15225 replies to this topic

[Captainfrom82]

 Hi

Remember Steinhoff holds Pepkor and Pepkor holds Tekkie Town. I don't think the Tekkie Town Pepkor issue is such a big deal.

Pepkor is worth about Euro 3 billion and I think Tekkie Town is but 1 of 19 companies in the Pepkor holding. Anyhow Pepkor said over and over again that it has no intentions to sell Tekkie Town..So the spat is about the fact that the court has ruled now that Pepkor cannot sell Tekkie Town until ownership has been proven.

I move about many places and the Tekkie Town outlets do not look so busy hey!!!. Not a sole in the Krugersdorp Key West outlet and not a sole in the Westgate outlet today...so this business that was biuild up store by store, according to Mostert also has a great potential to fail ..store by store and perhaps an option is to keep quite and stay in the Pepkor Group with some sort of a deal. That could also be  a life-line for Tekkie Town and  a way out of this problem. 

 

Hi Trader001,

 

Pepkor Holdings is a real giant with over 5300 stores and almost 50k employees. 

 

To place Tekkie Town into context, TT contributes less than 8% of stores, and around 4% of employees.  I cannot easily find out what TT contributes to both revenue and earnings (Steinhoff seem to be very carefully managing their reporting and analysts presentations in this regard).

 

It would not hurt me in the least if the entire transaction is reversed and Steinhoff/Pepkor gets back its money and TT goes back to the litigating previous owners.  The complication is obviously that there was a cash component also involved in the previous sale to Steinhoff/Pepkor.  That party is never going to agree to have the transaction reversed.

 

Jooste massively overpaid for TT.  I am not sure how BVH would be able to challenge the deal.

 

The real value in Pepkor Holdings is Pep Stores and Ackermans. 

 

Best Regards

Captainfrom82

[Trader001]

From:

https://www.iol.co.z...ruling-33097607

 

"Steinhoff International subsidiary Pepkor has lost yet another round against its former Tekkie Town executives for the control of the sneaker maker after the Western Cape High Court refused its application"

 

"During the hearing, Steinhoff attempted to convince the court that Steinhoff did not, in fact, control Pepkor." ..........................

 Hi

Remember Steinhoff holds Pepkor and Pepkor holds Tekkie Town. I don't think the Tekkie Town Pepkor issue is such a big deal.

Pepkor is worth about Euro 3 billion and I think Tekkie Town is but 1 of 19 companies in the Pepkor holding. Anyhow Pepkor said over and over again that it has no intentions to sell Tekkie Town..So the spat is about the fact that the court has ruled now that Pepkor cannot sell Tekkie Town until ownership has been proven.

I move about many places and the Tekkie Town outlets do not look so busy hey!!!. Not a sole in the Krugersdorp Key West outlet and not a sole in the Westgate outlet today...so this business that was biuild up store by store, according to Mostert also has a great potential to fail ..store by store and perhaps an option is to keep quite and stay in the Pepkor Group with some sort of a deal. That could also be  a life-line for Tekkie Town and  a way out of this problem. 

[Tom]

From:

https://www.iol.co.z...ruling-33097607

 

"Steinhoff International subsidiary Pepkor has lost yet another round against its former Tekkie Town executives for the control of the sneaker maker after the Western Cape High Court refused its application"

 

"During the hearing, Steinhoff attempted to convince the court that Steinhoff did not, in fact, control Pepkor." ..........................

 

 

[Investment novice]

Only good news in past has been from matress firms deals.
Settlement would be under wraps and if leaked would expect more volumes on this share.
There are options on the table.... Be very interesting if something comes out...

Sent from my SM-G950F using Sharenet Sharechat mobile app

[Bubble]

Rumour of an agreement going round, do anyone here know anything more.

 

https://www.finanztr...igung-moeglich/

 

Steinhoff could offer a surprise in the coming days or weeks. A report from the finance portal "Der Aktionär" about a possible agreement with injured investors, who are complaining (wanting) at the moment, has now appeared on the market. The complaints in the room and their consequences have contributed, among other things, to the fact that the price is quoted at all-time lows and shows tendencies to sink even further. An agreement in turn would be associated with the fact that it can come to a sensational comeback to the top.

 

Above all for Steinhoff, an agreement with the plaintiffs would be important and life-saving. Because the claims of the plaintiffs can not be used for the ailing company anyway. In that respect, on the other hand, the plaintiffs would also be relatively well served if there were a viable agreement to be able to cover part of the claims at all.

However, when it comes to an agreement, some difficulties are to be accomplished. According to observers, this is only about a big investor named Christo Wiese. In turn, Steinhoff has sued for a billion-dollar payment. If an agreement is reached here, a rescue would be possible. On the other hand, the lawsuits against former executives, which involve millions of claims by Steinhoff, are comparatively negligible. If there is an agreement, the wind turns.

[andi222]

Which is even better?

 

Hi Trader001,

 

yes you are correct. I don't know where I got that 90 Mil from haha.

