Good morning from Paul (I'm back at work now) and Graham.
Mello Monday is tonight, starting at 17:00. There are 3 interesting companies reporting, that we've reported on here recently. Also a session on ChatGPT, and finally a panel discussion on the disastrous delisting of iEnergizer (LON:IBPO) so all very topical & interesting I think.
Delistings
Again this topic rears its ugly head. We often flag this here in the SCVRs as a sudden and brutal way that shareholder value can be destroyed, at least for small shareholders like us. I expect the tiniest companies, that have effectively failed in their business models, to delist, and frankly good riddance - I'd happily see several hundred micro caps disappear, and we largely ignore most of the obviously rubbish ones here at the SCVRs anyway. However, last week shocked everyone with a much larger company, iEnergizer (LON:IBPO) (over £500m market cap before the announcement, a lot less now), and highly profitable & dividend paying, suddenly announcing it was intending to delist, and it's a done deal given the CEO controls it with an 83% shareholding.
I was discussing IBPO with some investor friends over the weekend, and for me the conclusion is to reinforce my policy of not investing in any company where one individual has such extreme shareholder dominance (83% held by Anil Aggarwal). Or at least I would never invest in any AIM-listed company where such a ridiculous share ownership structure exists, because AIM has inadequate controls over the behaviour of a dominant shareholders. AIM allows companies to float with a clearly inadquate free float, and also allows the dominant shareholder to de-list any time they like, if they're above 75%, or can get there with the agreement of others. Surely we need a new rule to require at least 50% free float before companies are allowed to list on AIM? And maybe we should copy other international markets, where a dominant shareholder is restricted from voting in a delisting? Companies need to be forced to commit to a listing, even if it ceases to be convenient for a controlling shareholder.
However, this idea conflicts with my preference (following a lot of very successful investors) for family-run and controlled companies, which are often very good performers long-term. It was pointed out to me that both VP (LON:VP.) and Goodwin (LON:GDWN)…