Baobab – take out at 6p – another superb short call and a reminder of a range of morons abuse

Comments

1. ---

   Adge

   27 February 2015, 10:16

   I do not understand these people. You warn them a share is overvalued. Instead of heeding your warnings, they then villify and abuse you. But you are proved right more often than not.
   I can think of only one word to describe them. – Morons.

2. ---

   B Sanderson

   27 February 2015, 10:34

   Robert on this site wrote a number of articles on this is he also a moron?

3. ---

   Tom Winnifrith

   27 February 2015, 10:39

   BS

   No Robert Tyerman got it wrong but did not respond to my pieces with comments about delivering pizza etc so he is not a moron.

   You, BS, clearly are.

   T

4. ---

   B Sanderson

   27 February 2015, 13:55

   i didn’t say anything about your pizza so please don’t twist. I do believe I said I don’t really like pizza so your place would not be of interest. That’s no dig to you. I don’t like pizza. I asked a question about articles that appear here and whether that writer was a moron because you called people in that share them. Again you will say this is your site you can say what you like. But you talk about free speech and because I ask that question you call me a moron. I can see why the site looks at comments but also isn’t that against free speech.

5. ---

   wildrides

   27 February 2015, 14:29

   The independent Directors of BAO will not be accepting the offer ………….. They know it undervalues the asset . Therefore Vote NO to the offer and VOTE NO to delisting at the subsequent EGM.

   I Quote from the offer document directly that the independent directors are not taking Cannacords advice to accept the offer . They know it is worth more :-

   “Recommendation regarding the Offer

   The Independent Directors believe that, given the current financial status of the Company, the Offer represents a certain opportunity for Shareholders to realise the value of their Shares at a significant premium of 41.2 per cent. to the previous closing price. The Independent Directors, who have been so advised by Canaccord Genuity Limited, as the independent financial adviser for the purposes of Rule 3 of the Takeover Code, when taking into account the current financial status of the Company, believe the terms of the Offer to be fair and reasonable and recommend that Shareholders accept the Offer.

   In providing its advice to the Independent Directors, Canaccord Genuity Limited has taken into account the commercial assessments of the Independent Directors.

   Despite their recommendation, the Independent Directors who are Shareholders, namely Ben James and Jeremy Dowler, are not intending to accept the Offer for their entire shareholding. Ben James is not intending to accept the Offer for any of his Shares and Jeremy Dowler is intending to accept the Offer in relation to 1,500,000 Shares of the 8,840,169 Shares he beneficially owns, and to retain the balance of his Shares. Jeremy Dowler further intends to reinvest the proceeds from his partial acceptance of the Offer in any future capital raise of the Company.

   Ben James and Jeremy Dowler believe that the inherent value of the Project may be able to be realised in the future as part of an unquoted company and are therefore willing to maintain a shareholding in the Company.”

   Says it all really ………… the directors and one shareholder (35% holding) have got together to steel the asset from shareholders.

6. ---

   JB

   27 February 2015, 21:13

   Wildey – your conspiracy theory that it is a stitch up between the major shareholder and two directors is surely a paranoid step too far, even for this website. Much more likely that Tom was right back in Feb ’13 – it’s a junior company, with a mega project, in iron ore, no cash is available from the market, the only oxygen available is from the major shareholder, who is already so committed they either stump up or lose the lot, and as a condition of providing further support they lock existing management in and prevent them from cashing out.

7. ---

   wildrides

   28 February 2015, 04:06

   Not just the two directors ……. all the directors . They should have put the project on “care and maintainance” until the ore price improves . Its a great asset which will be needed one day . Even mega dilution would be better for share holders . They can then bottom draw it for 2-5 years and have a chance of recovering losses by using average down techniques , investing precisely at the point of the ore price upturn.
   The critical thing is shareholders are being denied the chance to remain involved simply because of the deliberate removing of the share from a tradeable market and insertion of a clause in the prospectus removing all “off exchange” share holder rights after five years . This means in effect “ we want to steal the asset from you now , but if you have the audacity to even think of being a share holder “off tradeable exchange” then dont even bother because we will just cancel your shares in five years time and rob you of your asset then instead “ Both ways you lose sucker .It was always the intention to get sucker shareholders to pay for development “up to a point” and then nick the asset off them just before the final hurdle . BHR anyone ? Its easy to engineer and happens time and time again on AIM . The current down turn just gave them an easy excuse to hide the intent and deception .

   Tom just got lucky on this one ………… the China market for steel slumped ……….. but …….. the China market for steel might not have slumped had China played their cards in a different way . Macro events enabled this ……….. not fraud ……… which is Toms unquestionable area of expertise .

8. ---

   JB

   28 February 2015, 06:43

   Wildey – I agree it is a great project. The problem is it is too great, and far too big for Baobab to develop on its own. So inevitably they are going to need a big brother, which in turn means that Baobab shareholders’ economic interest is inevitably going to be heavily diluted. And now you want to park the share at (1p?) and accept even further dilution in a few years time when conditions improve, instead of accepting 6p now? I can understand you being angry that the share price is no longer at the 35p of a couple of years ago, but in the context of today, surely 6p is a great get-out price? Or stay in, as the directors are, and take your chances.

9. ---

   kingoldby

   28 February 2015, 14:03

   B SANDERSON, you apparently do not understand what free speech means. Free speech means that you can say and wriie whatever you want, it also means that the private owners of a website have absolutely no obligation whatsoever to publish what you write.

   And making references to pizzas when replying to a discussion of business prospects, you do give pretty good evidence that you are a moron.