15225 replies to this topic

[DayTraderDad]

There is a fundamental difference between losing money on buying shares through the company earnings suffering through operation issue (eg. new competitors, or poor trading and macro-environment, etc), and losing money through an overt prolonged period of fraud perpetuated through a CEO.  
 
The former is correct in terms of your statement "well known buying shares is risky and one can loose all your money".  The latter is definitely not!

Hi Captain,

Here I don't agree people bought SNH at their own risk and had they done the due diligence would have sold the share.
I was invested in SNH in the 2012 and 2013. I decided to get out because did not trust the accounts and did not believe that MJ had a miraculous
way of turning business around plus very complicated set of financials and I could detect they were not making the cash.

Even the purchase of MF should have put alarms into experts heads but they choose to ignore.

If you listened to the Utube video a posted that comments

"So do you think SNH is hot or not" and the reply of analyst " Hahah at these level its cheap"

Now that the truth comes out people want cover!!

Sorry when one buys a share he takes with him the possible future profits but also the risk of a full on loss!!

Regards,
DTD

[Investment novice]

Hi Captain,

Yes I agree there were a lot of trading and could well be day trader buying and selling.
What I am saying if the entities that held the 1.9 bil share and did not sell them would only have a claim from R25 and the rest of the shares 4.3.1.9= 2.4 bil
basically 56 % would have a claim at R50 and the other 44% have a claim at R25.( assuming the 44% was long term holders)

It is all a guess and quite sure a long calculation will take place but to simple take the number of share and multiply R50 and say that is the claim dont think its correct.
Obviously VEB and other would like to go for the big numbers but Peter Wakkie seen this before so he will be well prepared.

Regards,
DTD

It is unlikely that the lawyers will be aiming to maximize the settlement. Veb is Jon profit. Secondly the price variances are determined by sentiment. And lastly... Expecting fair and full settlement requires this entity to declare bankruptcy and all then lose and shareholders m... Claimants will end with very little or nothing due to insurmountable debt and bond holders.... That have preference.

The legal settlement will be novel and will factor the regain in value post settlement. And this can only truly be done with a delisting. With a listing this is very risky for claimants and snh. But doable.... What won't be on the cards is 120 billion Rand settlement... And we looking at 2 billion.... However with a delisting... Shares to a value of 40 billion may be allocated.. Ahead of an ipo....

Sent from my SM-G950F using Sharenet Sharechat mobile app

[DayTraderDad]

Hi DTD,
 
I am not disputing the fact that a shareholder who bought at R25 would be limited to the difference between R25 and R2.  That is still a significant R20 per share loss - effectively over 10x the R2 we are using as a basis.
 
However, I would argue that the vast majority of shareholder transactions took place from 7 Aug 2015 to 30 Nov 2017 (which is well inside the 7 Dec 2017 deadline) and when the share price was over R50.  The volumes in this period were enormous.  Granted we need to remove Company and director dealings in its own shares  ( as well as any other related party transactions).  However, these would be insignificant compared to the number of transactions by members of the public and institutions.
 
I have tried to download the share transactions per day but it is pretty cumbersome.  Is there anyone who has access to this on an Excel spreadsheet who can advise?
 
Best Regards
Captainfrom82

Hi Captain,

Yes I agree there were a lot of trading and could well be day trader buying and selling.
What I am saying if the entities that held the 1.9 bil share and did not sell them would only have a claim from R25 and the rest of the shares 4.3.1.9= 2.4 bil
basically 56 % would have a claim at R50 and the other 44% have a claim at R25.( assuming the 44% was long term holders)

It is all a guess and quite sure a long calculation will take place but to simple take the number of share and multiply R50 and say that is the claim dont think its correct.
Obviously VEB and other would like to go for the big numbers but Peter Wakkie seen this before so he will be well prepared.

Regards,
DTD

[Milo]

There is a fundamental difference between losing money on buying shares through the company earnings suffering through operation issue (eg. new competitors, or poor trading and macro-environment, etc), and losing money through an overt prolonged period of fraud perpetuated through a CEO.  

 

The former is correct in terms of your statement "well known buying shares is risky and one can loose all your money".  The latter is definitely not!

