MAC , and the bottom line is no one can know until the valuation is done at that time stipulated. Note how the directors focus on the future cash flow oriented valuation which will be less affected than a fire sale market valuation which might be lower in these covid days.

Looking forward to seeing the new price today!

[Beagle]

Did MR Beagle write that announcement?

Haha, was wondering the same thing myself!

LOL - Some good strong barking in that announcement, that's for sure ! I like the forecast of $83-$90m underlying profit. Mid point is $86.5m which represents just a ($86.5 / $90.5m), 4.5% reduction on FY19. That's very strong in the circumstances and a very modest impact by any interpretation one cares to use.

What you're seeing here is the resiliency of their business model. They're not dependent on ongoing development for so much of their business model like SUM other companies who are likely to be considerably more affected are.

[Bjauck]

...

So let's say, APVG proposes $5.60 (20% discount to $7) as a starting point?

Given the uncertainties as to when there will be a post-covid environment & economy and how they will look, and the fact that MET has historically traded at a large discount to NTA, I would be more inclined to think that any adjusted APVG offer may be $4 something. That is, if they are not forced to complete at the current arrangement price.

I wonder how much the QC and lawyers will cost shareholders? All money down the gurgler, if directors fail in their bid to force the arrangement through.

[Beagle]

Talked to one of my contacts in one of the PE funds in Oz.

He said a lot of negotiated deals have been pulled, all citing the pandemic and its flow on impact as MAC events - however tenous the contention.

He also said however that having done all the due diligence, the buyers (his fund included) are really positioning themselves to renegotiate the deals to obtain post pre-covid 19 prices. The PE funds exist to do deals - not scuttle deals. All a question of price when they have decided on an acquisition.

I think that's where this 'dispute' is heading as it's not in anybody's interest to go to court and spend a lot of money.

So let's say, APVG proposes $5.60 (20% discount to $7) as a starting point?

Maybe they will settle this at the original proposed takeover price of $6.50. Some people reckon this is a dog but if so then I like the way its barking and showing some teeth !

[peat]

Maybe they will settle this at the original proposed takeover price of $6.50.

but its not at all unrealistic that the directors hold out for the full $7.00 given their expressed opinions and their job to act in the best of shareholders interest.

Your nose still working very well Beagle despite the lockdown.

[Balance]

yeh the statement today makes some good points . I tend to think it is very arguable either way

It is pretty hard to be categoric about whether the property portfolio has taken a hit large enough to trigger the MAC , and the bottom line is no one can know until the valuation is done at that time stipulated. Note how the directors focus on the future cash flow oriented valuation which will be less affected than a fire sale market valuation which might be lower in these covid days.

Looking forward to seeing the new price today!

$4.35 on opening.

If the arb funds hold off selling any more, we will be back at $5.00 by Friday.

[Beagle]

but its not at all unrealistic that the directors hold out for the full $7.00 given their expressed opinions and their job to act in the best of shareholders interest.

Your nose still working very well Beagle despite the lockdown.

I agree 100% !
Thanks mate. Beagle's are insatiable in their desire for food Very pleased I loaded up twice as much as last time.