 

As per SENS: The FSCA has imposed an administrative penalty of R1.5 billion on Steinhoff under Section 81 of the

FMA 2012. Noting Steinhoff's current financial position; to avoid penalising innocent Steinhoff
shareholders further; in recognition of the fraud perpetrated on the Steinhoff Group by former
employees and officers of the Company; and in acknowledgement of the co-operation of management
to date and Steinhoff's commitment to continue co-operating fully with the FSCA in all future actions
taken against any persons allegedly responsible for the wrongdoing, the FSCA has resolved, under
Section 173 of the Financial Regulation Act No. 9 of 2017, to remit a portion of the administrative
penalty resulting in Steinhoff paying a penalty of R53 million.

[Trader001]

Was fine not reduced to R53 Million instead of R90 million?  

Which is even better?

[Trader001]

Lol Tom it should rather show you that an initial fine of 1.5 billion was reduced to 90 Million. This will set a sample going forward. As I mentioned in my previous post a recovery of around 5% of any claims is probable. First one already showing this. Great work from management. 

 

This represents 2 € cents per share just like that. 

Was fine not reduced to R53 Million instead of R90 million?  

[DayTraderDad]

Lol Tom it should rather show you that an initial fine of 1.5 billion was reduced to 90 Million. This will set a sample going forward. As I mentioned in my previous post a recovery of around 5% of any claims is probable. First one already showing this. Great work from management. 

 

This represents 2 € cents per share just like that. 

Good post Andi don't worry Tom just keeping the Polly the Troll flags up. I agree this proves that management is doing a great job cleaning SNH and making the future rosy!!!

[DayTraderDad]

Quote from FSCA press release:

"The FSCA has therefore found that the Steinhoff Group made false, misleading or deceptive statements, promises or forecasts in its public statements to the markets in the prior period"

 

This statement and the acceptance of Steinhoff management of this statement and penalty, will definitely help giving momentum the hundreds of court cases currently going on in hundreds of courts worldwide against this Ponzi Scheme (Steinhoff) to have justice done against this Ponzi Scheme sooner and for the full amounts lost plus full legal cost plus full interest.

 

Soon there will be more penalties against Stienhoff from the Netherlands and Germany..etc, and more court orders to freeze their assets and later attach it, in favor of the aggrieved share holders, until the defrauded share holders get their money back (and hopefully before the creditors decide to liquidate it).

 

Quote from FSCA press release:

"The FSCA has therefore found that the Steinhoff Group made false, misleading or deceptive statements, promises or forecasts in its public statements to the markets in the prior period"

 

This statement and the acceptance of Steinhoff management of this statement and penalty, will definitely help giving momentum the hundreds of court cases currently going on in hundreds of courts worldwide against this Ponzi Scheme (Steinhoff) to have justice done against this Ponzi Scheme sooner and for the full amounts lost plus full legal cost plus full interest.

 

Soon there will be more penalties against Stienhoff from the Netherlands and Germany..etc, and more court orders to freeze their assets and later attach it, in favor of the aggrieved share holders, until the defrauded share holders get their money back (and hopefully before the creditors decide to liquidate it).

Yes TOM we all hear you again thanks for the RED highlights. So now that you had you say and see no future for SNH why don't you now focus on Delta Fund Properties they flying downwards!!!

[Lionelza1]

Market seems to be liking the news....

[andi222]

Quote from FSCA press release:

"The FSCA has therefore found that the Steinhoff Group made false, misleading or deceptive statements, promises or forecasts in its public statements to the markets in the prior period"

 

This statement and the acceptance of Steinhoff management of this statement and penalty, will definitely help giving momentum the hundreds of court cases currently going on in hundreds of courts worldwide against this Ponzi Scheme (Steinhoff) to have justice done against this Ponzi Scheme sooner and for the full amounts lost plus full legal cost plus full interest.

 

Soon there will be more penalties against Stienhoff from the Netherlands and Germany..etc, and more court orders to freeze their assets and later attach it, in favor of the aggrieved share holders, until the defrauded share holders get their money back (and hopefully before the creditors decide to liquidate it).

 

Lol Tom it should rather show you that an initial fine of 1.5 billion was reduced to 90 Million. This will set a sample going forward. As I mentioned in my previous post a recovery of around 5% of any claims is probable. First one already showing this. Great work from management. 

 

This represents 2 € cents per share just like that. 

Edited by andi222, 12 September 2019 - 01:56 PM.

[Tom]

Quote from FSCA press release:

"The FSCA has therefore found that the Steinhoff Group made false, misleading or deceptive statements, promises or forecasts in its public statements to the markets in the prior period"

 

This statement and the acceptance of Steinhoff management of this statement and penalty, will definitely help giving momentum the hundreds of court cases currently going on in hundreds of courts worldwide against this Ponzi Scheme (Steinhoff) to have justice done against this Ponzi Scheme sooner and for the full amounts lost plus full legal cost plus full interest.

