CDL & CDI ... Another Great Result

[Vaygor1]

The above points 1 and 2 are just not going to happen. MCK control the board and there is no way they would suffer unduly themselves to the benefit of the minority shareholders.
Nice in theory but in practice a no go.

I agree that MCK would very likely prefer a different solution to this one.. but then again, stranger things have happened at sea.
It is an interesting one as to control (Adrian Ho, MCK, CDI, NZX, minority shareholders) and interesting to see how/where this ends up eventually.
If the NZXR just rolls over the exemptions, it is the minority shareholders that might end up suffering in the long run.

[Vaygor1]

In my opinion, if the waiver is not continued, the minority shareholders will be the losers on this.

This is not a new situation (allowing for changes in personnel) for MCK (formerly CDL Hotels NZ Ltd).

Attachment 7953

John Henderson was an independent director of Kingsgate International, and was appointed to look after the interests of
minority shareholders during the takeover. John Henderson is an independent director of CDL Investments.
If possible, you may like to attend the upcoming ASM and have a chat to John over a sausage roll and a club sandwich.

Wow!! What a post. I think you should change two letters of your name to become Greater Good.

Be interesting to know what may have changed in the NZX rules since 2004. I just don't know if one can do today, what one could do 12 years ago on this issue.
With the waiver in place, it allows Adrian Ho to keep building his holding for the next 3 months, with a SSH coming only after 30? Days of a 1% upward movement to him holding 10.66% of CDI.
Be interesting to know who bought the 1.6 million shares on 16-March-2016 after CDI knew of the issue. Refer BlackPeter's post http://www.sharetrader.co.nz/showthr...l=1#post611881

I see in CDI's announcement on the subject "f. holders of the ordinary shares will not be disadvantaged by the granting of the waiver. Further, CDI has submitted, and NZXR has no reason not to accept, that it is in the best interests of holders of the ordinary shares to allow the ordinary shares to remain Quoted on the basis that the holders will remain entitled to the protections afforded by the Rules, and a constitution that reflects those protections"


ASM is in late May.. exact date and venue to be fixed.
Almost a necessity for me to attend I think and would look forward to a chat with John Henderson (and Roy Austin).
My initial thoughts being clarification on what protections are offered in the constitution that reflect the protections afforded by the Rules, and as Independent Directors, what are they able to do, or are planning to do to try and rectify the situation. Probably worth a phone call before the ASM I would think.

Thanks GF.

PS.... Personally, I prefer the diet conscious cup of tea and a vanilla wine biscuit.

[BlackPeter]

Have seen Black Peters post and think it wild speculation. In my opinion just plain wrong, further I suggest the directors think this is a very good business, easy to operate, no debt, one employee, that delivers excellent cash returns in good times and can go into hibernation on the down side of the cycle very quickly. So, I doubt the wind up / loot speculation. And that means they will be very keen to keep CDL Investments close, and if that means taking it private, then so be it.
So, ease up on the the tilting at windmills, visions of windfall profits and consider the possibility that the waiver is in your interests as a minority shareholder, What MCK or Mr Ho do, is out of your influence, If you really think there is some conspiracy, there is the Wall Street Walk,

Hmm - obviously I have no intention to question the wisdom of a "greater fool" ... but just out of interest - do you read your own posts before you press the "post" button? Do you read other people's posts before "appraising" them?

You said that the post vaygor linked to (as below) be wild speculation. I copied the complete post for your convenience into the quote below. Can you help me to spot the speculation in it? I see only a statement of a number of facts and two questions ...

Anybody noticed today's trading depth? Nearly 1.6 million shares changing hand - and orders for another 500k shares (at 62 and 63 cents) still waiting to be filled. Highly unusual depth for this stock ... something going on?

[BlackPeter]

Have seen Black Peters contribution #86, you quoted in post #90.........



and think it wild speculation. I suggest the directors think this is a very good business, easy to operate, no debt, one employee, that delivers excellent cash returns in good times and can go into hibernation on the down side of the cycle very quickly. So, I doubt the wind up / loot speculation. And that means they will be very keen to keep CDL Investments close, and if that means taking it private, then so be it.
So, ease up on the the tilting at windmills, visions of windfall profits and consider the possibility that the waiver is in your interests as a minority shareholder, What MCK or Mr Ho may do, is out of your influence, If you really think there is some conspiracy, maybe you could have a lay down after your cup of tea and biscuit. Or maybe get a cat.

