BBC South East Today ran a story on the Kent Reliance takeover by JC Flowers today and did a short interview with me. Unfortunately they didn't use much of the material we recorded but hopefully the piece they showed will keep the issue in the media.
There is a press conference by KRBS tomorrow (Tuesday) in Rochester so more news may be forthcoming about the details in the Transfer document and why they have not given out the full facts in the summary of the proposals.
Monday, 25 October 2010
Kent Reliance Transfer to One Bank - JC Flowers Private Equity Deal
Some rather interesting information has come to light from web sources regarding this deal by Kent Reliance.
One of JC Flowers reported other targets has said:
“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.”
Another site says
"The deal is likely to prove controversial, given founder Chris Flowers's reputation as a tough deal maker with no previous interest in mutuality."
One of JC Flowers reported other targets has said:
“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.”
Another site says
"The deal is likely to prove controversial, given founder Chris Flowers's reputation as a tough deal maker with no previous interest in mutuality."
Sunday, 24 October 2010
Is KRBS Takeover good for investors?
Read the details of the transfer to find out if the Kent Reliance KRBS take over deal is good for investors - that is investors in KRBS not investors in JC Flowers (JCF). I have no doubt at all that this deal has been structured to be an excellent deal for JC Flowers - a 20% return guarantee and up to 8% interest on their shares is something I think we would all like to have!
Whether the takeover deal is good for savers and investors in KRBS is another matter. The following extracts may be of interest - page numbers relate to the main Transfer Document.
(p63) KRPS will hold 59.9% and JCF 40.1%, The boards view is that significant adjustment is likely to be needed at the time of investment but is not LIKELY to increase JCF holding to more than 75%.
So they expect that JCF could own 75% of KRPS at the time of the transaction!! How on earth can they be proposing a transaction that they already know (expect/anticipate) will be exceeeded or changed as soon as it happens? Surely the transaction should include all relevant information up front rather than buried in the details at page 63.
Changing from KRPS owning 60% to JC Flowers owning 75% is more than a little change in circumstances especially when it happens IMMEDIATELY not at some unspecified point in the future!
At this point JCF can appoint the majority of directors and therefore control the company! So within a few months of the transfer, KRPS will have no control over the assets and bank that they created. Some deal for the Private Equity company!! I don't blame them, they are only doing the best by their shareholders and investors, but the management of KRBS are being seriously remiss with hiding these details.
By voting for this deal you are likely to have no windfall and no assets owned by KRPS (KRBS) within a few months. KRPS will be just like every other bank - no more mutual society owned by its members for their benefit.
Kent Reliance Takeover (Kent Reliance Building Society) KRBS Takeover Why No Windfall
I hope a few more people realise the significance of what is being voted for. I've gone through the main document and there are some areas that have been very much glossed over in their summary. In addition the following was in The Observer newspaper on Sunday 24th October which presumably is based on the KRBS vehicle doing the bidding.
American private equity group JC Flowers is lining up bids for at least four UK building societies as part of an audacious plan to create a "supermutual" that could be partially floated on the London stock market in five years. West Bromwich, Skipton, Norwich & Peterborough and Principality are in his sights; together, they have more than 1.7 million members, the Observer reports.
(p61) The board's view is that further preference shares will be issued to JCF at the time of investment as a result of writedowns in the commercial portfolio.
So the numbers given for shares owned by both companies are meaningless if further shares are being issued at the same time.
(p63) KRPS will hold 59.9% and JCF 40.1%, The boards view is that significant adjustment is likely to be needed at the time of investment but is not LIKELY to increase JCF holding to more than 75%.
So they expect that JCF could own 75% of KRPS at the time of transaction!! How on earth can they be proposing a transaction that they already know (expect/anticipate) will be exceeeded or changed as soon as it happens? Surely the transaction should include all relevant information up front rather than buried in the details.
Changing from KRPS owning 60% to JCF owning 75% is more than a little change in circumstances especially when it happens IMMEDIATELY not at some unspecified point in the future!
At this point JCF can appoint the majority of directors and control the company! So within a few months, KRPS will have no control over the assets and bank that they created. Some deal for the Private Equity company!! I don't blame them, they are only doing the best by their shareholders and investors, but the management of KRBS are being seriously remiss with hiding these details.
In my view these are significant points and the board are being extremely secretive, one could even say deceptive, by not publicising these as they relate directly to the situation at the time of the transfer.
American private equity group JC Flowers is lining up bids for at least four UK building societies as part of an audacious plan to create a "supermutual" that could be partially floated on the London stock market in five years. West Bromwich, Skipton, Norwich & Peterborough and Principality are in his sights; together, they have more than 1.7 million members, the Observer reports.