 

Soon there will be more penalties against Stienhoff from the Netherlands and Germany..etc, and more court orders to freeze their assets and later attach it, in favor of the aggrieved share holders, until the defrauded share holders get their money back (and hopefully before the creditors decide to liquidate it).

Edited by Tom, 12 September 2019 - 01:27 PM.

[nosh]

SENS out

The FSCA has applied section 109 of the FMA 2012 to determine the level of administrative penalty to be paid by Steinhoff and, having considered representations from the Company, has also taken into account a number of mitigating factors. The FSCA has imposed an administrative penalty of R1.5 billion on Steinhoff under Section 81 of the FMA 2012. Noting Steinhoff’s current financial position; to avoid penalising innocent Steinhoff shareholders further; in recognition of the fraud perpetrated on the Steinhoff Group by former employees and officers of the Company; and in acknowledgement of the co-operation of management to date and Steinhoff’s commitment to continue co-operating fully with the FSCA in all future actions taken against any persons allegedly responsible for the wrongdoing, the FSCA has resolved, under Section 173 of the Financial Regulation Act No. 9 of 2017, to remit a portion of the administrative penalty resulting in Steinhoff paying a penalty of R53 million. The FSCA states that events subsequent to December 2017 have highlighted the gap that existed between the Steinhoff Group’s prior public statements and the financial reality. The size of the headline penalty reflects the scale and severity of the regulatory breach. While, in light of Steinhoff’s current financial position, we have made the decision to remit a substantial proportion of the penalty, even after this reduction it remains the largest single fine ever imposed by the FSCA. We would like to thank the current Steinhoff management team for their co-operation and constructive engagement through this difficult and complex process.”

[Investment novice]

Wow... We ducked a massive bomb... But one problem solved. Onwards to the legal challenges. Think the same methodology will apply for legal settlements.


Sent from my SM-G950F using Sharenet Sharechat mobile app

[Lionelza1]

The slooowwww poison

[andi222]

Thanks - I get the reduction of nominal value of shares to close the gap but this "The equity value of the company now stands at negative €5.3-billion, or negative €1.24 per share."? please explain this statement .

 

Thanks in advance

 

Hi Nosh,

 

the article is misleading once again.

 

As per HY 2019 equity was as follows: (STEINHOFF INTERNATIONAL HOLDINGS N.V. CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS)

 

Total equity attributable to SH: -994

NCI: 1166

Total Equity: 172

 

However they are referring to the standalone company - STEINHOFF INTERNATIONAL HOLDINGS N.V. SEPARATE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD ENDED 30 SEPTEMBER 2018. The equity for the year ended 2018 is at negative 5,4 Billion Euro. 

 

So nothing to worry about.

 

They however should make this clear in their article. VERY misleading.

 

Hope this clears things up.

Edited by andi222, 04 September 2019 - 12:16 PM.

[Captainfrom82]

Thanks - I get the reduction of nominal value of shares to close the gap but this "The equity value of the company now stands at negative €5.3-billion, or negative €1.24 per share."? please explain this statement .

 

Thanks in advance

 

Hi Nosh,

 

I have no idea whatsoever where these numbers came from.  It certainly is materially different to the 1H19 balance sheet. 

 

I note that you are quoting The Daily Maverick who are not above making "mistakes" for sensationalism.  They then print a tiny "correction of their error".   I have tried to contact the author/reporter Sasha Planting with no success. 

 

Best Regards

Captainfrom82

[nosh]

Hey Nosh,

 

What you are missing is that this is a legal or regulatory  requirement.  Steinhoff has no option but to comply.  In effect, they are saying the nominal share premium is so out of sync with reality that it grossly does not reflect the (net) asset value of the group.

 

However, it is a zero sum game for the total equity.  It should have a zero impact in terms of the overall effect.  However, releasing funds from a non-distributable (share Premium Reserve) to a distributable Reserve (like the Accumulated Profit of in Steinhoff's case the Accumulated Losses)  is a very good thing indeed.

 

Steinhoff are cleaning up the balance sheet.   Setting off the Accumlated losses against the reclassified Share Premium has no impact on the Equity.  But the Balance Sheet looks a lot easier on the eye.

 

Without this, Steinhoff would have to have 5 years of E2b profits (after tax and after dividends have been paid) transferred to the Accumulated Losses reserves to extinguish the E10b amount.  Steinhoff would never achieve this off their anemic revenue and diminishing ownership.

 

Regards

Captainfrom82

Thanks - I get the reduction of nominal value of shares to close the gap but this "The equity value of the company now stands at negative €5.3-billion, or negative €1.24 per share."? please explain this statement .

 

Thanks in advance

[Lionelza1]

This share will bounce all over the place, very low volume trades.
May go in any direction

Sent from my SM-G950F using Sharenet Sharechat mobile app

Only going in 1 direction and that's down. Slow poison till the next set of news. More than likely dip under R1 again

When is the next set of news