The CWU has to be more vocal about this useless Board

[wdo1256]

If you receive your AGM voting papers through, vote accordingly to your feelings on re-appointment of the board and their pay which can be rejected - If memory serves me right it was close to 10% last year and that with us having 5% of the shares its not just us unhappy with the board.

Sorry to disappoint, but even after the industrial dispute we had, at the last AGM the votes 'for' approval of the Directors remuneration report and remuneration policy were 99.18 % and 97.88 % respectively.

The lowest 'for' % vote to re-elect directors was Baroness Hogg at 93.94 %.

I agree that it seems that we are against it getting rid of the board,

Two years ago 7.3 % voted against Keith Williams and 11.20% voted against Baroness Hogg being re-appointed.
If a few of the major shareholders feel betrayed by the board agreeing to the low offer from Daniel Kretinsky they might vote or abstain against the board.
Let's face it these are the best business leaders in the country then god help the UK.

[Barnacle]

If you receive your AGM voting papers through, vote accordingly to your feelings on re-appointment of the board and their pay which can be rejected - If memory serves me right it was close to 10% last year and that with us having 5% of the shares its not just us unhappy with the board.

Sorry to disappoint, but even after the industrial dispute we had, at the last AGM the votes 'for' approval of the Directors remuneration report and remuneration policy were 99.18 % and 97.88 % respectively.

The lowest 'for' % vote to re-elect directors was Baroness Hogg at 93.94 %.

I agree that it seems that we are against it getting rid of the board,

Two years ago 7.3 % voted against Keith Williams and 11.20% voted against Baroness Hogg being re-appointed.
If a few of the major shareholders feel betrayed by the board agreeing to the low offer from Daniel Kretinsky they might vote or abstain against the board.
Let's face it these are the best business leaders in the country then god help the UK.

Wouldn’t a new owner install a new board one way or another? That’s what usually happens.

[wdo1256]

If you receive your AGM voting papers through, vote accordingly to your feelings on re-appointment of the board and their pay which can be rejected - If memory serves me right it was close to 10% last year and that with us having 5% of the shares its not just us unhappy with the board.

Sorry to disappoint, but even after the industrial dispute we had, at the last AGM the votes 'for' approval of the Directors remuneration report and remuneration policy were 99.18 % and 97.88 % respectively.

The lowest 'for' % vote to re-elect directors was Baroness Hogg at 93.94 %.

I agree that it seems that we are against it getting rid of the board,

Two years ago 7.3 % voted against Keith Williams and 11.20% voted against Baroness Hogg being re-appointed.
If a few of the major shareholders feel betrayed by the board agreeing to the low offer from Daniel Kretinsky they might vote or abstain against the board.
Let's face it these are the best business leaders in the country then god help the UK.

Wouldn’t a new owner install a new board one way or another? That’s what usually happens.

Depends what Daniel promised the board between the 1st and 2nd offer, (just speculation) see below

17/ Daniel Kretinsky came in with an offer of £3.20 per share and the board called it “Opportunistic” yet a week later they accepted it an offer of £3.60 per share plus 10p in dividends. How can someone offering 12% more suddenly be an acceptable deal?

18/ What was said to the board during that week, it makes you wonder what promises were made to the board to make them change their minds so quickly, do you trust them?

20/ If this is such a good deal why have none off the other major shareholders listed below given it their approval, because it is rubbish and they put their shareholders interest first, it’s only the Royal Mail board who think that this is a good deal.

[wdo1256]

Reason 21 to get rid of this board

This proposal is going to cost us £56.9 million in expenses

Win win for the board they get money from the buyout and it didn't cost them a penny as it comes out of the business.

[postslippete]

Ultimately, money talks. Advisors and banks like Goldman Sachs, Barclays and JP Morgan who are working on the takeover of RM financially are in line to pocket anywhere from £130 -£150million in fees.

The offer could also be worth up to £3 million for RM current and former directors. Martin Seidenberg himself stands to reap millions of pounds from bonus shares, some of which was granted as recently as this month. For us postal workers who own roughly 5% of the total shares may also benefit financially.

