Still doesn't make sense to me why they waited that long. Also, wouldn't it make sense to say that if they made the sens announcement a lot earlier that the guys would have lost out on A LOT of money before their sell orders went through? Doesn't conveniently timing your sens announcements basically count as insider trading?
Pinnacle Holdings
#41
Posted 19 September 2014 - 09:31 AM
My posts are my opinion and shouldn't be seen as investment advise from me or the view of the organisation I work for.
Do your own research before engaging in trades/investments
#42
Posted 18 September 2014 - 07:36 PM
There is no smoke without a fire, don't be fooled by this nonsense.
People who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do. (Isaac Asimov)
#43
Posted 18 September 2014 - 02:12 PM
#44
Posted 12 September 2014 - 09:43 AM
So you would have preferred management sticking to old policy even though their situation radically changed?
"Colourful" times call for change. That's how you manage a business.
Sitting back and saying, "o well, that's what we do every year..." That would worry me.
No you misunderstood me mate. I agree,management should change their dividend policy when circumstances change.
Because of the asymmetry of information, management generally have a better idea of what's happening within the company. Changes in management behaviour (in this case, dividend policy) often-times reveal they're true beliefs about the circumstances of the business. The issue is not the change itself, its analysts' understanding of what the change says about the company's true circumstance. (which they interpreted in a negative light).
I prefer nothing. I don't hold (and have never held the share)...
Yes, I will take your money!
#45
Posted 09 September 2014 - 09:57 AM
So you would have preferred management sticking to old policy even though their situation radically changed?
"Colourful" times call for change. That's how you manage a business.
Sitting back and saying, "o well, that's what we do every year..." That would worry me.
#46
Posted 08 September 2014 - 02:24 PM
The issue is not that they pay or don't pay the dividend.
The issue is a change of dividend policy at a time when they announced their first set of bad results, after a colourful few months.
Yes, I will take your money!
#47
Posted 08 September 2014 - 11:08 AM
No divvie, that's not good, not good at all
"The Group wishes to preserve its cash resources to ensure that
gearing reduces to more acceptable levels and that it invests
into growth areas of the business."
Who holds PNC for the dividend??
(was 1 point something % last year) 1.8% i think?
Agree with previous 2 comments.
I would have been more worried if they just paid out another div. for the sake of it.
Build balance sheet, pay off debt, continue acquisitions + expansion.
#48
Posted 05 September 2014 - 02:39 PM
Management did the prudent thing. I managed to sell a lot at 1360c. Am nibbling at 1150 and lower. The stock is trading on a PE of 7x, okay for me!
#49
Posted 05 September 2014 - 02:35 PM
No divvie, that's not good, not good at all
"The Group wishes to preserve its cash resources to ensure that
gearing reduces to more acceptable levels and that it invests
into growth areas of the business."
That's not necessarily a bad thing
#50
Posted 05 September 2014 - 02:07 PM
No divvie, that's not good, not good at all
"The Group wishes to preserve its cash resources to ensure that
gearing reduces to more acceptable levels and that it invests
into growth areas of the business."
#51
Posted 05 September 2014 - 02:07 PM
Results out.
#52
Posted 28 August 2014 - 01:26 PM
Profits looking good so far, but the question is sell now and buy again later (at a lower price) or hold on and ride out the volatility.
#53
Posted 27 August 2014 - 10:30 AM
Mustek's results out this morning. PNC down 2,82%...
Mustek's results:
Revenue
R4,76 billion
+13,4%
(2013 : R4,20 billion)
Headline earnings per share
100,72 cents
+38,3%
(2013 : 72,85 cents)
Net asset value per share
858,67 cents
+12,7%
(2013 : 762,10 cents)
Dividend per share
28 cents
+40%
(2013 : 20 cents)
(Just interesting, don't own either)
#54 Guest_Bandido_*
Posted 26 August 2014 - 10:13 AM
I got them at R15. 8500 now keep for a while and make moola
#55
Posted 26 August 2014 - 10:05 AM
Bought 1500c, TP 1650c
#56
Posted 26 August 2014 - 08:46 AM
The stock is probably worth closer to 1600c post this event. Now the question is was Tshivhase ever guilty, or was it simply a case of a corrupt officer wanting a bribe and never getting it. We will never know.
I am sitting on a pile of shares, thank you whoever was dumping at any price!
#57
Posted 26 August 2014 - 07:45 AM
@ Merlin
I see your point but then, at the same time, you cannot then go and assume he was probably guilty.
There may have been lack of evidence because there was no evidence or fabricated.
You could then, by the same token, assume that the "officer of the state" was in fact corrupt and was trying to falsely implicate Mr Tshivhase.
And we all know about corrupt state officials don't we ?
Anyway, the outcome is still the same, he was not "proven" guilty and Pinnacle share was up 43.65% at the end of trade.
Happy trading brother!
#58
Posted 25 August 2014 - 06:56 PM
Correction Zoner, it did not say he was not guilty - what was said was "that after careful consideration of the evidence at their disposal and consultation with, and evaluation of the reliability of all the state witnesses, the SCCU has come to the conclusion that the evidence presented is insufficient to provide a reasonable prospect of a successful prosecution. The charges against Mr Tshivhase will accordingly be withdrawn.
That is a huge difference to not guilty - it means in all probability that he is guilty but that the state did not have enough evidence against him - his word against an officer of the state.
there can be more stumbles for PNC - the insider trading charges by PNC directors still have to become dripping egg on PNCs face to come! my second hand reading of the Sens was of the one director having lack of evidence against him! all of the other directors in the clear?
#59
Posted 25 August 2014 - 06:07 PM
Correction Zoner, it did not say he was not guilty - what was said was "that after careful consideration of the evidence at their disposal and consultation with, and evaluation of the reliability of all the state witnesses, the SCCU has come to the conclusion that the evidence presented is insufficient to provide a reasonable prospect of a successful prosecution. The charges against Mr Tshivhase will accordingly be withdrawn.
That is a huge difference to not guilty - it means in all probability that he is guilty but that the state did not have enough evidence against him - his word against an officer of the state.
Share just jumped up to 35% in the last 10 min... not guilty!
1330c
People who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do. (Isaac Asimov)
#60
Posted 25 August 2014 - 04:49 PM
Sold.
Winner, winner... got me a chicken dinner