Jump to content


Photo
* * * * - 6 votes

Steinhoff


  • Please log in to reply
12871 replies to this topic

#1 Tiekkie

Tiekkie

    Little Master

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 520 posts
  • LocationPort Elizabeth

Posted Today, 06:39 PM

https://www.biznews....mostert-viljoen

Piedt taking him apart
  • 0

#2 Tiekkie

Tiekkie

    Little Master

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 520 posts
  • LocationPort Elizabeth

Posted Today, 06:38 PM

https://www.biznews....mostert-viljoen
  • 0

#3 Bushmanbob

Bushmanbob

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 56 posts

Posted Today, 05:06 PM

but they had an option to take shares or cash....so they have to take the risk like everyone els when you buy shares

I agree Tiekkie - Shareholders at the time had paid for their shares in SNH.  TT guys didn't pay cash but they exchanged their company for shares.  There is no difference in the sense that everyone who held shares paid something for them be it cash or as an equity swap (in the case of TT guys).  How then do TT guys think their claim is any different from anyone else? 

I mean can you tell me the difference between TT guys claim and the claim of institutional or retail investors who had purchased R3.2 Billion of SNH stock?  The TT chaps swapped R3.2 billion in SNH equity for their business, the investors swapped R3.2 bill in cash for SNH shares - no difference, in fact as has been discussed numerous times, the TT boys were better off because their business was actually worth significantly less than the R3.2billion premium price SNH offered.

Everyone who had shares at the time when news emerged of the alleged fraud (and at this stage is has been alleged, never proven in a court of law) has the same grounds for claim as the TT guys which is precisely why the Global Settlement is in progress.  They should be classified the same way as everyone else who held shares at that point.  

Man alive.... I think SNH should issue all shareholders who have held shares for longer than 6 months, with blood pressure medication.  Or we should mount a class action suit against TT boys for our pain and suffering.


  • 0

#4 Tiekkie

Tiekkie

    Little Master

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 520 posts
  • LocationPort Elizabeth

Posted Today, 04:04 PM

When I bought shares in 2019 it was at R6....and I lost 90% of my value....I have been accumulated ever since to average down .....patience was the order of the day
  • 0

#5 Tiekkie

Tiekkie

    Little Master

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 520 posts
  • LocationPort Elizabeth

Posted Today, 04:01 PM

Well splitting hairs, the CEO should take responsibility...thats just my thoughts on this..but that is where I see their point would be..they couldnt cash in..

but they had an option to take shares or cash....so they have to take the risk like everyone els when you buy shares
  • 0

#6 Midas1

Midas1

    Sage

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,285 posts

Posted Today, 02:56 PM

I dont think they would have a case if the shares had just done a small dip,,or medium dip, its the fact that a large amount went down to nothing..due to books being cooked


  • 0

#7 Midas1

Midas1

    Sage

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,285 posts

Posted Today, 02:54 PM

a company can't commit fraud. People in the company committed the fraud

Well splitting hairs, the CEO should take responsibility...thats just my thoughts on this..but that is where I see their point would be..they couldnt cash in..


  • 0

#8 Tiekkie

Tiekkie

    Little Master

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 520 posts
  • LocationPort Elizabeth

Posted Today, 02:44 PM

I hear you all, the only thing I think was dodgy if TT wasnt allowed to sell those SNH shares for a few years....one would have to ask why? They should have taken cash and a lesser amount, but obviously greed came in, but it does seem dodgy that they couldnt cash in their money...But obviously if you buy bitcoin and it drops you cant sue bitcoin...except this was a fraudulent company,,,tricky,,,just trying to see what a fair judge would think

a company can't commit fraud. People in the company committed the fraud
  • 0

#9 Tiekkie

Tiekkie

    Little Master

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 520 posts
  • LocationPort Elizabeth

Posted Today, 02:38 PM

I'm certain that we will see a massive spike I'm share price tomorrow then everyone want to jump on the band wagon. I'll just enjoy the ride. And enjoy green beers
  • 0

#10 Midas1

Midas1

    Sage

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,285 posts

Posted Today, 02:37 PM

By that reasoning their claim should be zero if they claim SNH is illiquid.  I am referring specifically to their attempt to liquidate SNH. With regards to any damages claim (material loss), the claim would need to be quantified and to do so they would have to justify what their damages were - and again, the more SNH is worth the less their material loss claim would be because the SNH price would have climbed.  Also, as I have said before, how can they forgive the orchestrator of the alleged fraud (Jooste) while holding SNH responsible.  It is the equivalent of a victim forgiving the person who shot him, but trying to hold the gun responsible.  Only my unqualified opinion. 
For now though, I cannot see how delays would help TT prove their application for liquidation.