DK offer relies on a acceptance of at least 75% of all the shares issued and as he already holds nearly 28%, it will rely on the other large investors. We have not really heard their thoughts about the new improved offer of 370p a share - but IDS shares are currently worth 322p right now so it's a decent increase. The last time these shares were at 370p a share was 2 years ago and we have had industrial disputes and financial losses since then so they may be tempted to sell.

And as for the next government approval, they will be more concerned with building a cabinet and stabilising the economy. Labour have zero interest in re-nationalisation.

[wdo1256]

Ultimately, money talks. Advisors and banks like Goldman Sachs, Barclays and JP Morgan who are working on the takeover of RM financially are in line to pocket anywhere from £130 -£150million in fees.

The offer could also be worth up to £3 million for RM current and former directors. Martin Seidenberg himself stands to reap millions of pounds from bonus shares, some of which was granted as recently as this month. For us postal workers who own roughly 5% of the total shares may also benefit financially.

DK offer relies on a acceptance of at least 75% of all the shares issued and as he already holds nearly 28%, it will rely on the other large investors. We have not really heard their thoughts about the new improved offer of 370p a share - but IDS shares are currently worth 322p right now so it's a decent increase. The last time these shares were at 370p a share was 2 years ago and we have had industrial disputes and financial losses since then so they may be tempted to sell.

And as for the next government approval, they will be more concerned with building a cabinet and stabilising the economy. Labour have zero interest in re-nationalisation.

We are a money tree to certain people.

I think that the 75% is going to harder than expected, the other large investors are not going for it, most staff who own shares will vote against it and members of the public in theory won't go for it.

One good thing is that both right and left wing papers are critical of the board, and questioning the boards attitude and inept actions to DK.

Phase one reject the DK offer
Phase two get rid of this board that has cost us millions and millions in mistakes
Phase three play Foden in his best position in the euros

[postslippete]

Phase three play Foden in his best position in the euros

Nah, he could have just waited until Sunday and then gone back home with the rest of the squad.

[clashcityrocker]

I think that the 75% is going to harder than expected, the other large investors are not going for it, most staff who own shares will vote against it and members of the public in theory won't go for it.

Which large investors?
How do you know what most staff are going to do?
Ditto members of the public?

[wdo1256]

I think that the 75% is going to harder than expected, the other large investors are not going for it, most staff who own shares will vote against it and members of the public in theory won't go for it.

Which large investors?
How do you know what most staff are going to do?
Ditto members of the public?

Listed on my original message was 20 reason to vote against the board plus the top 10 shareholders.

The large investors from No 2 to 10 own between 2% - 7.8% shares each, none of these have backed the deal so I’m hoping that they will vote against / not back the deal.

I don’t know how staff will vote, but I can’t see many voting for it. Would you endorse it ?

I haven’t seen one article in the press backing the deal so the public might vote against it.

Also a lot of people don’t bother and ignore forms.

[clashcityrocker]

The large investors from No 2 to 10 own between 2% - 7.8% shares each, none of these have backed the deal so I’m hoping that they will vote against / not back the deal.

You haven't got a clue what any of them will do, have you?
Most of them probably don't conduct their business in public.

What do you "hope" will happen to the share price if the deal doesn't go through?

[wdo1256]

[quote=wdo1256 post_id=<a href="tel:1095985">1095985</a> time=<a href="tel:1719763182">1719763182</a> user_id=503]

The large investors from No 2 to 10 own between 2% - 7.8% shares each, none of these have backed the deal so I’m hoping that they will vote against / not back the deal.

You haven't got a clue what any of them will do, have you?
Most of them probably don't conduct their business in public.

What do you "hope" will happen to the share price if the deal doesn't go through?
[/quote]


I answered your questions and you asked more in response. First you asked who the large shareholders were, I answered and now you are critical because I haven’t a clue how they will vote. All I know is that they hold 42% of shares and DK needs them.
It seems strange to me that none of the major shareholders have come out in support DK.

