Friday 29 October 2010

Quotes on the Kent Reliance Deal With JC Flowers

If 25% of KRBS members vote NO then the deal will be blocked so please use your vote.

"the biggest winner by far in this deal is JC Flowers .... members’ welfare would be very much a secondary concern"

A few quotes from different websites about the deal by JC Flowers to takeover Kent Reliance Building Society. These are not my quotes but are collected from various websites and are primarily from respected commentators.

Norwich & Peterborough Building Society has denied claims that it will be joining JC Flowers as part of its plans to create a ‘supermutual'. “Unlike Kent Reliance, we are well capitalized and a financially strong business, therefore we have no reason to join JC Flowers as part of a supermutual.”

You can't accuse Kent Reliance Building Society's directors of not being prepared to think outside the box. An aggressive growth strategy under Lazenby has come back to haunt it in the past couple of years, leaving the mutual with a loss-making mortgage book and a commercial property loan portfolio of dubious quality.

the board fully accepted that there is the potential for losing independence by accepting the equity investment, losing control of the bank and of the industrial and provident society's percentage shareholding being reduced to a level that the ethos of mutuality is no longer sustainable.

“My initial reaction is one of caution. Venture capitalists are usually a pretty mercenary bunch who focus primarily on how much money they can make...So make no bones about it, JC Flowers would be entering into any deal primarily to make money for itself. I believe members’ welfare would be very much a secondary concern.”

But the biggest winner by far in this deal is JC Flowers. It has effectively paid £50 million for 40 per cent of Kent and it could see its stake increase further if Kent's £130 million commercial property loan book makes further losses. US private equity firm JC Flowers is lining up bids for at least four building societies to create a “supermutual” which would be partially floated in five years

No comments: