Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Forterra Trust (formerly: Treasury China Trust)
03-12-2014, 12:00 PM.
Post: #481
RE: Forterra Trust (formerly: Treasury China Trust)
So no other insti or >5% shareholder declared they sold?
=========== Signature ===========
Before you speak, listen. Before you write, think. Before you spend, earn. Before you invest, investigate. Before you criticize, wait. Before you pray, forgive. Before you quit, try. Before you retire, save. Before you die, give. –William A. Ward

Think Asset-Business-Structure (ABS)

Find Reply
03-12-2014, 12:13 PM.
Post: #482
RE: Forterra Trust (formerly: Treasury China Trust)
(03-12-2014, 12:00 PM)specuvestor Wrote: So no other insti or >5% shareholder declared they sold?

PAG declared.
Credit Suisse Group declared.
Only left APG (about 8.5% stake) yet to declare.
=========== Signature ===========
Research, research and research - Please do your own due diligence (DYODD) before you invest - Any reliance on my analysis is SOLELY at your own risk.

Find Reply
03-12-2014, 12:42 PM. (This post was last modified: 03-12-2014, 12:43 PM by opmi.)
Post: #483
Forterra Trust (formerly: Treasury China Trust)
APG must have sold. If not, the no free float suspension notice will be out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalki
=========== Signature ===========
"... but quitting while you're ahead is not the same as quitting." - Quote from the movie American Gangster

Find Reply
03-12-2014, 04:18 PM. (This post was last modified: 03-12-2014, 04:21 PM by specuvestor.)
Post: #484
RE: Forterra Trust (formerly: Treasury China Trust)
(27-11-2014, 03:54 PM)specuvestor Wrote:
(26-11-2014, 07:02 PM)GreedandFear Wrote:
(26-11-2014, 12:07 PM)specuvestor Wrote:
(24-11-2014, 10:28 AM)opmi Wrote:
(24-11-2014, 10:25 AM)sQQs Wrote: Thank you all for the update.
I will divert @ $2.25

since it is unconditional offer now, can get money back faster than conditional offer. if accept offer.

No need to pay brokers comm...unless you need to feed your brokers...

Pretty strange why people selling 17m shares a day when this stock is supposed to be tightly held according to the AR.

Unless of course they are stockist on behalf of the buyer... like what Ackman did with Allergan but in much larger scale

I would think NF should be happy to keep FT as a >50% owned listed ATM.

I am sure that we will see some disclosure of changes in share ownership by some of the major shareholders in the next few days (just as we have now seen the disclosure of PAG's sale). What Ackman did was different. He bought shares, in the market, up to the 10% limit that a financial investor is allowed to without disclosure. Then he disclosed that he was acting in concert with Valeant. If any of the major shareholders of Forterra are acting in concert with Nan Fung, they would have had to disclose this in the offer documents...

Not sure if you understand what I'm trying to say.

Major institutional holders don't sell in drip and draps in a GO which is why forumers can guess who are the sellers. They cross out trades in off-market to reduce comm while receiving cash in T+3 rather than 6 weeks later.

Stockists are supposed to be "invisible" and even CDP could only see the custodian bank as counterparty. Same logic why SLS treat Nets sale and cash sale differently (if you get my drift) Acting-in-concert is a heavy legal obligation, and if the insti funds are involved, they will surely have to declare. See Serial System Eddie Chng case or last year's 3 kings penny stock case

What Ackman done is no different from the stockists in principle, which is why the lawsuit. The difference is the size and the "transparency" because he is insti. Ackman is winning on the legality

I could be wrong. Let's see who the 200+ shareholders are selling such amounts.

(03-12-2014, 12:13 PM)Boon Wrote:
(03-12-2014, 12:00 PM)specuvestor Wrote: So no other insti or >5% shareholder declared they sold?

PAG declared.
Credit Suisse Group declared.
Only left APG (about 8.5% stake) yet to declare.

Thanks Boon I was referring to if there were any declaration post the discussions last week. I think the stockists has done their job.

Even at 87% acceptance IMHO I think it is not NF desire to delist. That's why stock is now below 225. Let's see.
=========== Signature ===========
Before you speak, listen. Before you write, think. Before you spend, earn. Before you invest, investigate. Before you criticize, wait. Before you pray, forgive. Before you quit, try. Before you retire, save. Before you die, give. –William A. Ward

Think Asset-Business-Structure (ABS)

Find Reply
03-12-2014, 11:37 PM.
Post: #485
RE: Forterra Trust (formerly: Treasury China Trust)
NF itself is not listed. With an initial stake of 29+% stake, till 87%, i believe NF will exercise its right to compulsory acquire FT if it cross over 90%

Find Reply
04-12-2014, 11:37 AM.
Post: #486
RE: Forterra Trust (formerly: Treasury China Trust)
(03-12-2014, 11:37 PM)cloud_soon Wrote: NF itself is not listed. With an initial stake of 29+% stake, till 87%, i believe NF will exercise its right to compulsory acquire FT if it cross over 90%

Yes, they already said they WILL if cross 90%

Find Reply
04-12-2014, 11:40 AM.
Post: #487
RE: Forterra Trust (formerly: Treasury China Trust)
as at 03-Dec2014; Already control Aggregate=227,287,793 Units (88.43%)
1) Based on Current IssShrs of 257,019,717 => Only need another 4,029,952 shrs (1.57%) to hit 90% Mandatory Acquisition Level

2) if based on MAX potential IssShrs of 259,529,717 => need another 6,288,952 shrs (2.42%) to hit 90% Mandatory Acquisition Level

but if all the additional 2.51m new Units (if Units Options get excercised) are from friendly parties and will ACCEPT OFFER,
then its down to ONLY 3,778,952 shrs (1.46%) to 90% Mandatory level.

Find Reply
04-12-2014, 11:47 AM.
Post: #488
Forterra Trust (formerly: Treasury China Trust)
If options held by directors and employees, they will tender. That's why must vote against share Options scheme for those likely privatization targets.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalki
=========== Signature ===========
"... but quitting while you're ahead is not the same as quitting." - Quote from the movie American Gangster

Find Reply
04-12-2014, 04:18 PM.
Post: #489
RE: Forterra Trust (formerly: Treasury China Trust)
(04-12-2014, 11:47 AM)opmi Wrote: If options held by directors and employees, they will tender. That's why must vote against share Options scheme for those likely privatization targets.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalki

hmm very true, this is easily overlooked in most cases

Find Reply
08-12-2014, 06:42 PM.
Post: #490
RE: Forterra Trust (formerly: Treasury China Trust)
Interesting piece of advice on the offer - "not fair but reasonable"
______________________________________________________

10.
CIMB’S ADVICE ON THE OFFER
After carefully considering all available information and based on our assessment of the financial terms of the Revised Offer, we are of opinion that on balance, the financial terms of the offer are not fair but reasonable.

IDs concur.

http://infopub.sgx.com/FileOpen/Forterra...eID=327335
=========== Signature ===========
Research, research and research - Please do your own due diligence (DYODD) before you invest - Any reliance on my analysis is SOLELY at your own risk.

Find Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
Valuebuddies.com | Return to Top | Lite (Archive) Mode | RSS Syndication | CONTACT US: nas......@valuebuddies.com | | Share Buy-Back | Disclosure of Interest