(p61) The board's view is that further preference shares will be issued to JCF at the time of investment as a result of writedowns in the commercial portfolio.
So the numbers given for shares owned by both companies are meaningless if further shares are being issued at the same time.
(p63) KRPS will hold 59.9% and JCF 40.1%, The boards view is that significant adjustment is likely to be needed at the time of investment but is not LIKELY to increase JCF holding to more than 75%.
So they expect that JCF could own 75% of KRPS at the time of transaction!! How on earth can they be proposing a transaction that they already know (expect/anticipate) will be exceeeded or changed as soon as it happens? Surely the transaction should include all relevant information up front rather than buried in the details.
Changing from KRPS owning 60% to JCF owning 75% is more than a little change in circumstances especially when it happens IMMEDIATELY not at some unspecified point in the future!
At this point JCF can appoint the majority of directors and control the company! So within a few months, KRPS will have no control over the assets and bank that they created. Some deal for the Private Equity company!! I don't blame them, they are only doing the best by their shareholders and investors, but the management of KRBS are being seriously remiss with hiding these details.
In my view these are significant points and the board are being extremely secretive, one could even say deceptive, by not publicising these as they relate directly to the situation at the time of the transfer.
Saturday, 23 October 2010
Why We Will Vote Against the KRBS/Kent Reliance Building Society Takeover by JC Flowers
The documents proposing the transfer of Kent Reliance Building Society to a new company with Private Equity investment by JC Flowers have now been sent out.
I urge any member to read the document carefully. Although a complicated legal document it contains a number of very key points and some information that is critical to understand. Importantly read the section about Disadvantages listed by the Directors, the crucial ones being:
1) Loss of control of the bank by KRPS
2) KRPS shares will reduce so mutuality is no sustainable
Based on the information in the document we will be voting AGAINST the proposal.
The deal guarantees a return of 20% per year to JC Flowers
JC Flowers could potentially become the majority owner of the new bank very quickly
Mutuality is quoted but is effectively being given up to a private equity partner
More information about the KRBS Kent Reliance takeover is on the Rainham History website
I urge any member to read the document carefully. Although a complicated legal document it contains a number of very key points and some information that is critical to understand. Importantly read the section about Disadvantages listed by the Directors, the crucial ones being:
1) Loss of control of the bank by KRPS
2) KRPS shares will reduce so mutuality is no sustainable
Based on the information in the document we will be voting AGAINST the proposal.
The deal guarantees a return of 20% per year to JC Flowers
JC Flowers could potentially become the majority owner of the new bank very quickly
Mutuality is quoted but is effectively being given up to a private equity partner
More information about the KRBS Kent Reliance takeover is on the Rainham History website
Wednesday, 20 October 2010
Ward Homes re-developing former offices on Ash Tree Lane Chatham
Ward Homes will be re-developing the grounds of its former offices on Ash Tree Lane in Chatham shortly. The development, named ‘Capstone Heights’ is set against the backdrop of the spectacular Chatham countryside and new homes will take full advantage of these views. Planning approval has been granted for 55 houses and apartments.
Ward Homes is investing in the local area around the development. Particular attention will be paid to traffic calming measures and pedestrian safety, and to improving equipment on the nearby Luton recreation ground. The land to the south-east of the development is designated an Area of Local Landscape Importance. To uphold this, the architecture of the properties will blend in with the natural landscape.
For further information, please visit www.wardhomes.co.uk
Frances Clark
Marketing Manager
Ward Homes Limited
A trading name of Barratt Homes Limited
T: 01959 568439
F: 01959 568488
M: 07793 581954
Thursday, 9 September 2010
Rainham Premier Inn Climbdown? Will it now get a proper name?
Have Premier Inn had a change of heart over the name of the new Premier Inn hotel in Rainham?
The hoardings outside the building work had proudly announced that the new Gillingham East A2 Premier Inn would be opening shortly. This caused a lot of local anger as the hotel is in the centre of Rainham and would undoubtedly cause massive confusion for guests that didn't know the area and travelling to Gillingham expecting to be able to stay at the Premier Inn.
This evening we noticed that the sign stating Gillingham East has now been covered over with only A2 still visible. So will the new Premier Inn be known as Rainham A2 recording its actual location? We wait and see!!
The hoardings outside the building work had proudly announced that the new Gillingham East A2 Premier Inn would be opening shortly. This caused a lot of local anger as the hotel is in the centre of Rainham and would undoubtedly cause massive confusion for guests that didn't know the area and travelling to Gillingham expecting to be able to stay at the Premier Inn.
This evening we noticed that the sign stating Gillingham East has now been covered over with only A2 still visible. So will the new Premier Inn be known as Rainham A2 recording its actual location? We wait and see!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)