I thought he had shelved the idea of increasing his stake a few weeks back
Printable View
I thought he had shelved the idea of increasing his stake a few weeks back
That is just consolidating their holdings, not increasing the %.
With the company tax rate being lower than the trust tax rate, this could be as simple as a tax efficient holding structure. I am sure the Hill family dont need the dividend income stream for day to day living so retaining in a company makes sense.
Must admit Belg...MHI wasn't not one of my better portfolio holdings and it wasn't that big a portfolio holding about 4% which really is an useless holding if you are after cap gain. ..tentatively bought in during a mental implosion just after New Year 2010 thinking the good news at 68c + a possible dividend increase + the thought that the overall NZX market was going to keep rising up (a rising tide raises all boats)...however the plan went awry the NZX fell..nearly pushed the bail out button on many occassions but the tight trading pattern kept me in...not much else around + I had cash at hand then...
Didn't buy anymore on the recent 72c symmetrical triangle breakout because I'm so over MHI shares... it briefly paused at 80c giving me an "out"...reason:.. I'm now 99.5% in the market and I really need cash in a hurry to buy another share I'm interested in.....yeah made 12c/share + a couple of Dividends 1.5 + 2.5 = 4c/share and my brokerage didn't eat much cap gain ..so no disaster Belg made 16c/s (maybe 15c/s) on an outlay of 68c/s
But if MHI goes over 84c may be tempted to cull something else in my portfolio and re-enter if there is not much else around at that time..who knows
Partial takeover at 90c.
How much of the recent price rises can be attributed to people in the know?
90 cents not enough to have me running for the exits , but a vote of confidence for the stock that
Mr Hill wants more shares in his own comaany
But the price was 70 cents then... its moved a lot lately on little or no news while the markets in general have been moving sideways. I bought some more at 70 a while back and am now wondering if I should ditch some of them....
Why give him 50% control for only 90c.
Exactly CJ...and even more so when in august the CEO was quoted in the NZHerald that their movement then had nothing at all to do with wanting majority control.(or words to that effect).
Also makes you wonder why they want it. They have effective control now anyway with 45% so the only think they couldn't push through is something that requires 75% or something that only requires 50% but everyone else would vote against (which almost never happens)
Belg, with you on this one... but why are the ACC and the other fund selling some of their shares? I wouldnt mind knowing the rationale behind this. Also if they creep provisions are in place and they can purchase up to 5% of shares in any one year... that will seriously underpin the shareprice one would think. Interesting... the free float on shares will be even less once Durante have their 50.1%... Happy holder at this stage
Things going so well for MHI (todays announcement) nobody should sell into his offer eh
Yes, Winner, I would'nt be selling these shares anytime soon. This guy is a smart cookie and MHI is bucking the current gloomy retail forecasts. If they keep posting positive profit announcements and the US market picks up this share could easily hit a $1 plus , regardless of the buyback . I'm a happy holder.
a cynic would say he should have waited with the announcement.... :P
looks like they are having trouble getting enough acceptances at 90 cents. Can and will they raise their bid?
Agree Belg, got a letter in the mail today from Durante, signed by Sir M himself. Smacks of desperation...
Durante have received acceptances for 78% of the 9 million shares required to declare the Offer unconditional.
They claim to be "encouraged by the response and confident that the Offer will succeed".
We'll see.
Totally underwhelming response to this result and the ordinary dividend ........................I think everybody wants to know whether or not MHI reach their target and whats going to happen if they don't. Until then the shareprice is going nowhere.
Am I the only one that thinks having one family own a controlling stake is a huge negative?
I like this business and Michael Hill but it really does mean there can never be a truly independent board and any large decisions will be at the whims of the Hill family if they have 50.1%
Or am I missing something and they do not have voting rights on all of their shares?