bosley
- 20 Feb 2004 09:34
hewittalan6
- 18 Apr 2006 12:34
- 16021 of 27111
Not very significant really, Tony.
The constitution of most companies allows for the purchase of its own shares at any time, but the mandate to do so, and the very strict rules over how many, how much and when has to be reviewed at every AGM and refreshed for the coming 12 months.
Standard AGM resolution, I believe.
Alan
Fred1new
- 18 Apr 2006 12:51
- 16022 of 27111
I think it depends on whether they are kept as treasury stocks or not. If treasury then that should not really effect the sp and "resold" later or can be used to fund acquisitions or options etc.
I think possibly without requiring an AGM
The overall value of the company is to effected.
But check what I have written.
JJS
- 18 Apr 2006 12:57
- 16023 of 27111
Hello again,
It looks like I did speak too soon, with the SP changing direction soon after I last posted :(
I wonder if the MMs are working an order, as we don't usually see this much volatility on such low volumes ?
JJS
- 18 Apr 2006 13:00
- 16024 of 27111
Tony,
Might I suggest that the buyback could be used as a blocking move, to prevent a hostile takeover bid ?
If you add up the number of shares already tightly held, and add the 10% buyback, then see whats left, is it than less than 50% of the stock ?
Tonyrelaxes
- 18 Apr 2006 13:18
- 16025 of 27111
Thanks all.
My query was really about any significance of the specific number of shares involved - neither a round number nor a specific percentage.
The reasons for buybacks can only be good.
Further query - is there a "closed period" during which the Company cannot buy back ahead of news that could affect the SP? If not it arrears the Directors could use their knowledge of upcoming events/announcements to buy back for the benefit of both the Company and Shareholders - a thoroughly good move!
oblomov
- 18 Apr 2006 13:45
- 16026 of 27111
Hello again, JJS
I take it you're not going to answer my question then, and we dont really know whether Howard was in the States last week - he could have been at the South Pole for all we really know.
Tonyrelaxes
- 18 Apr 2006 14:03
- 16027 of 27111
Oblo [ Hi :-) ]
See my post 16015 re Howard's travels.
oblomov
- 18 Apr 2006 14:10
- 16028 of 27111
Thanks Tony - already did. Just being argumentative!
Still like to know how these things get started, though. You read things on these BB's that people post with authority and you wonder 'how can they possibly know that?' - Know what I mean? If it originated from PM1, 'nuff said, nothing surprises!
I think JJS, having made the post, you could have answered even if to say you were just copying an unsubstantiated post from elsewhere. Like I said, fact is we dont know where Howard was last week, so why pretend we do?
PapalPower
- 18 Apr 2006 14:31
- 16029 of 27111
Tony, it would be good if this is a new addition to the special resolutions !! If it is it would mean they expect soon to have enough cash flow to start buying back their shares to, as you say, concentrate and therefore increase the value.
Perhaps the filter tow patent is in fact going to be very valuable :) ????
rpaco
- 18 Apr 2006 14:44
- 16030 of 27111
I believe that buy backs are also used to provide shares for employee share schemes and for directors options/emoluments/get rich quick schemes. However if they cancel 10% it will enhance the price.
Tonyrelaxes
- 18 Apr 2006 14:56
- 16031 of 27111
PapalP
I cannot find my copy of the Annual Report y/e 31 Oct 2004 to see it this is a new item or not.
rpaco
I think employee share scheme etc issues come from new, previously unissued shares. Pages 43 and 44 of latest Annnual report shows numbers of shares which can be issued in the future under various Employee and Management Incentive schemes.
niceonecyril
- 18 Apr 2006 14:59
- 16032 of 27111
Would such buy back have an adverse effect on the SP,
ie;to keep at a lower price could be advantageous to the company?
cyril
Tonyrelaxes
- 18 Apr 2006 15:33
- 16033 of 27111
Cyril.
Not so sure a buy back lowers the price. Thinking about it, in theory it should be neutral at that time.
In the books a buy back depletes cash but at the same time reduces the number of shares that participate in the remaining net assets.
A buy back reduces the number of shares in circulation so each remaining share has a greater proportion of the Company's Market Cap.
Presumably Directors will only carry out a buy back if they think the overall market worth of the Company is to rise more than market anticipation.
Directors have a better idea of what news is in the pipeline so could use that knowledge to the Company' shareholder's advantage by reducing the number of shares in circulation with a buy back prior to releasing that news or its resulting profits.
Hence my query about a possible Closed Period or such activities.
I have no idea of the tax implications for the Company of buy back transactions or how differences between Nominal Value and Price are dealt with - possibly via the Share Premium Account.
JJS
- 18 Apr 2006 16:55
- 16034 of 27111
Hello oblomov,
I know that Howard is in the USA, whether you believe me is not a concern of mine.
Like a good chef, I never reveal the secret of my sauces !
zscrooge
- 18 Apr 2006 17:07
- 16035 of 27111
The cut n paste chef. LOL
oblomov
- 18 Apr 2006 17:11
- 16036 of 27111
Hello JJS.
I hope I dont appear churlish, but if you are not prepared to substantient claims, please dont post them. We've had so much rubbish in the past 'I KNOW theres going to be a cash call...', 'I KNOW theres an important RNS this week..', etc. - so many 'I Know's' from people who dont know. It's too easy for rampers/bashers to post with the rider 'I dont reveal my sources' - doesn't help anyone. Moan over.
JJS
- 18 Apr 2006 17:36
- 16037 of 27111
Were the 400k and 700k the orders being worked as I posted earlier ?
JJS - 18 Apr 2006 12:57 - 16023 of 16036
Hello again,
It looks like I did speak too soon, with the SP changing direction soon after I last posted :(
I wonder if the MMs are working an order, as we don't usually see this much volatility on such low volumes ?
JJS
- 18 Apr 2006 17:42
- 16038 of 27111
Hello oblomov,
Feel free to contact Howard, or any of the directors, or even the investor relations department, and I am 100% sure that someone will confirm that Howard is in the USA, as it didn't take me much effort to find out in the first place.
The way I look at it, is that if Howard is in the USA it is to discuss deals at the highest level, whether or not any deal will come from this visit, is up to each individual to guess.
oblomov
- 18 Apr 2006 18:44
- 16039 of 27111
JJS,
Now you even know what he's there to discuss - 'deals at the highest level' no less!
Have you got him bugged, or are you just making it up?
explosive
- 18 Apr 2006 19:22
- 16040 of 27111
Maybe hes just there on holiday!!