 

 

Don’t agree buying shares is a gamble. You either make money or lose money. No one can predict the future. Anything can happen.

[Captainfrom82]

I agree no shareholder wants to see the end of Steinhoff and at present cash is not there the debt has to be reduced so only option for aggrieved
shareholders is to buy more shares at R1.50 to R2.00 and once there is a recovery they make a profit!!!
I think that's why CW TITAN bought the shares again!!!
The only problem is the lawyers they are hungry for money because that's all they do jump from share to share trying to make a living!!
The courts need to stop this madness because it is well known buying shares is risky and one can loose all your money.
So shareholders now want security for losses but very happy when share goes up.

 

There is a fundamental difference between losing money on buying shares through the company earnings suffering through operation issue (eg. new competitors, or poor trading and macro-environment, etc), and losing money through an overt prolonged period of fraud perpetuated through a CEO.  

 

The former is correct in terms of your statement "well known buying shares is risky and one can loose all your money".  The latter is definitely not!

[Milo]

Share dropped to R1.40 on 6 December 2018 because there was a sense that said 2017 and 2018 financials will be delayed. So the bottom might be at at R1.40 and now it has hit R1.40 again and going up slowly from here so basically a double bottom has formed after 5 months and if we get better news forward then a good up is coming. 

[Captainfrom82]

Hi Captain,

My apologies it is not mil it 1,9 Billion.

I cannot see how a shareholder that bought a share for R25 now want to claim from R52.

If the NAV is above E1.20 after MF and Conforama being equity accountant what will then be the share price?

Regards,
DTD

 

Hi DTD,

 

I am not disputing the fact that a shareholder who bought at R25 would be limited to the difference between R25 and R2.  That is still a significant R20 per share loss - effectively over 10x the R2 we are using as a basis.

 

However, I would argue that the vast majority of shareholder transactions took place from 7 Aug 2015 to 30 Nov 2017 (which is well inside the 7 Dec 2017 deadline) and when the share price was over R50.  The volumes in this period were enormous.  Granted we need to remove Company and director dealings in its own shares  ( as well as any other related party transactions).  However, these would be insignificant compared to the number of transactions by members of the public and institutions.

 

I have tried to download the share transactions per day but it is pretty cumbersome.  Is there anyone who has access to this on an Excel spreadsheet who can advise?

 

Best Regards

Captainfrom82

[DayTraderDad]

For those that a bought after a Dec 2017,,,they won't have much of a claim... But again steinhoff can peg the date and allocate accordingly....

The reality is that there will definately be a settlement... Either in the firm of a payout which will be minuscule or through a listing and preferential allocation..
.the easiest is to do it close doors which can only happen delisted.

Either way... We can be satisfied that all are working to salvage value... And if the share hits a low... Buy... I missed my 140 this morning.....

Sent from my SM-G950F using Sharenet Sharechat mobile app

I agree no shareholder wants to see the end of Steinhoff and at present cash is not there the debt has to be reduced so only option for aggrieved
shareholders is to buy more shares at R1.50 to R2.00 and once there is a recovery they make a profit!!!
I think that's why CW TITAN bought the shares again!!!
The only problem is the lawyers they are hungry for money because that's all they do jump from share to share trying to make a living!!
The courts need to stop this madness because it is well known buying shares is risky and one can loose all your money.
So shareholders now want security for losses but very happy when share goes up.

[Investment novice]

For those that a bought after a Dec 2017,,,they won't have much of a claim... But again steinhoff can peg the date and allocate accordingly....

The reality is that there will definately be a settlement... Either in the firm of a payout which will be minuscule or through a listing and preferential allocation..
.the easiest is to do it close doors which can only happen delisted.

Either way... We can be satisfied that all are working to salvage value... And if the share hits a low... Buy... I missed my 140 this morning.....

Sent from my SM-G950F using Sharenet Sharechat mobile app

[DayTraderDad]

This will be round 2 for Peter Wakkie. Same hold opponents Deloitte and VEB!!!!