Last time you also mentioned that I didn’t know how staff would vote, that is correct however I replied that I couldn’t see many members of staff voting for it and asked if you would endorsed the offer from DK.

You also said that I didn’t know how the public is going to vote, that is correct but I pointed out that nobody in the press has backed DK therefore this might sway the public.

Finally you ask what I hope for the share price if this deal doesn’t go through. To answer your last question I don’t care about the share price as I’m more concerned who owns Royal Mail and what their intentions are rather that how much they are worth.

[clashcityrocker]

I answered your questions and you asked more in response. First you asked who the large shareholders were, I answered

If you want to be pedantic - I asked which large shareholders weren't backing the deal because you said "the large investors are not going for it".
That remains to be seen. I suspect that Mr Kretinsky has had conversations with them and he might have an idea as to how they will vote.
You haven't had any conversations with any of them and you have nothing to back up your assertion (with the exception of Threadneedle St).
What is certain is none of them carry out their business on social media. So your assertion that the large shareholders are not going for it is just (wild) speculation/wishful thinking.

As for the public and the staff - if they don't sell they could well find themselves in a very difficult situation where they hold shares in a business that is no longer listed on the stock exchange. Vote no and your shares may be worthless.

Of course if the deal doesn't go through then the share price may plummet leaving the business vulnerable to a takeover by another individual/hedge fund. The offer price may well be lower than Mr Kretinsky is offering now. But of course you don't care what happens to the share price do you?

And I don't see Starmer wanting to spook the markets by vetoing the deal.
Fun times ahead......

[yellowbelly]

I answered your questions and you asked more in response. First you asked who the large shareholders were, I answered

If you want to be pedantic - I asked which large shareholders weren't backing the deal because you said "the large investors are not going for it".
That remains to be seen. I suspect that Mr Kretinsky has had conversations with them and he might have an idea as to how they will vote.
You haven't had any conversations with any of them and you have nothing to back up your assertion (with the exception of Threadneedle St).
What is certain is none of them carry out their business on social media. So your assertion that the large shareholders are not going for it is just (wild) speculation/wishful thinking.

As for the public and the staff - if they don't sell they could well find themselves in a very difficult situation where they hold shares in a business that is no longer listed on the stock exchange. Vote no and your shares may be worthless.

Of course if the deal doesn't go through then the share price may plummet leaving the business vulnerable to a takeover by another individual/hedge fund. The offer price may well be lower than Mr Kretinsky is offering now. But of course you don't care what happens to the share price do you?

And I don't see Starmer wanting to spook the markets by vetoing the deal.
Fun times ahead......

Clash - agree with you about the suits - they'll be keeping their cards very close to their chests. In the city money talks - nothing else.

However you can't 'not sell' your shares if the deal goes through. They'll be bought off you whether you like it or not.

[clashcityrocker]

However you can't 'not sell' your shares if the deal goes through. They'll be bought off you whether you like it or not.

My understanding is this:

If you do not accept the offer but it goes through you will not be automatically bought out. Technically you may end up being a shareholder in a private company, which is highly unattractive as you will not be able to trade your shares and have limited information as to what is going on. There will be no dividends. The exception to this is if acceptances get to 90% at which point under Company Act provisions DK can forcibly buy you out at the offer price.

[postslippete]

My understanding is this:

If you do not accept the offer but it goes through you will not be automatically bought out. Technically you may end up being a shareholder in a private company, which is highly unattractive as you will not be able to trade your shares and have limited information as to what is going on. There will be no dividends. The exception to this is if acceptances get to 90% at which point under Company Act provisions DK can forcibly buy you out at the offer price.

That is true. Whilst we hold a minority stake in the company and Kretinsky needs at least 75% for the offer to be accepted, if you don't accept the offer online then you could potentially be left holding shares in a delisted company and they will quickly drop in value and/or be very difficult to sell. Obviously, if Bidco gets over 90% acceptance of the deal then they will be sold regardless of your wishes anyway.

If it were me I would just accept the deal.