I hear you all, the only thing I think was dodgy if TT wasnt allowed to sell those SNH shares for a few years....one would have to ask why? They should have taken cash and a lesser amount, but obviously greed came in, but it does seem dodgy that they couldnt cash in their money...But obviously if you buy bitcoin and it drops you cant sue bitcoin...except this was a fraudulent company,,,tricky,,,just trying to see what a fair judge would think


  • 0

#11 Bushmanbob

Bushmanbob

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 56 posts

Posted Today, 02:16 PM

But if balance sheet goes up they could claim a bigger piece of the pie

By that reasoning their claim should be zero if they claim SNH is illiquid.  I am referring specifically to their attempt to liquidate SNH. With regards to any damages claim (material loss), the claim would need to be quantified and to do so they would have to justify what their damages were - and again, the more SNH is worth the less their material loss claim would be because the SNH price would have climbed.  Also, as I have said before, how can they forgive the orchestrator of the alleged fraud (Jooste) while holding SNH responsible.  It is the equivalent of a victim forgiving the person who shot him, but trying to hold the gun responsible.  Only my unqualified opinion. 
For now though, I cannot see how delays would help TT prove their application for liquidation.


  • 0

#12 Bubble

Bubble

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 242 posts

Posted Today, 02:11 PM

But if balance sheet goes up they could claim a bigger piece of the pie

But, that pie gets sold "by force" at a serious discount.

 

And any good Management pack their bags and go to the competition, leaving that businesses to fail.

 

The lawyers always smile.


  • 0

#13 Midas1

Midas1

    Sage

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,285 posts

Posted Today, 02:03 PM

I can't see how it would be in TT boys interests to have this thing dragged out.  Their argument for liquidation is likely to be less and less meaningful the more time passes - in other words I believe SNH's balance sheet is likely to improve over time - which of course does not help TT guys to demonstrate that SNH is illiquid.  In my view SNH's balance sheet is likely to improve and if TT delay, then the liquidity argument gets weaker as each day passes once the GS has been ratified (which will hopefully happen soon). 

But if balance sheet goes up they could claim a bigger piece of the pie


  • 0

#14 Bushmanbob

Bushmanbob

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 56 posts

Posted Today, 01:22 PM

I can't see how it would be in TT boys interests to have this thing dragged out.  Their argument for liquidation is likely to be less and less meaningful the more time passes - in other words I believe SNH's balance sheet is likely to improve over time - which of course does not help TT guys to demonstrate that SNH is illiquid.  In my view SNH's balance sheet is likely to improve and if TT delay, then the liquidity argument gets weaker as each day passes once the GS has been ratified (which will hopefully happen soon). 


  • 0

#15 DayTraderDad

DayTraderDad

    The Oracle

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,487 posts

Posted Today, 01:17 PM

I cant see how 36 TT stores are worth around R100M each. The properties are not even theirs. R5M tops. Just give them back those shops for their shares and be done with the matter. Legal fees will just pile up from the SHN litigation fat cats. 

The 36 Mr. Tekkie shops are wholly owned by TT old boys. They started a new outfit after the walkout from PEPKOR Management!! They not part of the Tekkie Town business!!!


  • 1

#16 Ironman

Ironman

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 6 posts

Posted Today, 12:50 PM

I cant see how 36 TT stores are worth around R100M each. The properties are not even theirs. R5M tops. Just give them back those shops for their shares and be done with the matter. Legal fees will just pile up from the SHN litigation fat cats. 


  • -1

#17 Africa1962

Africa1962

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 146 posts

Posted Today, 12:49 PM

for sure sure.....

 

exTT just does not have the leverage that SNH has.....I am willing to bet that they going to announce IPO of their Australian businesses soon...which will make them even more solvent....making exTT argument even smaller......


  • 0

#18 Africa1962

Africa1962

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 146 posts

Posted Today, 12:22 PM

I feel sorry for the TT old boys but they should have taken the settlement and then let the share price rise back to the Eur 1 or 2 and they would have much more money than they will have at the end of this court battle!!! Anyway my thoughts!!! 

 

for sure sure.....


  • 0

#19 DayTraderDad

DayTraderDad

    The Oracle

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,487 posts

Posted Today, 11:58 AM

agreed for the short term.....

 

but for the longer term.....litigation costs money.....which will have to be budgeted for..and then the possibility of SNH losing........so growth will be hampered by this overhanging cloud....instead of putting money towards other good things.....so TT must go away as soon as possible...

We have to face reality, what the TT old boys want is not doable so best is to fight it in court. No one can be guarantied when buying shares!!! Also quite sure 36 Mr. Tekkie shops not enough to sustain years of court battles against SNH.

 

I feel sorry for the TT old boys but they should have taken the settlement and then let the share price rise back to the Eur 1 or 2 and they would have much more money than they will have at the end of this court battle!!! Anyway my thoughts!!! 


  • 0

#20 Midas1

Midas1

    Sage

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,285 posts

Posted Today, 11:46 AM

normally at 10....but I think the Netherlands should not be a problem.. WC high Court is unpredictable to say the least

Thanks but its a definate, so I guess no surge in price after that sens..?


  • 0





Sponsored by Sharenet and VPSNine Linux VPS Hosting