[DayTraderDad]

Good reading:

https://money.cnn.co.../ahold_grocers/

Highlight:

NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Shares of Ahold lost nearly two-thirds of their value Monday after the world's No. 3 retailer said it overstated profits by half a billion dollars at its U.S. food distribution service and said its chief executive and chief financial officer were quitting.

"How do you spell Ahold now -- E-N-R-O-N?" a trader with Madoff Securities in London said. "The company had been fairly forthcoming about its problems, so this was a real shocker." He added: "It remains to be seen if Ahold can recover from this credibility crisis."

After the announcement, Ahold's (AHO: Research, Estimates) American shares tumbled $6.53, or 61 percent, to close at $4.16 on the New York Stock Exchange.

[DayTraderDad]

From VEB: Reached agreement after 15 years.

https://www.veb.net/...s-in-zaak-ahold

Highlight:
"The VEB reached an agreement with Deloitte on 4 June 2018 on a compensation arrangement regarding (briefly stated) the accounting fraud at Ahold that became public in 2003, when Deloitte was the auditing auditor. After 15 years, stopping the lawsuit is preferable to conducting further years of legal proceedings.

[DayTraderDad]

This was virtually the same as Steinhoff.


NIJMEGEN, the Netherlands, Nov. 28 - Royal Ahold, the Dutch supermarket giant, said Monday that it would pay shareholders worldwide $1.1 billion to settle class-action lawsuits that were threatening to derail the company's turnaround.

The settlement -- a megadeal by European standards -- protects Ahold's current and former executives as well as its consultants and insurers from further claims in connection with a 2003 accounting scandal that cost investors on both sides of the Atlantic billions of dollars. It also allows the company to try to put one of the biggest corporate frauds in Dutch history behind it.

"The company can now move forward and focus entirely on its business," Peter Wakkie, Ahold's chief corporate governance counsel and an executive board member, said in a statement.

Ahold's accounting firm at the time of the scandal -- Deloitte & Touche -- was not a party to the agreement and could face future litigation. A Deloitte spokesman in the Netherlands declined to comment on Monday, but the firm has denied any wrongdoing in the past, saying it was deceived by Ahold's top executives at the time.

Four of Ahold's former officials -- including the chief executive, Cees van der Hoeven, and the chief financial officer, A. Michiel Meurs -- are facing criminal charges in the Netherlands that they falsified documents, misled investors and defrauded auditors.

[DayTraderDad]

My take is that you cannot simply determine lost value on the share as is it is perceptive and the current trading price is not the true bottom.
Following legal settlement the share will assume a new trading price especially with the restructuring. Hence why you probably looking at a strategy to capture as much value as possible in the settlement through delisting... Cleansing... Restructuring...and re listing

The majority of current shareholders are still those that owned pre Dec 2017....hence the get a R3. 50 example payout and still get their volume in shares back when re listing ast R28 hypothetically.... This would be far better off then 10c on the Rand....

Current shareholders who bought post Dec 2017 could potentially get back one share for every four they hold..... As this is marginal compared to the historical shareholders.

Steinhoff has to find anew innovative strategy to get a Settlement and salvage value to keep going....... And veb would be keen for such a deal.....

This is my own thinking. I will share this with steinhoff through investor platform... And we should look for a win win....

Sent from my SM-G950F using Sharenet Sharechat mobile app

You have a interesting idea but what about all the shareholders that bought at R20 when the share price fell??
If they are forced out by SNH and get R4 I guess they will start a claim against SNH and the whole process start again!!!

[DayTraderDad]

Shareholding of some major holdings 30 June 2013

Investec Asset Management 241 013 144 13.13%
Public Investment Commissioners 237 720 826 12.95%
BS Beteiligungs und Verwal 171 937 928 9.36 %
Sanlam Investment Managers 105 654 115 5.75%


In 29/03/2019 PIC holding 273,897,828 so the 237 013 144 are below R25 not sure that PIC is on day trading business!

[DayTraderDad]

Hey DTD,
 
I doubt if this is the material part of the claim and whether it is the reason for the meeting.  1.9m shares is chicken feed compared to the volumes that VEB are speaking of. 
 

 
Best Regards
Captainfrom82

Hi Captain,

My apologies it is not mil it 1,9 Billion.