Lets see: Merrian-Webster defines "speculation" as "ideas or guesses about something that is not known".

I mentioned a number of "options" which the board may or may not choose ... not a speculation. It would have been a speculation if I would have "speculated" what the board would do, which I didn't.

You speculated however what you think the directors might think. Unless of course, you are one of the directors, in which case you wouldn't speculate but divulge insider knowledge . Nothing wrong with that (speculating, not the spilling of insider information), but I think you are just using the word "speculation" incorrectly.

Didn't further examine what you might mean with a "wild" speculation - is this the opposite of a "domesticated" speculation?

But setting semantics aside ... I agree that your speculation (that the board might keep doing what it currently does) is as good (or bad) as the options I listed. I won't speculate here about the likelihood of the mentioned options and which of the speculations are wilder than others ....

I guess it all depends on what the board wants to achieve ... and this what I said in the post you quoted "depends what they want to do" - so maybe just read that again.

I assume (sort of a speculation ...) that you really just want to say that you believe that the board will continue with its strategy of accumulating and hiding wealth. Fair enough ... but why do you call other options "wild speculations"?

Discl: not a speculator ... just an (hopefully) "intelligent investor"

[Vaygor1]

I suggest the directors think this is a very good business, easy to operate, no debt, one employee, that delivers excellent cash returns in good times and can go into hibernation on the down side of the cycle very quickly. So, I doubt the wind up / loot speculation. And that means they will be very keen to keep CDL Investments close, and if that means taking it private, then so be it.
So, ease up on the the tilting at windmills, visions of windfall profits and consider the possibility that the waiver is in your interests as a minority shareholder, What MCK or Mr Ho may do, is out of your influence, If you really think there is some conspiracy, maybe you could have a lay down after your cup of tea and biscuit. Or maybe get a cat.

I too was very surprised at your response GF.

I was sincere about your post preceding mine being a awesome post and very relevant and informative. I even added to your reputation for it, before I saw your responses via ICBM. Both the one before and the one after your edit.

I enjoyed your comment about sausage rolls and club sandwiches and only wished to reciprocate the humour. Honestly.

On top of that, I must have triggered something because all I want is to see CDI striving to adhere to the rules.
I have seen waivers from the NZX in the past when there should have never been a waiver, like they feel sorry for the predicament the company has found itself in.

If I portrayed a conspiracy (as you put it) I didn't view it as such but raised questions that I think are prudent ones to ask under the circumstances.

The Indépendant Directors should be jumping up and down to get CDI to act and fix this breach, which they (CDI and MCK) are perfectly capable of doing… maybe I can influence that… just maybe…., even if my holding is a trifling amount by comparison, I would like to think I have some voice given my holding.

[Vaygor1]

Hi GF.

I saw your "hmmm.. how do I delete post", which has now gone. In any event I thank you for it. In my view you provide well thought out and informative posts. Other ST members that I highly regard on this web-forum, I see via your reputation-received comments, also think the same. Please keep 'em coming.

I shall attempt to be a little less speculative in the future too. I need tempering sometimes in this respect I think.

Best wishes,
Vaygor1.

[podg]

Seems like quite a while since anyone posted something about CDL Investments. Is it me, or does a dividend paid in late May, part of a Dec 31 balance date result, seem a couple of months late? other listed companies paid dividends for the same period in March !!

[beetills]

Never given much thought about it but now that you mention it,yes it does seem a long time to wait.

[podg]

Seems like quite a while since anyone posted something about CDL Investments. Is it me, or does a dividend paid in late May, part of a Dec 31 balance date result, seem a couple of months late? other listed companies paid dividends for the same period in March !!

[podg]

well, that depends on the entry point doesn't it, fool. I first bought CDI shortly after it took over Euronational. remember them? so that was 1992. I paid 7c, and then 10c and then 14c. thus, my div yield is tremendous.

Good to have all the facts before making any conclusions.