I cannot see how a shareholder that bought a share for R25 now want to claim from R52.

If the NAV is above E1.20 after MF and Conforama being equity accountant what will then be the share price?

Regards,
DTD

[Investment novice]

My take is that you cannot simply determine lost value on the share as is it is perceptive and the current trading price is not the true bottom.
Following legal settlement the share will assume a new trading price especially with the restructuring. Hence why you probably looking at a strategy to capture as much value as possible in the settlement through delisting... Cleansing... Restructuring...and re listing

The majority of current shareholders are still those that owned pre Dec 2017....hence the get a R3. 50 example payout and still get their volume in shares back when re listing ast R28 hypothetically.... This would be far better off then 10c on the Rand....

Current shareholders who bought post Dec 2017 could potentially get back one share for every four they hold..... As this is marginal compared to the historical shareholders.

Steinhoff has to find anew innovative strategy to get a Settlement and salvage value to keep going....... And veb would be keen for such a deal.....

This is my own thinking. I will share this with steinhoff through investor platform... And we should look for a win win....

Sent from my SM-G950F using Sharenet Sharechat mobile app

[Captainfrom82]

======snip========

As for shareholder claims remember there was over 1.9 mil shares bought below R25 so I guess that's is what SNH and vVEB meeting is all about to establish exactly what is the claim.
But if I get R3.50 whow I will be the first in the row!!
For me the only option is for all parties to sit back let company recover because with a NAV of R22 the losses are much less!!!

 

Hey DTD,

 

I doubt if this is the material part of the claim and whether it is the reason for the meeting.  1.9m shares is chicken feed compared to the volumes that VEB are speaking of. 

 

Anyone who held Steinhoff shares from 7 Aug 2015 until COB on 7 December 2017 can be part of the claim (and likely is in the list of aggrieved litigant shareholders).  On 7 Aug 2017, the Steinhoff share price was R52.  The share price now is for simple calcs R2. 

 

Just for the 2016 financial year, the on 30 June 2015 at R76.99 and closed on 30 Sep 2016 at R78.55.  During this year the share it a high of R96.85 and a low of R69.80

 

There are many way to look at this, but just assuming that on 1m shares traded per day, and assume that there was just 400 trading days from 7 Aug 2015 to 7 Dec17 that would be 400m shares bough who may be eligible for compensation of for simplicity sake R50 (a lawsuit of around R20b or  E1.25b).  And I have been pretty conservative.

 

Assume that Steinhoff settles for half, and you still have a very large number.

 

There is bound to be a good uptake as the lawyers have capped their compensation to 9%.

 

Best Regards

Captainfrom82

[Investment novice]

Yep agree... There is a strong push for this entity to survive. Despite the roller coaster... Trade memories are short... I expect the voltality to be good now for some good returns. I will aim to get some more at r1. 30 to R1. 50....and build my volume.

I agree with Polly and Co.. This company is a white investment and none of the financial advisors will advise you based on their professional training... But any trader not investor... Or speculator or gambler will see the opportunity of ups and downs... In any event... They have been here making money all along... Buying pre news.. And dumping the day just before the sens....

This company has a long road ahead and all parties will work to salvage and save.... Be good to get a few sens now on progress of restructuring... Etc...

Some interesting days....


Sent from my SM-G950F using Sharenet Sharechat mobile app

[DayTraderDad]

To sort this entire mess out steinhoff will have to agree a few market acceptable moves... They can buy out existing shareholders for r3. 50 as an example. Any shareholder with a legal claim will then be entitled to the allocated shares unlisted.

The main value of snh has been eroded by the fear of litigation and by the share dumping...

Cw would be paid out and received shares... In the unlisted which would be of a significant value following settlement and relisting.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Sharenet Sharechat mobile app

The more I read the new I am starting to get a feeling CW is going to have a hard time explaining all is actions to the judge that will give
his money back!!!

As for shareholder claims remember there was over 1.9 mil shares bought below R25 so I guess that's is what SNH and vVEB meeting is all about to establish exactly what is the claim.
But if I get R3.50 whow I will be the first in the row!!
For me the only option is for all parties to sit back let company recover because with a NAV of R22 the losses are much less!!!